Toy bag: Covers a multitude of
sins
Implies the family’s stuff isn’t good
enough
Toys are not there for when
intervention occurs (between visits)
Must be a child-focused visit
Teaches the parent erroneously
about how children learn (through home visits)
Professional sets the agenda
Professional works with the child
Professional wishes parents would
be more “involved” in the visit
Parent’s role is to observe
Skills are discussed as they occur
during the visit or without any context (e.g., “I notice he stops playing when
he hears us talking. Is he easily distracted?” Discussing language without any
time of the day).
Professional is quick to make
suggestions for previously undiscussed issues
 |
| Home visit in rural Paraguay |
Professional asks questions and
doesn’t make a suggestion (or doesn’t say she’ll think about it or talk to teammates)
Professional gives parent homework
Professional fails to follow up on
topics and decisions from previous visit
Professional leaves without
concrete strategies the family is interested in
Professional leaves without
knowing what the family would like the next visit to focus on
Professional suggests
nonfunctional or non-evidence-based strategies (abnormal, no context, not in
naturally occurring learning opportunities)
Professional discusses skills
happening only during “play” (like HV) time (not evening or outings routines)
Professional addresses only child
issues, not family outcomes
Professional assumes interventions
are one parent to one child, when other adults and children are involved in
everyday routines
Professional fails to check in with parent about whether strategy will work and will be feasible
Professional doesn’t follow up
with opportunities to talk about the Big Four of Caregiving: talking, reading,
playing, teaching
Professional mentions no family needs/outcomes
Professional doesn’t ask about
emotional well-being of primary caregiver (e.g., “How are YOU doing?”)
