How the Justice System Responds to Juvenile Victims: A Comprehensive Model.

The justice system handles thousands of cases involving juvenile victims each year. These victims are served by a complex set of agencies and institutions, including police, prosecutors, courts, and child protection agencies. Despite the many cases involving juvenile victims and the structure in place for responding to them, the juvenile victim justice system model presented in this Bulletin is a new concept. Although the juvenile victim justice system has a distinct structure and sequence, its operation is not very well understood. Unlike the more familiar juvenile offender justice system, the juvenile victim justice system has not been conceptualized as a whole or implemented by a common set of statutes. This Bulletin identifies the major elements of the juvenile victim justice system by delineating how cases move through the system. It reviews each step in the case flow process for the child protection and criminal justice systems and describes the interaction of the agencies an individuals involved. Recognizing how the juvenile victim justice system works can inform policy decisions and improve outcomes for juvenile victims. Acknowledging the existence of the system has important implications for system integration, information sharing, and data collection—all of which play a key role in ensuring the safety and well-being of juvenile victims

Which sexual abuse victims receive a forensic medical examination? : The impact of Children\u27s Advocacy Centers

Abstract Objective This study examines the impact of Children\u27s Advocacy Centers (CAC) and other factors, such as the child\u27s age, alleged penetration, and injury on the use of forensic medical examinations as part of the response to reported child sexual abuse. Methods This analysis is part of a quasi-experimental study, the Multi-Site Evaluation of Children\u27s Advocacy Centers, which evaluated four CACs relative to within-state non-CAC comparison communities. Case abstractors collected data on forensic medical exams in 1,220 child sexual abuse cases through review of case records. Results Suspected sexual abuse victims at CACs were two times more likely to have forensic medical examinations than those seen at comparison communities, controlling for other variables. Girls, children with reported penetration, victims who were physically injured while being abused, White victims, and younger children were more likely to have exams, controlling for other variables. Non-penetration cases at CACs were four times more likely to receive exams as compared to those in comparison communities. About half of exams were conducted the same day as the reported abuse in both CAC and comparison communities. The majority of caregivers were very satisfied with the medical professional. Receipt of a medical exam was not associated with offenders being charged. Conclusions Results of this study suggest that CACs are an effective tool for furthering access to forensic medical examinations for child sexual abuse victims

Spot deformation and replication in the two-dimensional Belousov-Zhabotinski reaction in water-in-oil microemulsion

In the limit of large diffusivity ratio, spot-like solutions in the two-dimensional Belousov-Zhabotinski reaction in water-in-oil microemulsion are studied. It is shown analytically that such spots undergo an instability as the diffusivity ratio is decreased. An instability threshold is derived. For spots of small radius, it is shown that this instability leads to a spot splitting into precisely two spots. For larger spots, it leads to deformation, fingering patterns and space-filling curves. Numerical simulations are shown to be in close agreement with the analytical predictions.Comment: To appear, PR

Evaluating Children’s Advocacy Centers’ Response to Child Sexual Abuse

Children’s Advocacy Centers (CACs) play an increasingly significant role in the response to child sexual abuse and other child maltreatment in the United States. First developed in the 1980s, CACs were designed to reduce the stress on child abuse victims and families created by traditional child abuse investigation and prosecution procedures and to improve the effectiveness of the response. According to several experts (Fontana, 1984; Pence and Wilson, 1992; Whitcomb, 1992), child victims were subjected to multiple, redundant interviews about their abuse by different agencies, and were questioned by professionals who had no knowledge of children’s developmental limitations or experience working with children. Child interviews would take place in settings like police stations that would further stress already frightened children. Moreover, the response was hampered because the multiple agencies involved did not coordinate their investigations, and children’s need for services could be neglected

Identifying the substance abuse treatment needs of caregivers involved with child welfare

Parental substance use significantly increases risk of child maltreatment, but is often under-identified by child protective services. This study examined how agency use of standardized substance use assessments and child welfare investigative caseworker education, experience, and caseload affected caseworkers’ identification of parental substance abuse treatment needs. Data are from a national probability sample of permanent, primary caregivers involved with child protective services whose children initially remained at home and whose confidential responses on two validated instruments indicated harmful substance use or dependence. Investigative caseworkers reported use of a formal assessment in over two thirds of cases in which substance use was accurately identified. However, weighted logistic regression indicated that agency provision of standardized assessment instruments was not associated with caseworker identification of caregiver needs. Caseworkers were also less likely to identify substance abuse when their caseloads were high and when caregivers were fathers. Implications for agency practice are discussed

Do Children\u27s Advocacy Centers improve families’ experiences of child sexual abuse investigations?

Abstract Objective The Children\u27s Advocacy Center (CAC) model of child abuse investigation is designed to be more child and family-friendly than traditional methods, but there have been no rigorous studies of their effect on children\u27s and caregivers’ experience. Data collected as part of the Multi-Site Evaluation of Children\u27s Advocacy Centers were used to examine whether CACs improve caregivers’ and children\u27s satisfaction with investigations. Methods Nonoffending caregiver and child satisfaction were assessed during research interviews, including the administration of a 14-item Investigation Satisfaction Scale (ISS) for caregivers. Two hundred and twenty-nine sexual abuse cases investigated through a CAC were compared to 55 cases investigated in communities with no CAC. Results Hierarchical linear regression results indicated that caregivers in CAC cases were more satisfied with the investigation than those from comparison sites, even after controlling for a number of relevant variables. There were few differences between CAC and comparison samples on children\u27s satisfaction. Children described moderate to high satisfaction with the investigation, while a minority expressed concerns about their experience. Conclusions The CAC model shows promise for improving families’ experiences, but to build upon this promise, agencies will need to systematize procedures for refining and adapting the model as new research becomes available

Child witnesses productively respond to "How" questions about evaluations but struggle with other "How" questions

Child interviewers are often advised to avoid asking “How” questions, particularly with young children. However, children tend to answer “How” evaluative questions productively (e.g., “How did you feel?”). “How” evaluative questions are phrased as a “How” followed by an auxiliary verb (e.g., “did” or “was”), but so are “How” questions requesting information about method or manner (e.g., “How did he touch you?”), and “How” method/manner questions might be more difficult for children to answer. We examined 458 5- to 17-year-old children questioned about sexual abuse, identified 2485 "How” questions with an auxiliary verb, and classified them as “How” evaluative (n = 886) or “How” method/manner (n = 1599). Across age, children gave more productive answers to “How” evaluative questions than “How” method/manner questions. Although even young children responded appropriately to “How” method/manner questions over 80% of the time, specific types of “How” method/manner questions were particularly difficult, including questions regarding clothing, body positioning, and the nature of touch. Children’s difficulties lie in specific combinations of “How” questions and topics, rather than “How” questions in general