I have no data on point, but see Levine, M. & Doherty E. (1991) The Fifth Amendment and therapeutic requirements to admit abuse. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 18, 98-112. The paper traised issues that are on point for this qwuestions. Murray levine On Wed, 3 Mar 1999 BRubin525@xxxxxxx wrote: > In our community CPS takes the position that a parent must acknowledge both > the abuse of their children and take responsibility for the abuse > before the parent can have unsupervised visits with their children. Yet, many > stuck cases get hung up when a parent adamantly denies either the abuse or > that it had any negative effects. Despite a great amount of work, if a parent > continues to deny these events, there is little chance for any reunification. > Yet, in many cases, parent's can agree that in the future there will be no > corporal punishment. Also, in some cases, despite the parent's denial, enough > work has been done that it appears the children will be reasonably safe.Is > there any research that supports the idea that a parent "must" admit the abuse > before the child is reasonably safe? Or is this simply an ideological > position that is based on clinical practice? I am mostly thinking about > physical > abuse, Bart Rubin, Ph.D. > Murray and/or Addie Levine e-mail: psylevin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx snail mail: Dept/. Psychology, SUNY Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260 voice: 716-645-3650 ext 228 Fax: 716-645-3801
[ Home |
About NDACAN | Datasets |
User Support |
Contribute Data |
Summer Research Institute ]
[ CMRL List Serve | Bibliography
| Measures Index |
Useful Links | Search ]
Copyright © 1996-2012 National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect