Stephanie Govenden, Julie Taylor, John Devaney, Alex McTier
{"title":"A short report of a Scottish audit of disability and child protection medical examinations","authors":"Stephanie Govenden, Julie Taylor, John Devaney, Alex McTier","doi":"10.1002/car.2906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A Scottish national child protection audit has shown that practitioners can have differing understanding of the term ‘disability’ and are variable in their own recording of disabilities. It was apparent from the audit that disability was more likely to be recorded for older children than those under five. The audit found that an abuse allegation is less likely to be substantiated for disabled children by a Child Protection Medical Examination. For disabled children in our sample, there was a ‘substantiation of abuse rate’ of 33%, which was less than the 56% rate for non-disabled children. The differences in rates encourage us to consider what is an appropriate response when disabled children may have experienced harm and abuse. The audit highlights the vulnerability of disabled children to abuse and indicates the need to equip practitioners with the skills, competencies and confidence to engage with and support this vulnerable group.</p>","PeriodicalId":47371,"journal":{"name":"Child Abuse Review","volume":"33 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Child Abuse Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/car.2906","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"FAMILY STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A Scottish national child protection audit has shown that practitioners can have differing understanding of the term ‘disability’ and are variable in their own recording of disabilities. It was apparent from the audit that disability was more likely to be recorded for older children than those under five. The audit found that an abuse allegation is less likely to be substantiated for disabled children by a Child Protection Medical Examination. For disabled children in our sample, there was a ‘substantiation of abuse rate’ of 33%, which was less than the 56% rate for non-disabled children. The differences in rates encourage us to consider what is an appropriate response when disabled children may have experienced harm and abuse. The audit highlights the vulnerability of disabled children to abuse and indicates the need to equip practitioners with the skills, competencies and confidence to engage with and support this vulnerable group.
期刊介绍:
Child Abuse Review provides a forum for all professionals working in the field of child protection, giving them access to the latest research findings, practice developments, training initiatives and policy issues. The Journal"s remit includes all forms of maltreatment, whether they occur inside or outside the family environment. Papers are written in a style appropriate for a multidisciplinary audience and those from outside Britain are welcomed. The Journal maintains a practice orientated focus and authors of research papers are encouraged to examine and discuss implications for practitioners.