Opinions among mandated reporters toward child maltreatment reporting policies

Delaronde, Steven; King, Gary; Bendel, Robert B.; Reece, Robert M.

doi:10.1016/s0145-2134(00)00151-4

Cited by 58 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…of seeking confirmation from other professionals, support the literature on uncertainty or discomfort with reporting (Delaronde et al, 2000;Bell and Tooman, 1994). In examples like the following excerpt, these nurses' knowledge of child health and welfare may have been valued for their ability to add weight to a suspicion.…”

Section: Moral Judgements and Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 70%

Influences on registered nurses' decision‐making in cases of suspected child abuse

Nayda

2002

Child Abuse Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports on the factors influencing decision-making for a group of 10 South Australian community nurses in cases of suspected child abuse. Each nurse participated in a structured interview. The data were organized into themes, using the computer program NUD*IST. Factors having an impact on the nurses' decisions to report included: the type of suspected abuse, making moral judgements and decision-making, the consequences of reporting, and the impact versus the outcomes of reporting. Most significantly, the community nurses based many of their decisions on their estimation of the kind of intervention likely to be undertaken by children's protection services.

show abstract

Section: Moral Judgements and Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 70%

Influences on registered nurses' decision‐making in cases of suspected child abuse

Nayda

2002

Child Abuse Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Critical Intervention Specialist and mandated reporter would work together to determine a strategy to deal with the case and decide if it should be reported to CPS. Research finds support for such an alternative from various professional report sources (Delaronde et al, 2000).…”

Section: Policy and Practice Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 96%

Comparing reports of suspected child maltreatment in states with and without Universal Mandated Reporting

Krase¹,

DeLong-Hamilton

2015

Children and Youth Services Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…8,[21][22][23][24] Of course, multiple factors give rise to the variability in how mandated reporters understand, interpret, and apply their responsibility to report suspected child abuse, including the circumstances of individual cases, perceived efficacy of child protection services, perceptions of blame, and personal experience with abuse. 9,10,17,20,[25][26][27][28] However, despite considerable investigation examining such causes of inconsistency, little research has examined possible confusion over what "suspicion" and "reasonable suspicion" mean. These concepts are fundamentally important, because they define the threshold for determining whether a report is warranted and hence form the basis for reporting practices.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8 Both practically and conceptually, significant problems arise from this lack of direction: inconsistent reporting of (possible) abuse, unequal protection of children, inequitable treatment of parents, inefficient use of child protection service resources, [9][10][11][12][13] and substantial ambiguity about the nature and meaning of the threshold in judging whether to report. 14,15 These difficulties, in turn, are compounded by (1) the multitude of individuals who qualify as mandated reporters, (2) lack of education regarding what circumstances warrant reporting, 11,16,17 (3) absence of meaningful oversight concerning actual reporting practices, [18][19][20] and (4) reporters' immunity from civil or criminal liability. 8,[21][22][23][24] Of course, multiple factors give rise to the variability in how mandated reporters understand, interpret, and apply their responsibility to report suspected child abuse, including the circumstances of individual cases, perceived efficacy of child protection services, perceptions of blame, and personal experience with abuse.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reasonable Suspicion: A Study of Pennsylvania Pediatricians Regarding Child Abuse

Levi¹,

Brown

2005

Pediatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT.Objective. It has long been assumed that mandated reporting statutes regarding child abuse are self-explanatory and that broad consensus exists as to the meaning and proper application of reasonable suspicion. However, no systematic investigation has examined how mandated reporters interpret and apply the concept of reasonable suspicion. The purpose of this study was to identify Pennsylvania pediatricians' understanding and interpretation of reasonable suspicion in the context of mandated reporting of suspected child abuse.Methodology. An anonymous survey was sent (Spring 2004) to all members of the Pennsylvania chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics (n ‫؍‬ 2051). Participants were given several operational frameworks to elicit their understanding of the concept of reasonable suspicion, 2 of which are reported here. Respondents were asked to imagine that they had examined a child for an injury that may have been caused by abuse and that they had gathered as much information as they felt was possible. They then were asked to quantify (in 2 different ways) the degree of likelihood needed for suspicion of child abuse to rise to the level of reasonable suspicion.The physicians were asked to identify (using a differential-diagnosis framework) how high on a rank-order list "abuse" would have to be for it to rise to the level of reasonable suspicion (ie, first on the list, second, third, and so on, down to tenth). The second framework, estimated probability, used a visual analog scale of 0% to 100% to determine how likely suspected abuse would have to be for physicians for them to feel that they had reasonable suspicion. That is, would they need to feel that there was a 99% likelihood that abuse occurred before they felt that they had reasonable suspicion, a 1% likelihood, or something in between?In addition to standard demographic features, respondents were queried regarding their education on child abuse, education on reasonable suspicion, frequency of reporting child abuse, and (self-reported) expertise regarding child abuse. The main outcome measures were physician responses on the 2 scales for interpreting reasonable suspicion.Results. Pediatricians (n ‫؍‬ 1249) completed the survey (61% response rate). Their mean age was 43 years; 55% were female; and 78% were white. Seventy-six percent were board certified, and 65% reported being in primary care. There were no remarkable differences in responses based on age, gender, expertise with child abuse, frequency of reporting child abuse, or practice type. The responses of pediatric residents were indistinguishable from experienced physicians, and the responses of primary care pediatricians were no different from pediatric subspecialists.Wide variation was found in the thresholds that pediatricians set for what constituted reasonable suspicion. On the differential-diagnosis scale (DDS), 12% of pediatricians responded that abuse would have to rank first or second on the DDS before the possibility rose to the level of reasonable suspicion, 41% indicated a r...

show abstract

Opinions among mandated reporters toward child maltreatment reporting policies

Cited by 58 publications

References 17 publications

Influences on registered nurses' decision‐making in cases of suspected child abuse

Influences on registered nurses' decision‐making in cases of suspected child abuse

Comparing reports of suspected child maltreatment in states with and without Universal Mandated Reporting

Reasonable Suspicion: A Study of Pennsylvania Pediatricians Regarding Child Abuse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About