Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Mar;32(3):393-404.
doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2007.10.002.

The Canadian child welfare system response to exposure to domestic violence investigations

Affiliations

The Canadian child welfare system response to exposure to domestic violence investigations

Tara Black et al. Child Abuse Negl. 2008 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: While child welfare policy and legislation reflects that children who are exposed to domestic violence are in need of protection because they are at risk of emotional and physical harm, little is known about the profile of families and children identified to the child welfare system and the system's response. The objective of this study was to examine the child welfare system's response to child maltreatment investigations substantiated for exposure to domestic violence (EDV).

Methods: This study is based on a secondary analysis of data collected in the 2003 Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect (CIS-2003). Bivariate analyses were conducted on substantiated investigations. A binary logistic regression was also conducted to attempt to predict child welfare placements for investigations involving EDV.

Results: What emerges from this study is that the child welfare system's response to EDV largely depends on whether it occurs in isolation or with another substantiated form of child maltreatment. For example, children involved in substantiated investigations that involve EDV with another form of substantiated maltreatment are almost four times more likely than investigations involving only EDV to be placed in a child welfare setting (Adjusted Odds Ratio=3.87, p<.001).

Conclusions: These findings suggest that the involvement of child welfare has not resulted in the widespread placement of children exposed to domestic violence. The Canadian child welfare system is substantiating EDV at a high rate but is concluding that these families do not require child protection services.

Practice implications: There is debate in the literature about how the child welfare sector should respond to cases involving exposure to domestic violence. Contrary to conventional wisdom, this study finds that children who are the subject of investigations involving substantiated exposure to domestic violence are less likely to be removed from their home than children experiencing other forms of maltreatment. Strategies need to be developed to counter misperceptions about the intrusiveness of child welfare, and discussions need to take place about when it is appropriate for child welfare to become involved when children are exposed to domestic violence.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

MeSH terms