Defining maltreatment in practice: How child welfare workers respond to allegations of child exposure to domestic violence

Over the last three decades new research in the fields of psychology, neuroscience, and medicine, combined with shifting social norms, have brought increased attention to the issue of child exposure to domestic violence (CEDV)... [ view full abstract ]

Over the last three decades new research in the fields of psychology, neuroscience, and medicine, combined with shifting social norms, have brought increased attention to the issue of child exposure to domestic violence (CEDV) in United States. Studies find that children exposed to domestic violence exhibit higher rates of emotional, behavioral, and physical problems than their non-exposed peers. These findings have led some advocates and policymakers to conclude that CEDV is a form of child maltreatment that requires public intervention. However, few states have defined CEDV as a type of maltreatment in law and little is known about how child welfare workers respond to allegations of CEDV in practice. While past studies have documented the co-occurrence of domestic violence and child maltreatment among child welfare involved families, this paper examines the possibility that CEDV itself might prompt an initial child welfare investigation and may, at times, be construed by workers as a type of child maltreatment.

Through analysis of case records and administrative data, this paper examines one child welfare agency’s response to investigated referrals that allege CEDV. A random sample (n=295) of case records for all households referred to and investigated by the agency between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012 were reviewed for indications of CEDV. Examination of these data found that CEDV was a frequent experience among households referred to and investigated by this agency. Seventeen percent (n=51) of investigated households in the sample indicated CEDV at the time of investigation and for ten percent (n= 31) of households, CEDV was the only reason indicated for referral. Of the 31 households referred for CEDV alone, nine were substantiated for maltreatment. These findings suggest that workers sometimes construe CEDV as a type of maltreatment in the absence of other allegations. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.