رفاه کودکان بعنوان دروازه ورود به خدمات خشونت خانگی

This paper uses data from the National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well Being to examine the identification of domestic violence (DV) by child welfare workers during investigations of maltreatment and determine how this contributes to the receipt of DV services. The study focuses on female caregivers of children remaining in the home following the investigation (n = 3165). While child welfare workers indicate that active DV is present in only 12% of families investigated for maltreatment, 31% of caregivers reported DV victimization in the past year. The sensitivity of reports of DV is low between caregivers and workers, with both reporting active or recent DV in only 8% of families. Substance abuse by the primary caregiver is a strong predictor of under identification of DV by the child welfare worker (OR = 7.6). Overall, about half of the caregivers with active DV identified by the worker received DV services over the 18 months following the investigation. Logistic regression analyses examined whether receipt of child welfare services (CWS) increases the likelihood that a referral will be made to DV services and whether caregivers will then obtain these services. Both the identification of DV by the worker and having an open CWS case are significant contributors to receipt of DV services.

Previous research on the co-occurrence of domestic violence (DV) and child maltreatment strongly suggests that children who have been involved with child welfare services (CWS) are often exposed to DV. Child welfare workers concluded that DV was present in 28% of the 125 caregivers indicating a current or recent relationship in a sample drawn from families in CWS in New York City (Magen, Conroy, Hess, Panciera, & Levy Simon, 2001). In another study of 74 CWS cases, workers expressed a belief that DV had happened or had a high risk of happening in 32% of the cases (Shepard & Raschick, 1999). More than half (57%) of caregivers with a history of severe DV victimization entering the child welfare system have had previous contact with CWS (Hazen, Connelly, Kelleher, Landsverk, & Barth, 2004). On the basis of the recognition of this co-occurring risk, states have begun to change their risk assessment procedures and laws to ensure preemptive attention to children in families with DV. Yet, the estimates on which new policies and practices are based are from small samples drawn from local agency case record reviews and do not capture the majority of child welfare cases.