Decision making in child protection: An international comparative study on maltreatment substantiation, risk assessment and interventions recommendations, and the role of professionals’ child welfare attitudes

Benbenishty, Rami; Davidson‐Arad, Bilha; López, Mónica López; Devaney, John; Spratt, Trevor; Koopmans, Carien; Knorth, Erik J.; Witteman, Cilia; Valle, Jorge F. del; Hayes, David

doi:10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.03.015

Cited by 150 publications

(114 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

101

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Case-workers' decisions on individual children are influenced by macro-elements such as the legal, welfare state and child welfare systems (Benbenishty et al, 2015;Duffy & Collins, 2010;Smith & Donovan, 2003); this intersection is the focus of this study. In a family service oriented system (e.g., Finland and Norway and, to a degree, England), child protection workers typically have long-standing relationships working with families that may last over months or years.…”

Section: Four Country Contexts For Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time, Institutional Support, and Quality of Decision Making in Child Protection: A Cross-Country Analysis

Berrick

Dickens

Pösö

et al. 2016

Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Gover

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines perceptions of time and institutional support for decision making and staff confidence in the ultimate decisions madeexamining differences and similarities between and within the serviceoriented Nordic countries (represented by Norway and Finland) and the risk-oriented Anglo-American countries (represented by England and California). The study identifies a high degree of work pressure across all the countries, lines of predominantly vertical institutional support and relatively high confidence in decisions. Finland stands out with higher perceived work pressure and with a horizontal support line, whereas England stands out with workers having a lower degree of confidence in their own and others' decisions. KEYWORDSChild protection; decision making; support; time pressure; worker experiences State involvement in family life is frequently framed as supportive of parents' rights and obligations to rear their children. Financial assistance, protective labels on medication, or compulsory education might all be viewed as supportive of parents' efforts to help their children grow and thrive (Sugarman, 2008). Under some circumstances, however, state actors place limits on parents. When parents, themselves, are seen as unsafe, most modern welfare states have systems in place to respond. In the most extreme cases, the State may separate children from their parents temporarily or permanently. When States engage with family life such that children are placed in out-of-home care, the stakes are high. Decisions regarding parent-child separation, typically recommended by a child protection worker in a state agency and approved by a judge (cf. Burns et al., forthcoming; Gilbert, Parton, & Skivenes, 2011), must be of the highest quality and fully justified. The research literature tells us little about the actual quality of decision making related to child removal in child protection systems. Ample evidence now exists relating to the determination of risk for future maltreatment (see, e.g., Johnson, Clancy, & Bastian, 2015), but whether a decision to involuntarily separate a child from his or her parent is "right" or "wrong" is, in part, normative, based upon the values and standards established in a local or state jurisdiction. In instances of extreme and imminent danger to the child, the "right" decision might be more widely accepted, though whether and how staff measure extreme or imminent circumstances is still highly contested (Baird & Wagner, 2000;Gambrill & Shlonsky, 2000). Absent an objective indicator of "accuracy" in the context of child removal, other factors such as time for deliberation, institutional support, and accountability can provide a context for reasoned assessments.How staff make decisions is a more commonly studied phenomenon in the street-level-bureaucracy literature. Some have raised questions about child welfare staff's incomplete review of evidence and arguments and the potential for biased information gathering (e.g., Munro, 1999Munro, , 2008. Other signals from the field ...

show abstract

Section: Four Country Contexts For Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time, Institutional Support, and Quality of Decision Making in Child Protection: A Cross-Country Analysis

Berrick

Dickens

Pösö

et al. 2016

Human Service Organizations: Management, Leadership & Gover

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Benbenishty et al (2014) observam que as decisões são tomadas segundo a hierarquia e na interseção de contextos relacionados com a pessoa, com a equipa de profissionais, com o quadro político-jurídico, a região ou país, e o contexto cultural e histórico. Contudo este processo é contínuo, uma vez que com o mero decurso do tempo a situação em análise está sujeita a modificações que obrigam a processar novas informações e a reconsiderar as assunções iniciais (Gambrill, 2008).…”

Section: Fatores Pessoais E Ambientais Que Influenciam Os Profissionaunclassified

Decisión, riesgo e incertidumbre. ¿Retirada o reunificación de los niños y jóvenes en peligro?

Delgado

Carvalho

Pinto³

et al. 2016

Ped Soc. Rev Int

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2008, 2010), pretendeu-se saber como é que estudantes do ensino superior, em áreas científicas relacionadas com as profissões envolvidas no processo de decisão sobre os projetos de vida de crianças e jovens em perigo, decidiriam em presença de um caso concreto, em diferentes cenários. Participaram no estudo 200 estudantes do ensino superior, de diferentes regiões de Portugal. Utilizou-se um desenho fatorial (2×2), o que implicou o uso de um questionário vinheta com quatro versões, descrevendo um caso de uma criança com suspeitas de ser vítima de violência, e em que se pondera qual a decisão a tomar no momento e, caso seja retirada da sua família biológica, se deve ou não ser reunificada dois anos após essa decisão. Entre os resultados principais destaca-se que os estudantes reconhecem o risco da criança estar a sofrer danos significativos, físicos e emocionais, mas decidiram, maioritariamente, a favor de uma intervenção junto da família biológica, evitando a remoção da criança do seu contexto de vida. Contudo, perante uma decisão favorecendo o acolhimento familiar eles consideraram, ao reavaliarem o caso após dois anos, também maioritariamente, que a criança deveria permanecer junto da família de acolhimento. Evidencia-se, com significado estatístico, que a tomada de decisão foi influenciada, no primeiro momento, pela concordância ou não da mãe face com a retirada e, no segundo momento, pelo desejo ou não da criança de reunificação com a família biológica. Conclui-se que o desenvolvimento de critérios profissionais de avaliação e de tomada de decisão, passa pela integração no programa curricular dos cursos superiores na área da proteção infantil, do estudo dos critérios para a retirada, das condições para a reunificação e das vantagens de se envolver a criança e a família biológica na intervenção.ABsTRACT: This study aims to better understand what influences and determines decisions in contexts characterized by complexity and uncertainty, and contributes to the development of recommendations for practice. Based on the work of Benbenishty (2008, 2010), we intended to understand how students from higher education, in scientific areas related to professions involved in decision making processes of children and young people at risk individual care plan, would decide in the presence of a specific case

show abstract

“…The literature suggests that the professional practices developed in the health services are based on power relations that hinder the integration between professions and professionals 4 . As a consequence, the practices developed in the context of these services tend to be fragmented and individualized, proving to be ineffective in the face of the complexity of the problem, which can not be understood by individual competence in a single professional area, but rather involving multidisciplinary and intersectoral actions 5 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organization of professional practices against intrafamily violence against children and adolescents in the institutional context

Schek

Silva

Lacharité

et al. 2017

Rev. Latino-Am. Enfermagem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective:to analyze based on the practitioners' discourse, the way they organize their practices confronting situations of intra-family violence against children and adolescents. Method:qualitative research carried out with 15 professionals who work in social and health services located in the southernmost of Brazil. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews, performed at the participants' workplace. We used a theoretical matrix to analyze the data, based on Institutional Ethnography and the technique of discursive textual analysis. Results:the practitioners' practices developed in situations of intra-family violence against children and adolescents are organized on the basis of: power relations that take place in services that respond to violence situations; routines instituted to meet the demands of care in services; and the interplay between the conception of violence as a public health problem and the conception of violence as a social problem. Conclusion:the way these practices are organized is reflected in actions that are not protective against situations of intra-family violence against children and adolescents.

show abstract

Decision making in child protection: An international comparative study on maltreatment substantiation, risk assessment and interventions recommendations, and the role of professionals’ child welfare attitudes

Cited by 150 publications

References 39 publications

Time, Institutional Support, and Quality of Decision Making in Child Protection: A Cross-Country Analysis

Time, Institutional Support, and Quality of Decision Making in Child Protection: A Cross-Country Analysis

Decisión, riesgo e incertidumbre. ¿Retirada o reunificación de los niños y jóvenes en peligro?

Organization of professional practices against intrafamily violence against children and adolescents in the institutional context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About