Detection of Child Abuse - Essay Example

Child Abuse and Social Work: A Case Study 2008 The case of Kimberley Harte, 23 and her partner, Stephen Duncan, 26, from Maida Vale, London shocked the United Kingdom when, in 2007, they were convicted with 11 years and half and 10 years and half imprisonment respectively for physically abusing their child inflicted with mild cerebral palsy. The case was also the more heart-wrenching since it brought to light the serious failings of the social work agencies who were entrusted with the job of ensuring that the child led a healthy life. The child was born prematurely that caused her cerebral palsy. Soon after birth, she was taken up for care on charges of domestic violence but before she could be found an adopted home, the social workers gave her back to the birth parents on the basis of a report of the Westminster Council. The social workers did little to follow up on the case till the grandmother of the child grew suspicious. There were 20 home visits by social workers but they failed to detect any wrongdoings although the court found the child to have been abused within a month of her return (BBC, 2007). The court found that the child was returned to the birth parents even when the foster parents expressed their worries over the child’s distress. Although the couple denied having caused physical injury on the child by intent, the court found them guilty of causing bodily harm at least three times. Boiling water was poured over her hands; hair was pulled and ripped from her head; she was kicked hard in the groin, causing internal injuries; she was locked up naked in the bathroom every night and forced to eat her own faeces. The court found the case to be the most horrible one of child abuse. The case brought to light not only the darker side of human mind but also the haste and carelessness that social workers often take decisions with. Despite the fact that the parents visited the child only rarely as she spent the first seven months of her life in the hospital and that she had to be taken up by a foster family soon after, the Westminster Council and the charity, NCH, delayed on the adoption process and believed that the couple had reformed after undergoing a domestic violence intervention program. Even after returning the child to them, the social workers’ visits found nothing wrong. Typical of such cases, they did not see the child in person in most visits as she was supposedly out with the father. Even when they did see the child, they believed that the injuries were results of accidents (Kirby, 2007). The Harte-Duncans case has a close similarity with the Victoria Climbie case in 2000, when the death of the eight year old girl as a result of abuse induced the laws in Britain to be stricter and the Every Child Matters program initiated by Prime Minister Tony Blair. The case is all the more similar because the victims of child abuse were known to the social workers in most cases yet they failed to prevent it. The Every Child Matters program covers all vulnerable children in United Kingdom, believing that this will prevent child abuse through monitoring. But, this does not take into account severely vulnerable children or those who are unable to communicate their problems for disability or any other reason (Kilby, 2007). Besides, the hesitation of the social workers in freeing the child for adoption reflects the social attitude that biological parents are preferred than adoption, even when the former are abusive and known to be prone to domestic violence. In most cases, the children who are taken up by social workers are handed over to a series of foster carers rather than found a permanent adopted home and finally returned to the biological parents. In 2007, there were 5,100 children put up in the British child protection register for physical abuse, 2,600 for sexual abuse and 6,700 for emotional abuse. The last group is the fastest growing, defined by the Department of Health as those victims of “persistent emotional ill-treatment . . . [which] may involve conveying to children that they are worthless or inadequate . . . and may feature age or developmentally inappropriate expectations being placed on children . . . Some level of emotional abuse is involved in all types of ill-treatment of a child, though it may occur alone” Cavendish, 2007). While the resources of social work are stretched in order to tackle vague cases that may be termed by psychiatrists as “emotional abuse”, the actual physical abuse that may eventually result in death, like the Victoria Climbie case, gets undetected. The statutory framework to deal with child abuse was changed from the socio-medical understanding as in the 1980s and the early 1990s to a socio-legal framework more recently, emphasising on training and practice of social workers (Welbourne, 2000). Despite the legalization of child protection, there are huge amibuities over the stages of required intervention and its modalities. Psychiatrists have found that children who have learning difficulties are at greater risk of sexual and physical abuse (Allington-Smith, 2002). Typically, families with such children are socially isolated and relatively poorer in material and emotional resources. This often results in the carers being prone to frustration or even rejection of the child as well as the child suffering from low self-esteem. Besides, certain physical conditions of children may result in their lack of communication. The complex combination of such problems often result in abuse. In the United Kingdom, any detection of child abuse has to be informed to the social work agencies. However, a multi-agency framework covering social workers, health professionals and child protection teams would be more appropriate. Child abuse cases are usually categorised as emotional, sexual and physical abuses but most cases are combination of all three types while abuse enhances the disabilities of children suffering with such problems. Cross et al (1993, cited in Allington-Smith, 2002) found that children with disabilities are likely to suffer abuse 1.7 times that of other children. Besides, 147 out of 1000 impairments were also found to be as a result of abuse. An abused child may demonstrate regressive behavior and become all the more vulnerable to further abuse. Multi-agency framework in dealing with child abuse has been emphasized since the Working Together to Safeguard Children document was published in 2000. A number of inter-agency issues have been raised in the guidelines, including safeguarding police and social workers records on cases. It has been recognized that some of the issues in the child abuse cases are extremely complex, involving a number of people, locations and period of abuse and the interaction of various causes. Complex abuse is defined as “involving one or more abusers and a number of related or non-related abused children and young people. The abusers concerned may be acting in concert to abuse children, sometimes acting in isolation, or may be using an institutional framework or position of authority to recruit children for abuse” (quoted in Guideline, 2000). Although each case is different in terms of complexity, a number of agencies, including health, education and probation needs to act in tandem with the social workers. In the Harte-Duncan case, their was very limited interaction with the other agencies. The issue of child abuse concerns the societal values regarding out-of-home care for children. As Bailey (2001) writes, “It is our national interest to ensure that every infant has access to high-quality, nurturing, developmentally supportive care, whether that care is provided by a parent or by some other caregiver….Yet, with the exception of state regulations for child care and the establishment of early intervention systems for high risk children, as a nation, we are reluctant to intervene too much in the lives of children, families or the individuals who make a living caring for children”. Thus childcare is not just an issue with families but a societal concern. Risks of child abuse like that in the Hart-Duncans case could to a large extent be reduced if the childcare program for vulnerable families is increased. Rosenthal (1999) sets out the basic parameters in which the research on out-of-home childcare is conducted. According to him, all the research that has been done is based on the social parameters white middle class values regarding family and childcare. The role ascribed by such social values to family and communities have shaped the parameters chosen and the statistical methods adopted to analyze the child development and the environmental setting. The definition of “quality care” as well as the relationships between goals of childcare and the practices are shaped by the cultural contexts. Hence, while most studies have predominantly focused on Anglo-American values in childcare, Rosenthal emphasizes that the cultural context of childcare is equally important. Therefore the goals of childcare are not and cannot be the same for an American or a British child as it would be for an Asian or a Latin American child. EPPI Web studied the effect of inclusion of childcare and education for children below age 6 for a cross-section of cultural settings. ‘Care’ is defined as offering care for children over six hours a day, allowing mothers to be employed while education for such children would necessarily involve less hours. Reviewing studies on the subject in a number of languages - Bengali, Dutch, English, French, German and Spanish – allowed for a variety of cultural contexts. Out of 133 studies found, nine were found to have studied the effect of inclusion of education and childcare in France, Israel, Korea, Norway, Sweden and the United States across social groups. It was found that inclusion of education and childcare was beneficial for children below age six, particularly for children from multi-risk families although the effects on mothers and children cannot be generalized. The goals of childcare and education depend upon the teachers’ and parents’ perception that are again determined by the cultural context. Most research on out-of-home care has focused on maternal attachment and emotional security. However, the evidence whether infants who are enrolled in out-of-home care show less attachment to mothers is inconclusive. While Belsky (1988) and Clark-Stewart (1988) maintain that half of the children studied show less attachment to the mothers and are insecure in later life, the other half remain securely attached to their mothers (Howes, n.d). However, the research does not specify the quality of care provided or the attachment developed towards the alternate caregiver. Besides, while mothers who are caring and sensitive raise their children better than those who are not, the same applies to the alternate caregivers. It is more the quality of care provided than the setting that plays the crucial role in child development and emotional security. Typically, most studies have measured children’s social and emotional development as well as cognitive and language development to analyze the effects of out-of-home care (Azar, 2000). The children who are at out-of-home childcare do not do any worse in these tests although long term effects are not clear, as found in the longitudinal study by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD). Bales (n.d) found that parental involvement and quality of care at home as well as the institution are important for child development even when children are at out-of-home care for 30 hours or more a week. Children at high quality care that have small adult-to-child ratio, sensitive and trained caregivers and stimulate children in conflict resolution and problem solution are less likely to be aggressive than those at low quality care. Language hearing aids child development hence children tend to do develop better if parents and caregivers continuously talk to the children, ask questions, respond to their queries, encourage children to talk as well as sing and play with them. Children who get love and affection at home and have a nurturing atmosphere tend to show lower problems in adjusting with the out-of-home setting. The study, however, did not find statistically significant difference in aggressive behavior of children who were in full-time care in comparison to those who are in care for less than 10 hours a week. To study whether out-of-home care is beneficial for a child’s development, it is necessary to study the development theories. Over the years, psychologists, sociologists and educationists have developed various theories on child development. There are four broad areas of theories of child development – 1) psychoanalytic theories by Sigmund Freud, according to which early childhood experiences share a person’s identity in later life; 2) learning theories, 3) cognitive and 4) social learning (Encarta). Erik Erikson developed the psychoanalytic theory by stating that a child’s psychological growth is strongly influenced by social factors. Particularly in infancy, a child’s personality develops if she is confident that she will be provided with proper nurture and care. Learning theories emphasize on development experiences at home, school, care centers or among peer groups. Cognitive theories emphasized on thinking and reasoning in the process of learning. Jean Piaget’s cognitive theory of constructivism emphasized that children apply acquired current knowledge to new experiences that are thereby modified with the new experience. Hence, children play an active role in assimilating their new influences whether at home or at the out-of-home care centers. Although during the age 2 years and 6 years, thinking is more intuitive and subjective, it also develops to be conceptual depending on the surroundings. Social interaction with caregivers provides a fertile ground for an infant’s language acquisition skills. In the 1960s and 1970s, psychologists developed Piaget’s theory of constructivism to propose that infants and children develop emotional attachment to their caregivers in their development process. Bronfenbrenner stated that environmental factors besides the family and encompassing the school, peer group and the society at large influence the child’s development process. The sociocultural theories of learning, like that of Lev Vyogotsky, emphasize that the child’s interaction with adults contribute to her development (Encarta). From the theories of child development presented in the previous section, it is obvious that social interaction is crucial for cognitive development of children and to reduce the risks of child abuse for these vulnerable children. As Piaget found in his experiments with children, they develop cognitive skills faster and better if they interact with more adults and peers. Special education classes during preschool years improve cognitive skills and academic performance later. Also, sociomotional outcomes like self-esteem, academic motivation and social behavior also improve with preschool intervention (Future of Children). Thus, child abuse cases like that of Hart-Duncan is related to a large extent with other issues like poverty, domestic violence, education and child care, particularly in the context of learning or other disabilities. Hence, a multi-agency framework including education, childcare and police is necessary to tackle the menace. Work Cited BBC, Couple jailed for child torture, BBC Online, February 18, 2007, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6343693.stm Kirby, Jill, After Climbié, children are at even more risk, The Sunday Times, February 11, 2007, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article1364667.ece Cavendish, Camilla, Guilty of child abuse! (Well, our version.), The Times, August 23, 2007, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/camilla_cavendish/article2310550.ece Welbourne, Penelope, Child abuse in the UK: Some current developments in the conceptualisation and practice, Journal of Comparative Social Welfare, Vol 16 Issue 1, 2000 Allington-Smith, Pru, Management of Sexually Abused Children with Learning Disabilities, Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, Vol 8, 2002 Parliament, Complex Child Abuse Investigations: Inter-Agency Issues, http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/f_child_abuse.pdf Azar, Beth, The Debate over Childcare Isn’t Over. Monitor on Psychology. Volume 31. No 3, March, 2000, retrieved from http://www.apa.org/monitor/mar00/childcare.html Bales, Diane. W. What Do we Really Know About Child Care and Aggression? National Network for Child Care, retrieved from http://www.nncc.org/Research/aggression.html EPPI Web. What is the impact of out-of-home integrated care and education settings on children aged 0-6 and their parents? Retrieved from http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/EPPIWeb/home.aspx?page=/reel/review_groups/early_years/review_one_abstract.htm Rosenthal, M.K., Out-of-home Childcare Research: A Cultural Perspective, International Journal of Behavioral Development, 1999, Volume 23, Number 2, 1 June, pp. 477-518(42) http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761557692_2/Development_Child.html Future of Children, Long-Term Effects of Early Childhood Programs on Cognitive and School Outcomes, retrieved from http://www.futureofchildren.org/information2827/information_show.htm?doc_id=77671 Howes, Carollee, Infant Child Care, Retrieved from http://www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content/infant_care.html Allen, Rose, Child Care: Is It Good or Bad for Children? 2006 Retrieved from http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/familydevelopment/components/7268b.html Read More