2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2009.08.009
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Placement decisions and disparities among aboriginal groups: An application of the decision making ecology through multi-level analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
40
1
3

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 111 publications
(44 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
40
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…However, a multi-level analysis of CIS-1998 showed that the combined variable of visible minority and being of Aboriginal heritage increased the likelihood of placement (Fluke et al 2010). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, a multi-level analysis of CIS-1998 showed that the combined variable of visible minority and being of Aboriginal heritage increased the likelihood of placement (Fluke et al 2010). …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The presence of at least one child functioning issue has been associated with placement decisions . Previous research on children reported to child welfare has identified maltreatment-related characteristics associated with placement: severity of abuse; abuse resulting in injuries requiring hospitalization (Runyan et al 1981); maltreatment during an extended period (Black et al 2008); prior reports of alleged maltreatment and exposure to multiple types of maltreatment (Black et al 2008;Zuravin and DePanfilis 1997) and observable emotional harm (Black et al 2008;Fluke et al 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, race has been implicated for disproportionality and slower exit (or reunification) of minorities from the child welfare system in the United States (e.g., African Americans and American Indians), United Kingdom (e.g., Black children and families), Canada (e.g., First Nations/Indigenous peoples), and Australia (e.g., Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islanders) because minorities are more likely to be reported, removed, have their cases substantiated for maltreatment, or contend with inadequate resources (Blackstock, 2009;Carter, 2010;Chand & Thoburn, 2006;Delfabbro, Hirte, Rogers, & Wilson, 2010;Dettlaff et al, 2011;Fluke, Chabot, Fallonc, MacLaurind, & Blackstock, 2010). However, other maltreatment experts have attributed such disproportionality to other factors, including mental health or substance abuse problems of minorities and family/community poverty (Carter & Myers, 2007;Drake & Jonson-Reid, 2011;Drake, Lee, & Jonson-Reid, 2009;Font, Berger, & Slack, 2012;Jonson-Reid, Drake, & Kohl, 2009;Jonson-Reid, Drake, & Zhou, 2012).…”
Section: Racial and Cultural Factors In Perception And Determination mentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Ni Trocmé et al (2004) ni Fluke et al (2010) n'ont établi que parmi un ensemble de caractéristiques pouvant contribuer au placement, le statut autochtone constitue un prédicteur. Pourtant, dans la présente étude, le fait d'être autochtone double pratiquement le risque de placement (RC = 1,8), effet qui n'est pas annulé par l'ajout d'autres variables relatives aux signalements, aux services rendus, à l'enfant ou aux parents.…”
Section: Liens Entre Les Résultats Et Les éTudes Antérieuresunclassified