An Initial Assessment of the Extent to Which Risk Factors, Frequently Identified in Research, Are Taken into Account When Assessing Risk in Child Protection Cases

Abstract

This article briefly outlines the development of risk assessment instruments in a social work context. This is followed by an analysis of the initial stages of analysing the presence, absence and consideration of identified risk factors within one English local authority child protection context using initial cases conference minutes. The article then examines the relationship between risk factors identified from the conference minutes with outcome measures for each child four years later.• Findings: Many of the risk factors identified in the literature were not routinely recorded in conference minutes making risk assessment in general and the application of a risk assessment tool, in particular, problematic. There was some weak association between severity of abuse and subsequent social work intervention for a number of children, but there appeared to be little correspondence in respect of the majority of cases. There was support for Farmer's (1999) concerns about children not being registered when at risk of abuse or being deregistered when the risk of abuse remains high. • Applications: The need to routinely gather and record information on identified risk factors during the assessment process is highlighted. Though still at an early stage, the intention is to develop an empirically tested risk assessment tool, which can be used to evaluate potential risk more accurately and more consistently.

Social workers' perspectives on parental engagement when children are at risk in Romanian society

“…Although in wealthy nations, there is a debate over their effectiveness (Alaszewski & Walsh 1995; Lyons et al . 1996; Warner 2003) and their recognition by social work practitioners (Munro 1999; Warner 2003), there is still a high level of consistency regarding the essential factors in assessing risk such as the age of child, severity of abuse, perpetrator's access to the child, number of children in the home, single‐parent homes, caregiver's age and parental mental health (McDonald & Marks 1991).…”

“…However, without a structured way of assessing a situation of abuse or neglect, quantifying the level of risk and/or evaluating the severity of abuse or neglect can prove difficult. For example, Warner (2003) notes that:…”

“…Indeed, even in the presence of a sound theoretical framework for risk assessment and management, measuring and predicting abuse or neglect is difficult, but it is even more so when that framework is missing (McDonald & Marks 1991; Alaszewski & Walsh 1995; Warner 2003). In Romania, the indicators by which successful intervention can be measured are also created and recorded at an organizational, even if not national, level.…”

Child Protection and Psychology Education in Australian Universities

“…A list of items reflecting child protection‐related risk factors and proactive strategies that could be raised or covered throughout the programme, but may not be clearly stated in programme documentation, were included in the second section of the survey. The list of risk factors and proactive strategies was adapted from three sources: Warner (2003), Powell (2003) and Cameron and Karabanow (2003). Risk factors adapted from Warner included those relating to the child, factors relating to the parent or carer, and demographic and environmental factors.…”

Assessing the level of risk of families supported by Child and Family Protection Services: Practitioners and mothers as informants

“…The global level of family risk established by practitioners is related to the level of risk found using standardized protocols of risk factors and stressful life events reported by parents (English & Graham, 2000;McCrae & Barth, 2008;Rodrı´guez, Camacho, Rodrigo, Martı´n, & Ma´iquez, 2006), to psychosocial indicators assessed with standardized tools and with parents or children as informants (Al, Stams, Asscher, & Van der Laan, 2014), and to the family's socio-economic status (Rodrı´guez et al, 2006). Professionals' viewpoint also tends to coincide with that of child welfare researchers on the main indicators that must be included in family risk-assessment instruments (Ryan, Wiles, Cash, & Siebert, 2005), and data reported by practitioners are related to the degree of family improvement in adequately providing for the child (Wells & Correia, 2011).…”