苏格兰残疾和儿童保护体检审计简短报告

IF 0.9 4区 社会学 Q3 FAMILY STUDIES
Stephanie Govenden, Julie Taylor, John Devaney, Alex McTier
{"title":"苏格兰残疾和儿童保护体检审计简短报告","authors":"Stephanie Govenden,&nbsp;Julie Taylor,&nbsp;John Devaney,&nbsp;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":"{\"title\":\"A short report of a Scottish audit of disability and child protection medical examinations\",\"authors\":\"Stephanie Govenden,&nbsp;Julie Taylor,&nbsp;John Devaney,&nbsp;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}","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

摘要

苏格兰全国儿童保护审计表明,从业人员对 "残疾 "一词的理解可能不同,他们对残疾的记录也各不相同。审计结果表明,年龄较大的儿童比五岁以下的儿童更有可能被记录为残疾。审计发现,对残疾儿童的虐待指控不太可能通过儿童保护体检得到证实。在我们的样本中,残疾儿童的 "虐待证实率 "为 33%,低于非残疾儿童的 56%。比率上的差异促使我们思考,当残疾儿童可能遭受伤害和虐待时,什么才是适当的应对措施。审计结果凸显了残疾儿童易受虐待的特点,并表明有必要使从业人员具备与这一弱势群体打交道并为其提供支持的技能、能力和信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A short report of a Scottish audit of disability and child protection medical examinations

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Child Abuse Review
Child Abuse Review Multiple-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
6.20%
发文量
65
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信