Research That Matters (January 17 - 20, 2008)


Diplomat Ballroom (Omni Shoreham)

Impact of Childhood Disability on Risk of Maltreatment Recurrence

Christina M. Bruhn, PhD, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Jesse J. Helton, MA, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Background and Purpose: The study of child disability as a risk factor for maltreatment has suggested that relationships between disability and maltreatment exist; however, whether or not those relationships vary by type of disability and whether they persist when other relevant risk factors are controlled for have not been conclusively determined. Given the potential bi-directionality of the relationship between disability and abuse or neglect, the study of associations between these constructs requires a prospective analysis. Methods: Sample: The National Survey of Child Abuse and Neglect provided a unique opportunity to study these relationships. Not only does the study offer a robust, longitudinal data set containing measures of maltreatment recurrence, it also offers standardized measures of child intellectual and behavioral functioning. The entire Child Protective Services sample was used. Measures: Independent variables included child intellectual disability (defined as a score more than two standard deviations below the mean for the Battelle Developmental Inventory or the Kaufmann Brief Intelligence Test) and impaired behavioral functioning (defined as a borderline or clinical score on the Child Behavior Checklist) as well as covariates including child age and race and caregiver age, income, and number of household dependents upon income. Additional covariates included urban location and out-of-home placement. The dependent variable was time to re-report (and, in a subsequent model, substantiated re-report) as identified by caseworkers. Analysis: Survival analyses were conducted using SUDAAN to estimate time to re-report. The analyses reported here were limited to only those reports that took place while the child was living with the caregivers identified at waves 1 and 3 of the study, as those were the only times for which both caregiver characteristics and placement starting and ending times were available. The data set was further subpopulated in subsequent analyses to cases for which the perpetrator of the alleged maltreatment had the same relationship to the child as the identified caregiver (e.g. mother, grandmother, etc.). Results: The hazard for each significant predictor is reported in parentheses. Predictors of reporting included borderline/clinical score on the CBCL (1.81), in-home placement (2.27), and number of dependents (continuous variable) (1.17). Predictors of substantiated reports were CBCL (4.00), child's age (continuous, years) (.92), in-home placement (7.49), and number of dependents (1.38). In no case was intellectual disability found to be a significant predictor of safety. Conclusions and Implications: While childhood disability is commonly thought to be a risk factor for maltreatment, this study suggests that the dimensions of disability are a critical consideration. These findings suggest that intellectual functioning, as independently assessed using a standardized instrument, does not impact risk while caregiver report of child behavior plays a substantial role in risk determination. While these findings do not discount the fact that other dimensions of child functioning may interact with family and contextual factors to create risk in some circumstances, they suggest that investigators wishing to take child functional factors into account in assessing risk may wish to consider particularly the parent's perception of the child's behavior.