Upload
aubrey-nelson
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Staff Maltreatment in Residential
Care for Children At-Risk: The
Adolescents’ Perspective
Dr. Shalhevet Attar-Schwartz
School of Social Work and Social Welfare
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
ISCI 3rd International Conference
July, 2011, York, UK
2
Research Purpose
To study examines the prevalence and multi-
level correlates of staff physical and verbal
maltreatment of 1,324 Israeli adolescents in 32
residential care settings.
3
Background:Institutional Care in Israel
Every year between 7,000-8,000 young people live in out-of-home care
Due to historical and ideological reasons about 80% placed in RCSs.
Child Welfare Placement: Levels of Intensity of Care
25%
40%
30%
5%Educational
Rehabilatativ e
Therapeutic
Post-hospitalization
5
Maltreatment of Children in Care:
Existing Knowledge
No hard data to indicate the extent of maltreatment
Few existing studies revealing a worrying picture: compared to the general population, children in care are significantly more involved in official child maltreatment reports and police investigations (e.g., Benedict, Zuravin, Brandt, &
Abbey, 1994; Bolton, Laner, & Gai, 1982; Hobbs, Hobbs, & Wynne, 1999; Rindfleisch & Rabb, 1984).
6
Limitations of Existing Literature
Small-scale, unrepresentative, and retrospective samples
Based mostly on inquiry reported cases of alleged incidents of maltreatment assessed and reported by professionals
Based on adult reports Focus on severe abuse
7
Research Questions
What is the prevalence of physical and verbal maltreatment of Israeli adolescents in residential care by their setting’s staff?
What are the adolescent and the institutional correlates of staff maltreatment?
8
Methods
Sample1,324 young people aged 11-19 residing in 32
rehabilitative and therapeutic RCSs
Study designCross-sectional
9
Data Collection
Anonymous structured self-report questionnaire, completed by the adolescents in a the care setting
Organizational details of the settings provided by the directors
10
Dependent Variables: Staff Maltreatment
Verbal maltreatment: two items related to being cursed at;
humiliated, insulted or ridiculed by a staff member. A scale ranging
from 0 to 2 (= 0.62.
Physical maltreatment: four items related to being
grabbed and shoved; pinched; slapped; and kicked or punched. A
scale ranging from 0 to 4 (= 0.74.
(Benbenishty et al., 2002; Furlong et al., 2005)
11
Independent Variables:Child-Level Correlates
Age and gender
Adjustment difficulties (SDQ; Goodman, 1997)
Hyperactivity ( = 0.64)
Emotional symptoms (= 0.67)
Perceived social climate (Revised Social Climate Scale, Colton,
1989; Heal, Sinclair, & Troop, 1973)
Caretaker support ( = 0.79)
Strictness ( = 0.63)
RCS policy aimed at reducing violence (Benbenishty et al.,
2000; Furlong et al., 2005; = 0.85).
12
Independent Variables:Setting-Level Correlates
Setting type (rehabilitative or therapeutic)
Structure (traditional group settings vs. RCSs with
familial elements)
Size
Ethnic affiliation (Arab vs. Jewish settings)
13
Data Analysis Method: Multilevel Analysis
(HLM)
Enables the analysis of hierarchical data structure
Provides information regarding the unique contribution of each analysis level:
Level 1: Adolescents variables Level 2: Institutional variables
14
Sample Characteristics (N = 1,324 adolescents in 32
RCSs)
Average age: 14.06 (SD = 3.11)
54% males
62% are rehabilitative
75% Jewish settings
The majority (60%) of the RCSs are group settings
Average number of children: 102 (SD = 24.18)
15
Staff Verbal and Physical Maltreatment
Overall, 24.7% of the adolescents reported being victims of physical maltreatment by staff
One in three (29.1%) reported on verbal violence
Variance between Settings in Maltreatment
VariableProportion of variance between settings, ICC a
Physical maltreatment18.60%
Verbal maltreatment6.00%
a The interclass correlation (ICC) is calculated using the formula :variance between RCSs/(variance between + variance within).
17
Findings: Adolescent-Level
Correlates
The most vulnerable adolescents:
Boys (physical maltreatment)
Adolescents reporting on higher levels of emotional symptoms and hyperactivity
Adolescents perceiving staff as stricter and less supportive
Adolescents reporting on negative perception of the RCS policy against violence
18
Explained-Variance by Child-Level Characteristics
Child-level variables explained 16% of the variance within RCSs in physical and 15% in verbal maltreatment
Social climate of the setting explained the highest share of variance in verbal (11%) and physical (8%) maltreatment between the adolescents
19
Setting-Level Correlates
The most “at-risk” institutions: Therapeutic settings (vs. rehabilitative) Arab RCS (physical maltreatment) Settings with larger numbers of children
(physical maltreatment)
20
Explained-Variance between RCSs in Staff
Maltreatment
Setting-level variables explained 66.32% of the variance between RCSs in physical and 31.88% in verbal maltreatment
The largest share of variance between settings in physical maltreatment was explained by the cultural affiliation (45.01%)
The average perception of the RCS climate explained the highest share (31.88%) of variance between settings in verbal maltreatment
21
Discussion
A need for an ecological perspective Worrying rates of staff maltreatment in
RCSs Identifying adolescent at-risk and “settings
at-risk” Adjustment difficulties Social climate and policy Arab RCSs
22
Limitations and Recommendations for
Future Research
Cross-sectional design Adolescents as sole informants Explanatory variables not included Additional aspects of maltreatment A need for theoretical developments
explaining staff abuse in substitute care