Skip to main content



Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) List Serve

Browse or Search All Past CMRL Messages

Welcome to the database of past Child-Maltreatment-Research-L (CMRL) list serve messages (10,000+). The table below contains all past CMRL messages (text only, no attachments) from Nov. 20, 1996 - September 14, 2018 and is updated quarterly.

Instructions: Postings are listed for browsing with the newest messages first. Click on the linked ID number to see a message. You can search the author, subject, message ID, and message content fields by entering your criteria into this search box:

Message ID: 9462
Date: 2013-08-07

Author:Leah Bromfield

Subject:Re: Research on multiple maltreatment reports

Hi Richard There is a small literature in this field, which can be found using search terms such as: frequently encountered families, revictimisation, chronic maltreatment, cumulative harm, adverse childhood experiences, recurrent maltreatment, re-reports/re-substantiations etc. In my own research, reports are false or malicious in only a small percentage of cases. For the most part a report is a good indicator for adverse parenting, but when assessed as an isolated incident may not reach the threshold for statutory intervention – particularly in the case of emotional abuse and neglect. However, if these same events are considered as a pattern of behaviour they may be viewed as chronic low-moderate severity neglect. See Bromfield & Higgins "Chronic and isolated maltreatment in a child protection sample" (2005) http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/fm2005/fm70.html The cumulative impact of chronic neglect on the child's development can be detrimental. see: http://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/reports_and_working_papers/working_papers/wp12/?goback=%2Egde_133126_member_228947436 In Australia, both Victoria and New South Wales have amended their legislation to specify recognise "a series of acts or omissions that when viewed together may establish a pattern of risk of significant harm (cumulative impact)". In Tasmania, a policy has been implemented requiring a cumulative harm review following three notifications for similar issues within a specified period of time (12mths I think). I have been involved in developing practice resources on the issue for the child protection practitioners in Victoria, Australia. See Cumulative harm: Specialist Practice Resource http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/for-service-providers/children,-youth-and-families/child-protection/specialist-practice-resources-for-child-protection-workers I am currently conducting further research on the topic of frequently encountered families in South Australia, and am currently coordinating a special issue of a journal on this theme. I'd love to hear from others with an interest in this area. Cheers Leah -- Associate Professor Leah Bromfield Deputy Director, Australian Centre for Child Protection Hawke Research Institute, University of South Australia Ph: +61 8 8302 2924 Fax: +61 8 8302 2953 Level 2, Arthur Lemon Ave, Underdale GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001 From: Rich Gehrman > Reply-To: Child Maltreatment Researchers > Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 23:12:45 +0930 To: "Child-Maltreatment-Research-L@cornell.edu " > Subject: Research on multiple maltreatment reports We are interested in research and practice related to multiple reports of child maltreatment, particularly: 1. Is there research on the number of times children are reported compared to how often they are screened in for an assessment or investigation? What do we know about the relationship between multiple reports of maltreatment and the likelihood that abuse or neglect is occurring? 2. Are there counties or states that keep this information as a performance metric? For example one Minnesota county produces a report showing the number of children reported 25 times, 24 times… 1 time. 3. Is there research or are there policies and practices in place to evaluate when a series of reports may require an assessment or investigation even though individual reports may not rise to that level? For example state statute in Minnesota specifies a child protection response for a pattern of emotional abuse or neglect that may not be evident from any single report. 4. Is there research or are there policies/practices to evaluate maltreatment reports based on who is reporting them? For example several reports from a single person such as a non-custodial parent may be weighed differently than reports from different sources, such as a mandated reporter, a family member, and a neighbor. Thanks to all for any guidance you have on this topic. Rich Gehrman Rich Gehrman Executive Director Safe Passage for Children of Minnesota www.safepassagemn.org (651) 303-3209 gehrm001@umn.edu

Hi Richard There is a small literature in this field, which can be found using search terms such as: frequently encountered families, revictimisation, chronic maltreatment, cumulative harm, adverse childhood experiences, recurrent maltreatment, re-reports/re-substantiations etc. In my own research, reports are false or malicious in only a small percentage of cases. For the most part a report is a good indicator for adverse parenting, but when assessed as an isolated incident may not reach the threshold for statutory intervention – particularly in the case of emotional abuse and neglect. However, if these same events are considered as a pattern of behaviour they may be viewed as chronic low-moderate severity neglect. See Bromfield & Higgins "Chronic and isolated maltreatment in a child protection sample" (2005) http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/fm2005/fm70.html The cumulative impact of chronic neglect on the child's development can be detrimental. see: http://developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/reports_and_working_papers/working_papers/wp12/?goback=%2Egde_133126_member_228947436 In Australia, both Victoria and New South Wales have amended their legislation to specify recognise "a series of acts or omissions that when viewed together may establish a pattern of risk of significant harm (cumulative impact)". In Tasmania, a policy has been implemented requiring a cumulative harm review following three notifications for similar issues within a specified period of time (12mths I think). I have been involved in developing practice resources on the issue for the child protection practitioners in Victoria, Australia. See Cumulative harm: Specialist Practice Resource http://www.dhs.vic.gov.au/for-service-providers/children,-youth-and-families/child-protection/specialist-practice-resources-for-child-protection-workers I am currently conducting further research on the topic of frequently encountered families in South Australia, and am currently coordinating a special issue of a journal on this theme. I'd love to hear from others with an interest in this area. Cheers Leah -- Associate Professor Leah Bromfield Deputy Director, Australian Centre for Child Protection Hawke Research Institute, University of South Australia Ph: +61 8 8302 2924 Fax: +61 8 8302 2953 Level 2, Arthur Lemon Ave, Underdale GPO Box 2471, Adelaide, SA, 5001 From: Rich Gehrman > Reply-To: Child Maltreatment Researchers > Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2013 23:12:45 +0930 To: "Child-Maltreatment-Research-Lcornell.edu " > Subject: Research on multiple maltreatment reports We are interested in research and practice related to multiple reports of child maltreatment, particularly: 1. Is there research on the number of times children are reported compared to how often they are screened in for an assessment or investigation? What do we know about the relationship between multiple reports of maltreatment and the likelihood that abuse or neglect is occurring? 2. Are there counties or states that keep this information as a performance metric? For example one Minnesota county produces a report showing the number of children reported 25 times, 24 times… 1 time. 3. Is there research or are there policies and practices in place to evaluate when a series of reports may require an assessment or investigation even though individual reports may not rise to that level? For example state statute in Minnesota specifies a child protection response for a pattern of emotional abuse or neglect that may not be evident from any single report. 4. Is there research or are there policies/practices to evaluate maltreatment reports based on who is reporting them? For example several reports from a single person such as a non-custodial parent may be weighed differently than reports from different sources, such as a mandated reporter, a family member, and a neighbor. Thanks to all for any guidance you have on this topic. Rich Gehrman Rich Gehrman Executive Director Safe Passage for Children of Minnesota www.safepassagemn.org (651) 303-3209 gehrm001umn.edu