ارزیابی ریسک چند سازمانی و مدیریت برای کودکان و خانواده تحت خشونت خانگی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|36185||2014||8 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||8132 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Children and Youth Services Review, Volume 47, Part 1, December 2014, Pages 78–85
This paper explores risk assessment and management in relation to children and families experiencing domestic violence; in particular, the communication and collaboration between child protection services, the police and independent domestic violence services. Four key themes structure our analysis of the challenges of risk assessment and management in this field: the question of who is the primary client and the focus of risk assessment; the issue of how the information to inform risk assessment is organised, including how it is collected, the tools that are employed, and the context in which information is collected; the position of the child, mother and father and whether risk is assessed and managed with them or to them; and the relationship between risk assessment and risk management, specifically whether risk management is restricted to families where levels of danger are identified as high or whether there are opportunities for support and safety planning for families where the risk is assessed as low. Finally, the paper examines some of the mechanisms that have developed as a means of resolving these issues, describing approaches to multi-agency risk assessment and management in this field that have emerged in both the UK and Australia and drawing on a range of studies undertaken by the authors.
Established approaches and protocols for risk assessment and management are often challenged at the interface of interagency work. At the level of risk assessment, conflicts emerge between different conceptions of risk and between different approaches to the collection of information used to inform risk assessment. In risk management, some agencies restrict their intervention to high risk cases, while others maintain a focus on those which require lower levels of support. While these conflicts may impede the day-to-day practice of risk assessment and management, they are also valuable in illuminating the varying perspectives which organisations bring to the task of protecting children. Differences which arise in mapping the territory can highlight the need for new structures and the support required for agencies to work collaboratively.