A family is refusing to work with a practitioner, stating they already have too many...

This question falls under the Systems Competencies domain, which focuses on collaboration with families, service providers, and community systems to support the child’s recovery. The PRA CFRP Study Guide 2024-2025 emphasizes that practitioners must prioritize family-centered care and coordinate services to reduce fragmentation and overwhelm, especially when families feel burdened by multiple providers.

Option C (Coordinate a meeting with the family and all of the service providers) is the best course of action. The PRA guidelines highlight that when a family resists additional services due to provider overload, the practitioner should facilitate collaboration among existing providers to streamline care. Coordinating a meeting allows the practitioner to clarify roles, align goals, and address the family’s concerns, fostering trust and reducing redundancy. This approach aligns with the PRA’s emphasis on systems integration and family empowerment.

Option A (Accept the family’s decision and move on to the next referral) is incorrect because it dismisses the family’s needs without exploring solutions. The PRA Code of Ethics requires practitioners to advocate for families and seek collaborative resolutions rather than disengaging.

Option B (Encourage the family to work with the practitioner for at least one month) is incorrect because it disregards the family’s expressed concerns about provider overload. The PRA study guide advises against pressuring families, as this can erode trust and engagement.

Option D (Call the other service providers and request they close services with the family) is incorrect because it oversteps the practitioner’s role and disregards the family’s autonomy. The PRA framework emphasizes that decisions about service closure should involve the family and be based on their needs, not unilateral action by the practitioner.