[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Defining the co-occurrence of domestic violence and child maltreatment
Michelle,
In New South Wales, Australia, a child witnessing domestic violence is
considered child abuse. As such it is considered grounds for notification
and intervention by Department of Community Services (DoCS) ( equivalent of
Child Protective Services). There is a standing arrangement with Police
across the state that any domestic violence incident where a child is
present or involved is referred by police to DoCS. Police do not make a
judgement regarding harm to the child. That assessment is left to DoCS.
Ian Randall
-----Original Message-----
From: michelle kees [mailto:mkees73@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 31 October 2000 8:33
To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
Subject: Re: Defining the co-occurrence of domestic violence and
childmaltreatment
Out of curiousity, which states consider exposure to DV a form of child
abuse, and would such treat the act as abusive, presumably involving child
welfare, police, etc.
Thanks.
Michelle Kees, M.A.
Psychology Intern
Children's Memorial Hospital
2300 Children's Plaza, #10
Chicago, IL 60614
>From: "Rob Newell" <rmnewell@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
>To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
><CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>
>Subject: Re: Defining the co-occurrence of domestic violence and
>childmaltreatment
>Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2000 01:08:39 PDT
>
>FYI,
>
>Many states now (legally) consider domestic violence committed in the
>presence of a child a form of child abuse. As a child/adolescent clinical
>psychologist, I certainly do.
>
>Robert M. Newell, Ph.D.
>Seattle, Washington
>
>
>From: brianmorgan@btinternet.com
>Reply-To: brianmorgan@btinternet.com
>To: Child Maltreatment Researchers
><CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu>
>Subject: Re: Defining the co-occurrence of domestic violence and
>childmaltreatment
>Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 22:38:59 00100
>
>My two cents might be worth even less, as I am not a researcher
>in this field, but I'm wondering what this is _for_.
>
>Are you intending to provide predictors for child abuse based on
>domestic violence, and if so, do you not need to study the
>population of households with domestic violence to see how many
>are associated with child abuse, rather than the other way
>around?
>
>Even if you found that all child abuse cases are associated with
>domestic violence, this does not mean that all domestic violence
>leads to child abuse. You could end up wrongly removing children
>from any family where there was adult violence - much though the
>latter is to be deplored - when the appropriate intevention might
>be to work on the violence.
>
>And how about a prospective study, which in biomedical circles
>usually carries more weight - or am I wrong?
>
>Brian Morgan
>
>
> >I'll give you my two cents, for what it is worth.
> >
> >carolyn hartley wrote:
> >
> >> Dear List Members,
> >>
> >> I am working on a study of the co-occurrence of domestic violence and
> >> child maltreatment. I have a cross-sectional sample of all confirmed
> >> child abuse cases involving a parental perpetrator for a city in Iowa
> >> (population 130,000) for a 20-month period. I am comparing the
> >> characteristics of families defined as 'child maltreatment only' wi>th
> >> 'co-occurrence' families (both child maltreatment and domestic
> >> violence present).
> >>
> >> I have three sources of data to verify the presence of domestic
> >> violence: 1) the assessment narratives completed by child protection
> >> workers investigating the child abuse allegation; 2) the service
> >> authorization forms completed by child protection service workers on
> >> families referred for services after the investigation; and 3) a data
> >> base created by the city police department on all domestic violence
> >> arrests occurring in the city.
> >>
> >> My question has to do with defining 'co-occurrence' and 'child
> >> maltreatment only.'
> >>
> >> Regarding the co-occurrence group, should I restrict co-occurrence to
> >> only male batterer/female victim?
> >
> >My opinion would be yes for both research and political reasons. The
> >political reasons are fairly obvious, although I would add that men
> >battering their wives is a different phenomenon, socio-culturally, than
> >women battering their husbands. The roots of the problem are different,
> >the cultural support and history of woman abuse is much different. Of
> >course there are social psychologists who would disagree with me and
> >argue that violence is violence.
> >
> >For purposes of research I would question whether the N of the woman to
> >husband violence would be large enough to do any analysis. Furthermore,
> >do you want to invest your resources into that small N. I guess these
> >are rather pragmatic reasons.
> >
> >> I have a small percentage of cases involving a female batterer. The
> >> majority of studies on co-occurrence involve a female victim/male
> >> batterer.
> >>
> >> Also regarding this group, should the domestic violence precede the
> >> child maltreatment to be considered a 'co-occurrence'? Again, the
> >> majority of studies of families with known child abuse (from Edleson'>s
> >> excellent review) started with a report of child abuse and looked
> >> retrospectively at reports of domestic violence.
> >> All the child protection data on domestic violence I have involves
> >> domestic violence preceding child maltreatment. However, I have
> >> police report data on domestic violence occurring after the child
> >> maltreatment. Can I still consider this co-occurrence? What would
> >> be an appropriate time frame for assuming co-occurrence (a police
> >> incident within two months, six months, a year)?
> >>
> >
> >This is an interesting question. If you use the term "co-occurrence"
> >then temporal order isn't important. I think it would be useful to have
> >a window, as you suggest, for the occurrence of either form of abuse.
> >It might be interesting to study the subgroups and see how the order of
> >the abuse correlates with any differences in the sub-groups. One
> >justification for ignoring temporal order is that there might be
> >differences in the "opportunity" to be abused by a partner depending on
> >whether a woman is in a relationship or not. How long you open the
> >window is an arbitrary decision, I would personally choose a one year
> >period.
> >
> >
> >>
> >> Regarding the child maltreatment only group, how "pure" should this
> >> group be? Should I restrict the sample to no known history of
> >> domestic violence by a past or current partner? I have some
> >> assessment narratives and police data that indicate domestic violence
> >> by a past partner, but no evidence of battering by a current partner.
> >>
> >
> >Another difficult decision. I would try to make the groups as "pure" as
> >possible in order to have the highest confidence that any differences I
> >found were in fact attributable to their group membership (child
> >maltreatment only vs. co-occurrence group).
> >
> >
> >>
> >> I would appreciate any thoughts or suggestions of literature that
> >> might assist me in making these decisions.
> >
> >This is an area of research I'm very interested in and would appreciate
> >hearing what you decide as well as any papers which you write out of the
> >data.
> >
> >Good luck.
> >
> >
> >
> >> ************************************
> >
> >Randy H. Magen, Ph.D.
> >Associate Professor
> >School of Social Work
> >University of Alaska Anchorage
> >3211 Providence Drive
> >Anchorage, Alaska 99508
> >phone: (907) 786-6901
> >email: afrhm1@uaa.alaska.edu
> >Web site: http://cwolf.uaa.alaska.edu/~afrhm1/index.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>_________________________________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
>
>Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
>http://profiles.msn.com.
>
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at
http://profiles.msn.com.