Multidisciplinary child protection decision making about physical abuse: Determining substantiation thresholds and biases

The current study examined the threshold at which multidisciplinary child protection team (CPT) professionals substantiate physical abuse allegations and the extent that they utilize potentially biased constructs in their decision making when presented with the same case evidence. State legal definitions of child maltreatment are broad. Therefore, the burden of interpretation is largely on CPT professionals who must determine at what threshold physical acts by parents surpass corporal discipline and constitute child physical abuse. Biased or subjective decisions may be made if certain case-specific characteristics or CPT professionals' personal characteristics are used in making physical abuse determinations. Case vignettes with visual depictions of inflicted injuries were sent to CPT professionals in Florida and their substantiation decisions, personal beliefs about corporal discipline, and coercive discipline were collected. Results of the study demonstrated relatively high agreement among professionals across vignettes about what constitutes physical abuse. Further, CPT professionals strongly considered their perceptions of the severity of inflicted injuries in substantiation decisions. Although case specific characteristics did not bias decisions in a systematic way, some CPT professional characteristics influenced the substantiation of physical abuse. Practice implications and future directions of research are discussed. ► Inflicted injury leaving mark suggests physical abuse to child protection team (CPT). ► Injury severity perception indicates whether injury is classified as physical abuse. ► Case-specific factors do not appear to impact substantiation decisions. ► Some CPT professional characteristics impacted substantiation decisions

Multidisciplinary child protection decision making about physical abuse: Determining substantiation thresholds and biases

The current study examined the threshold at which multidisciplinary child protection team (CPT) professionals substantiate physical abuse allegations and the extent that they utilize potentially biased constructs in their decision making when presented with the same case evidence. State legal definitions of child maltreatment are broad. Therefore, the burden of interpretation is largely on CPT professionals who must determine at what threshold physical acts by parents surpass corporal discipline and constitute child physical abuse. Biased or subjective decisions may be made if certain case-specific characteristics or CPT professionals' personal characteristics are used in making physical abuse determinations. Case vignettes with visual depictions of inflicted injuries were sent to CPT professionals in Florida and their substantiation decisions, personal beliefs about corporal discipline, and coercive discipline were collected. Results of the study demonstrated relatively high agreement among professionals across vignettes about what constitutes physical abuse. Further, CPT professionals strongly considered their perceptions of the severity of inflicted injuries in substantiation decisions. Although case specific characteristics did not bias decisions in a systematic way, some CPT professional characteristics influenced the substantiation of physical abuse. Practice implications and future directions of research are discussed.Multidisciplinary child protection assessment Physical abuse Decision making Substantiation Bias

The Decision to Access Patient Information From a Social Media Site: What Would You Do?

PURPOSE: The current study examined the prevalence with which healthcare providers use a social media site account (e.g., Facebook), the extent to which they utilize social media sites in clinical practice, and their decision-making process after accessing patient information from a social media site. METHODS: Pediatric faculty and trainees from a medical school campus were provided a social media site history form and seven fictional social media site adolescent profile vignettes that depicted concerning information. Participants were instructed to rate their personal use and beliefs about social media sites and to report how they would respond if they obtained concerning information about an adolescent patient from their public social media site profile. RESULTS: Healthcare providers generally believed it not to be an invasion of privacy to conduct an Internet/social media site search of someone they know. A small percentage of trainees reported a personal history of conducting an Internet search (18%) or a social media site search (14%) for a patient. However, no faculty endorsed a history of conducting searches for patients. Faculty and trainees also differed in how they would respond to concerning social media site adolescent profile information. CONCLUSIONS: The findings that trainees are conducting Internet/social media site searches of patients and that faculty and trainees differ in how they would respond to concerning profile information suggest the need for specific guidelines regarding the role of social media sites in clinical practice. Practice, policy, and training implications are discussed

Multidisciplinary assessment of child maltreatment: A multi-site pilot descriptive analysis of the Florida Child Protection Team model

Child protection services Multidisciplinary assessment Child maltreatment Program evaluation

Multidisciplinary assessment of child maltreatment: A multi-site pilot descriptive analysis of the Florida Child Protection Team model

The Florida Child Protection Team (CPT) program is a statewide assessment model that was developed to provide objective multidisciplinary evaluations of complex cases of alleged child maltreatment. However, only limited research has examined the content and quality of CPT assessment practices. In fact, the limited research on the quality and content of child protection assessments in relation to child protection assessment “best practices” is a system wide problem. In the current study, we sought to systematically evaluate the assessment practices of a pilot sample of CPTs. Specifically, we were interested in gaining a better understanding of the population served by CPTs, the types of evaluations offered, the content of the assessments, clinical interpretations and findings, and recommendations. The results show areas in which CPT functions as an effective multidisciplinary assessment team and relative weaknesses in assessment practices that may require changes in CPT policy and/or additional training

No follow-up after positive newborn screening: medical neglect?

The current study examined medical professionals' behaviors related to reporting medical neglect when a family is noncompliant with follow-up services after a positive newborn screening result. Pediatric medical professionals within an urban medical campus were provided with five case vignettes in relation to different diseases. Medical professionals rated the severity of family noncompliance with follow-up services and indicated whether they would report suspected medical neglect to Child Protective Services (CPS). Physicians were more likely to report medical neglect than the other mandated reporters in the study. Logistic regression analyses found that medical professionals' perceptions of the severity of family noncompliance with services were significantly predictive of decisions to report medical neglect. Respondent gender and the method by which families were notified of screening results also significantly affected reporting behaviors in certain instances. Although all vignettes included information that met legal statutes for reporting neglect, medical professionals indicated that they would only report neglect 40-61% of the time across vignettes. Continued investigation of the rationale behind medical professionals' decision-making process and training protocols designed to improve mandated reporter knowledge and reporting behaviors are needed to further reduce bias and improve objectivity when considering ethical and professional obligations to report medical neglect

The Decision to Access Patient Information From a Social Media Site: What Would You Do?

PURPOSE: The current study examined the prevalence with which healthcare providers use a social media site account (e.g., Facebook), the extent to which they utilize social media sites in clinical practice, and their decision-making process after accessing patient information from a social media site. METHODS: Pediatric faculty and trainees from a medical school campus were provided a social media site history form and seven fictional social media site adolescent profile vignettes that depicted concerning information. Participants were instructed to rate their personal use and beliefs about social media sites and to report how they would respond if they obtained concerning information about an adolescent patient from their public social media site profile. RESULTS: Healthcare providers generally believed it not to be an invasion of privacy to conduct an Internet/social media site search of someone they know. A small percentage of trainees reported a personal history of conducting an Internet search (18%) or a social media site search (14%) for a patient. However, no faculty endorsed a history of conducting searches for patients. Faculty and trainees also differed in how they would respond to concerning social media site adolescent profile information. CONCLUSIONS: The findings that trainees are conducting Internet/social media site searches of patients and that faculty and trainees differ in how they would respond to concerning profile information suggest the need for specific guidelines regarding the role of social media sites in clinical practice. Practice, policy, and training implications are discussed

Multidisciplinary child protection decision making about physical abuse: Determining substantiation thresholds and biases

The current study examined the threshold at which multidisciplinary child protection team (CPT) professionals substantiate physical abuse allegations and the extent that they utilize potentially biased constructs in their decision making when presented with the same case evidence. State legal definitions of child maltreatment are broad. Therefore, the burden of interpretation is largely on CPT professionals who must determine at what threshold physical acts by parents surpass corporal discipline and constitute child physical abuse. Biased or subjective decisions may be made if certain case-specific characteristics or CPT professionals’ personal characteristics are used in making physical abuse determinations. Case vignettes with visual depictions of inflicted injuries were sent to CPT professionals in Florida and their substantiation decisions, personal beliefs about corporal discipline, and coercive discipline were collected. Results of the study demonstrated relatively high agreement among professionals across vignettes about what constitutes physical abuse. Further, CPT professionals strongly considered their perceptions of the severity of inflicted injuries in substantiation decisions. Although case specific characteristics did not bias decisions in a systematic way, some CPT professional characteristics influenced the substantiation of physical abuse. Practice implications and future directions of research are discussed