It focuses only on examining factors that hamper and ease interagency collaboration existing amid mental health services and child protection. By this, it scrutinizes situations of a parent experiencing mental infirmity, a factor that raises safety concerns for minors (Darlington, Feeney, & Rixon, 2005). Alternatively, the text depicts that professionals in Mental Health and Child Protection suppose the essentiality of collaborative practice. Despite this, derisory supportive approaches as well as structures significantly thwart their efforts. Hence, evidence exists that it supports professional collaboration though being satisfactory.
Contrary, the article “Inter-professional and Inter-Agency Collaboration” gives an explicit justification besides scrutinizing collaboration role that results from partnership amid various professionals as well as agencies. This article tries to provide a picture of some of the benefits and demerits that can arise from collaboration (Valios, 2009).
Certainly, the article authored by Valios when checked against the former text, evidence exist that Valios’ article directly and explicitly applies to the human services professionals’ collaboration. For instance, inter-professional and inter-agency collaboration (IPIAC) purposes to bring together professionals, services users, agencies, and service providers; all factors that help ensure deliverance of human service.
Generally, inter-professional implies to the working interactions amid diverse groups of professionals, for instance, between social workers, professors, and lawyers. Valios (2009) believes that each professional group brings its own perspective to the process of collaboration. Normally while taking into account a collaborative form of working, one notable aspect implies the importance of formulating an appropriate way of merging differing