The Use of the Child Abuse Potential Inventory in the Assessment of Parents involved in Care Proceedings

Abstract

Assessing for potential physical abuse is a fundamental task for those professionals undertaking assessments of parents involved in care proceedings. One tool developed to help assist in this endeavour is the Child Abuse Potential (CAP) Inventory (Milner, , ). The CAP Inventory provides an estimate of parental risk of child abuse and is one of the most widely used psychometric tools by psychologists in child protection settings. This review evaluates the psychometric properties of this measure and provides an overview of its potential uses, as well as its limitations. It concludes that there is evidence to support the validity and reliability of the CAP Inventory for use in care proceedings. Specifically, the review indicates that the CAP Inventory has good levels of reliability and validity (construct, content and concurrent). The only aspect of validity for which there is a lack of evidence is that of predictive validity and this is due to a dearth of prospective studies. Given the above, the practical, clinical and ethical implications for the use of the CAP Inventory in the assessment of parents involved in care proceedings are discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The Arabic/Lebanese Adaptation of Child Abuse Potential Inventory

“…Such measurements usually rely on caregivers' conscious realization of feelings and acts toward children and are affected by social appeal and caregivers' hesitation to disclose child abuse (Fazio & Olson, 2003). To overcome such disadvantages and to provide information concerning the possibility or potential for the respondents to maltreat their children, the Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAPI) was developed by Milner and Ayoub (1980), which has become one of the most effective and common assessment measures around the world (Laulik et al, 2015).…”

Psychology and child protection: Promoting widespread improvement in practice.

“…Any brief review is destined to omit more than it includes. Following is a short list of some of psychology’s contributions: Developing theory and research on the etiology of maltreatment (e.g., Cicchetti, Toth, & Maughan, 2000; Thornberry & Henry, 2013)Identifying and explaining psychological abuse and neglect as a form of maltreatment and exploring its consequences (e.g., Brassard & Donovan, 2006)Helping to examine the neuropsychological effects of child maltreatment (e.g., Kavanaugh, Dupont-Frechette, Jerskey, & Holler, 2017)Studying the consequences of maltreatment for development, behavior, and experience, both short-term (e.g., Cicchetti & Toth, 2015) and long-term (e.g., Widom, Czaja, & Dutton, 2008)Developing methods for assessing the risk that caregivers will maltreat their children (see, e.g., Laulik, Allam, & Browne, 2015)Implementing a community-wide approach to preventing child maltreatment (Kimbrough-Melton & Melton, 2015)…”

“…Developing methods for assessing the risk that caregivers will maltreat their children (see, e.g., Laulik, Allam, & Browne, 2015)…”

Physical Abuse of Children

“…In a previous issue of Child Abuse Review , Laulik et al . () detailed the psychometric properties of the CAPI in a paper examining its use in assessments of parents involved in care proceedings, including its strengths and limitations. These authors urged careful consideration when a decision is made to use the CAPI measure in clinical practice, emphasising that its use should be only ‘in the context of a wider assessment’ and that assessors should have relevant experience and be properly trained in its use (Laulik et al, , p. 342).…”