How Childcare Providers Interpret 'Reasonable Suspicion' of Child Abuse.

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Title:	How Childcare Providers Interpret 'Reasonable Suspicion' of Child Abuse.
Authors:	Levi, Benjamin blevi@hmc.psu.edu, Crowell, Kathryn¹, Walsh, Kerryann², Dellasega, Cheryl³
Source:	Child & Youth Care Forum. Dec2015, Vol. 44 Issue 6, p875-891. 17p.
Subject Terms:	Child care, Child welfare, Teachers, Data analysis, Prevention of child abuse, Analysis of variance, Chi-squared test, Probability theory, Public health laws, Questionnaires, Research funding, Statistical sampling, Statistics, Descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis Test
Geographic Terms:	United States
Abstract:	Background: Childcare providers are often 'first responders' for suspected child abuse, and how they understand the concept of 'reasonable suspicion' will influence their decisions regarding which warning signs warrant reporting. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate how childcare providers interpret the threshold for reporting suspected abuse, and to consider the implications of these findings for professional training and development. Method: A convenience sample of 355 childcare providers completed the Reasonable Suspicion of Child Abuse survey to quantify what likelihood of child abuse constitutes 'reasonable suspicion.' Responses were examined for internal consistency, evidence of a group standard, and associations with professional and personal demographics. Results: On a Rank Order Scale, responses for what constitutes 'reasonable suspicion' ranged from requiring that abuse be 'the' most likely cause (8 %) of an injury, to the second most likely (9 %), third (18 %), fourth (18 %), to even the seventh (8 %) or eighth (5 %) most likely cause of an injury. On a numerical probability scale, 21 % of respondents indicated that 'abuse' would need to be ≥83 % likely before reasonable suspicion existed; 40 % stated that a likelihood between 53-82 % was needed; 27 % identified the necessary likelihood between 33-52 %; and 12 % set a threshold between 1-32 %. Conclusions: The present finding that no consensus exists for interpreting 'reasonable suspicion' suggests that a broadly accepted interpretive framework is needed in order to help prepare childcare providers to know when to report suspected abuse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
	Copyright of Child & Youth Care Forum is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Database:	Education Research Complete

Description
Abstract:	Background: Childcare providers are often 'first responders' for suspected child abuse, and how they understand the concept of 'reasonable suspicion' will influence their decisions regarding which warning signs warrant reporting. Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate how childcare providers interpret the threshold for reporting suspected abuse, and to consider the implications of these findings for professional training and development. Method: A convenience sample of 355 childcare providers completed the Reasonable Suspicion of Child Abuse survey to quantify what likelihood of child abuse constitutes 'reasonable suspicion.' Responses were examined for internal consistency, evidence of a group standard, and associations with professional and personal demographics. Results: On a Rank Order Scale, responses for what constitutes 'reasonable suspicion' ranged from requiring that abuse be 'the' most likely cause (8 %) of an injury, to the second most likely (9 %), third (18 %), fourth (18 %), to even the seventh (8 %) or eighth (5 %) most likely cause of an injury. On a numerical probability scale, 21 % of respondents indicated that 'abuse' would need to be ≥83 % likely before reasonable suspicion existed; 40 % stated that a likelihood between 53-82 % was needed; 27 % identified the necessary likelihood between 33-52 %; and 12 % set a threshold between 1-32 %. Conclusions: The present finding that no consensus exists for interpreting 'reasonable suspicion' suggests that a broadly accepted interpretive framework is needed in order to help prepare childcare providers to know when to report suspected abuse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
ISSN:	10531890
DOI:	10.1007/s10566-015-9302-5