Australian Centre for Child Protection, University of South Australia, Australia.
Crimes Against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire, United States.
Child Abuse Negl. 2018 Feb;76:583-595. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2017.09.030. Epub 2017 Oct 6.
Child Advocacy Centers (CAC) emphasize developing effective cross-agency collaborations between workers involved in serious abuse investigations to foster improvements in agency outcomes, and to minimize distress, confusion and uncertainty for children and families. This study examined the characteristics of CACs, whether models in practice match the predominant model presented in the research literature. Directors of CACs in the United States that were members of the National Children's Alliance (NCA) mailing list (n=361) completed an online survey in 2016. While some core characteristics were ubiquitous across CACs, the data suggests that different types of CACs exist defined by characteristics that are not prescribed under NCA principles, but which are arguably relevant to the quality of the response. From the results of a cluster analysis, the researchers propose a typology of CACs that reflects the development and integration of centers: (a) core CAC services (i.e. interviewing & cross-agency case review); (b) an aggregator of external services, and (c) a more centralized full-service CAC. Further research is needed to understand how these variations may impact practice and outcomes; this is particularly important considering many CACs do not match the full-service models most commonly examined in the research literature, which limits the degree to which these findings apply to CACs generally. This article proposes further research framed by the need to better understand how different parts of the response impact on outcomes for children and families affected by abuse.
儿童倡导中心 (CAC) 强调在参与严重虐待调查的工作人员之间发展有效的跨机构合作,以促进机构成果的改善,并最大限度地减少儿童和家庭的痛苦、困惑和不确定性。本研究考察了 CAC 的特征,即实践中的模式是否与研究文献中呈现的主要模式相匹配。美国国家儿童联盟 (NCA) 邮件列表中的 CAC 主任 (n=361) 于 2016 年完成了一项在线调查。虽然 CAC 具有一些普遍存在的核心特征,但数据表明,不同类型的 CAC 存在,其特征不受 NCA 原则规定,但可以说与反应质量有关。研究人员通过聚类分析提出了一种 CAC 分类法,反映了中心的发展和整合:(a) 核心 CAC 服务 (即访谈和跨机构案例审查);(b) 外部服务的聚合器;以及 (c) 更集中的全方位服务 CAC。需要进一步研究以了解这些变化如何影响实践和结果;这一点尤为重要,因为许多 CAC 不符合研究文献中最常检查的全方位服务模式,这限制了这些发现对一般 CAC 的适用程度。本文提出了进一步的研究,其框架是需要更好地了解反应的不同部分如何影响受虐待影响的儿童和家庭的结果。