Talk:Child and family services

Non-reunification

i was wanting to know about non reunifcation cases and can they be reversed The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:97.89.24.95 on 19:00, 15 July 2008

Can this article be saved?

Seriously, this article is a complete mess. It's tagged for a rewrite, but I don't think even that will help. What the hell are we re-writing about? To paraphrase an infamous Vietnam quote, we may need to delete this article to save it. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 19:12, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New Edits

Myself and another University of Michigan student, both MSW candidates, are planning to edit the Child Care Debate section, and add a section about Two Generation Family Services. This is part of a class assignment, and changes will be posted by the beginning of April. Here is a link to our sandbox [[1]] feel free to give us feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cakingry (talk • contribs) 22:23, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting the Child Care Debate Section

After research my group member and I determined that this section was lacking factual information. We plan to replace the whole section with facts about childcare. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cakingry (talk • contribs) 15:11, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peer review and responses during the educational assignment in Winter 2015

In the first sentence a rephrasing that is more analytical would be helpful. Stating "Studies show..." could be useful. Potentially adding limitations and criticisms to either section (use existing resources). I'm really just curious, when you say low-income families, are those the only families receiving these services? The citation style needs to be redone, ours can be used as an example for this. Also, Emily's sources need to be added to the Child Care section. Obviously, a graphic is still needed and the 2 sections with subsections have been discussed with Desmond Patton as sufficient to fulfill the 3 section criteria. Mephilton (talk)

I really like the quality of the examples you used throughout this article. When you add the sources to the final section, you might want to look at the voice used and add some "studies suggest", "according to..." or things like that to make it less subjective. I'm sure that will sort itself out when the citations are added to that section but I'd imagine the 'wiki-bots' might appreciate it. Mgs6876 (talk) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cakingry (talk • contribs) 04:17, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article has no real or factual information needs to be deleted

This article does not say one thing about the topic header thats even remotely close having any credible worth. It should be removed immidieatly — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.141.118.182 (talk) 15:58, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]