Search

Infants and toddlers are at increased risk for severe/fatal abuse, often at the hands of male perpetrators. This paper examined whether child maltreatment cases involving younger children receive more casework services, overall caseworker activity (e.g., home visits, phone contacts), and are more likely to be substantiated, particularly if a male perpetrator is involved. The randomly selected sample consisted of 293 child abuse and neglect reports in a large county in Western New York in 1993. Hierarchical regression analyses showed that younger children generally receive more overall services and caseworker activity, and that while age makes a significant contribution after the decision has been made to substantiate a case, it does not have the same effect on the initial decision of whether or not to substantiate. Gender of the perpetrator did not reliably predict caseworker attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: The aim of this study was to examine the trajectory of cases through four systems: child protection, law enforcement, the dependency courts, and the criminal courts. Method: This study focused on a county selected from a 41-county telephone survey conducted for the National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect (NIS-3). For this analysis prospective samples were drawn from law enforcement (n =225) and the county child protection (CPS) agency (n =225) and followed through in-depth case tracking across all agencies and through both the dependency and criminal court systems. Results: The percentage of CPS cases opened in dependency court was similar to prior studies (29%), but the acceptance and prosecution rates were much higher—92% of the cases referred from CPS, including many cases of physical abuse. Compared to referrals from CPS to law enforcement (93%), few cases were referred from law enforcement to CPS (17%). Anecdotally, case referral patterns appeared to be influenced by communication patterns and mutual positive regard, regardless of the collaborative protocols in place. One of the most instructive findings was the degree of difficulty in tracking cases across organizations and the types of obstacles that impeded success. Disorganization was not an issue, rather internal structures set up to facilitate intra-organizational processing were the same structures that actually impeded cross-organizational case finding. Conclusions: It is not sufficient to rely on the existence of multi-disciplinary teams or Child Advocacy Centers to ensure collaboration. More attention to daily tasks and activities as well as the nature and quality of communication is warranted. On the technical side, use of common case identifiers on cases that are cross-referred is strongly recommended. Future studies should broaden the scope of inquiry to include the consequences of all case trajectories, rather than solely focusing on the justice system. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]