Predictors of failure by medical practitioners to report suspected child abuse in Queensland, Australia

Abstract

Objective: The goal of this investigation was to examine the level of notification of child abuse and neglect and the perceived deterrents to reporting by medical practitioners, who are mandated to report their suspicions but might choose not to do so.Design: A random sample of medical practitioners was surveyed. About three hundred medical practitioners were approached through the local Division of General Practice. 91 registered medical practitioners in Queensland, Australia, took part in the study. Results:A quarter of medical practitioners admitted failing to report suspicions, though they were mostly cognisant of their responsibility to report suspected cases of abuse and neglect. Only the belief that the suspected abuse was a single incident and unlikely to happen again predicted non-reporting (χ 2 [1, N = 89] = 7.60, p < 0.01). No gender, age or parent status differences were found between reporters and non-reporters. Conclusions:Although the rate of non-reporting shows improvement from previous research, it is still at an unacceptable level. The failure to report appears to result not from judgement about the presence or absence of indicators of child abuse and neglect but a threshold that moves individuals to act on their suspicions. Professional development should focus on some of the fallacies which CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT are very serious concerns, in that their consequences are substantial and have been shown to have a pernicious impact upon children in many ways. 1 The impact can be evident across the individual' s development, with negative factors being evident immediately, and continuing to emerge during childhood and adulthood, as well as

Are our Frontline Clinicians Equipped with the Ability and Confidence to Address Child Abuse and Neglect?

“…Our study was subject to the usual limitations of a voluntary postal questionnaire and self‐reported information. The proportion of respondents to our survey was 35 per cent, which is comparable to previous research (Bannon et al , ; Schweitzer et al , ; Van Haeringen et al , ). It is possible that our respondents represented a subgroup of health professionals who were more interested in CP and therefore more likely to respond, leading to bias in our sample.…”

“…A majority of our respondents (59%) had made a previous CP report. This rate is comparable to that of studies across the western world, where rates of 47 − 86 per cent of respondents had previously made a report (Borres and Hagg, 2007;Lazenblatt and Freeman, 2006;Schweitzer et al, 2003;Van Haeringen et al, 1998;Vulliamy and Sullivan, 2000;Zellman, 1990a). Fewer of the nurse respondents had made reports than the doctors, but our group of nurses had made more reports than in Feng and Levine's (2005) research amongst nurses.…”

“…The FTR rate in our study was five per cent and compares favourably with other studies in Australia. FTR rates appear to be showing an improvement over time in Australia, reducing from 43 per cent in 1997 (Van Haeringen et al , ) to 26 per cent in 2003 (Schweitzer et al , ). While not easily comparable, as these studies were from different states in Australia, we suspect our low rates of FTR may be a result of the changes in mandatory reporting legislation in NSW (Higgins et al , ), and the media attention that accompanies CAN cases.…”

“…Recognising or suspecting abuse yet not reporting it has been the subject of many studies. Failure to report (FTR) rates amongst mandated reporters have been quoted as ranging from eight per cent to 67 per cent (Borres and Hagg, 2007;Delaronde et al, 2000;Feng and Levine, 2005;Flaherty et al, 2000;Hawkins and McCallum, 2001;Saulsbury and Campbell, 1985;Schweitzer et al, 2003;Van Haeringen et al, 1998;Zellman, 1990a). The reasons for this behaviour are numerous and complex (Badger, 1989;Flaherty et al, 2004;Hawkins and McCallum, 2001;Nayda, 2002;Saulsbury and Campbell, 1985;Van Haeringen et al, 1998;Zellman, 1990aZellman, , 1990b; and the solutions are not entirely clear (Vulliamy and Sullivan, 2000).…”

“…Many previous studies have suggested that professionals' lack of confidence in reporting and misguided beliefs about CAN are the result of a lack of training. Improving training in CAN and support for frontline professionals has been recommended for the last two decades or more (Badger, 1989;Bannon and Carter, 2003;Bannon et al, 1999Bannon et al, , 2001Borres and Hagg, 2007;Dubowitz and Black, 1991;Hey, 2003;Lazenblatt and Freeman, 2006;Schweitzer et al, 2003;Zellman, 1990a). Such education appears universally well received by health professionals.…”