ARCHIVED - Canadian Incidence Study of Reported Child Abuse and Neglect 2008

Chapter 5 - Characteristics of Children and Families

Nico Trocmé, Barbara Fallon, Bruce MacLaurin, Vandna Sinha, Tara Black, Elizabeth Fast, Caroline Felstiner, Sonia Hélie, Daniel Turcotte, Pamela Weightman, Janet Douglas, and Jill Holroyd

This chapter provides a description of cases of substantiated maltreatment²⁷ in terms of the characteristics of the children, their caregivers and their homes. The estimates presented in this chapter are weighted Canadian estimates derived from child maltreatment investigations conducted in 2008 in a representative sample of Canadian child welfare sites. The sampling design and weighting procedures specific to the study should be considered before inferences are drawn from these estimates. The estimates do not include (1) incidents that were not reported to child welfare, (2) reported cases that were screened out by child welfare before being fully investigated, (3) new reports on cases already opened by the child welfare site, (4) cases that were investigated only by the police, and (5) cases that were investigated because of concerns about future risk of maltreatment (see Chapter 2 for a full description of the inclusion and exclusion criteria). Readers are cautioned that the findings presented in this chapter are not directly comparable to findings presented in the CIS-2003 and CIS-1998 reports (Chapter 1).

Age and Sex of Children in Maltreatment-Related Investigations and Substantiated Maltreatment

Table 5-1 presents the children’s age and sex in all maltreatment-related investigations as well as in substantiated child maltreatment investigations. The incidence of all maltreatment-related investigations was nearly identical for males (38.69 investigations per 1,000 children) and females (39.66 per 1,000 children). There was some variation by age and sex in the incidence of investigated maltreatment, with rates being highest for infants (52.00 investigations per 1,000 female infants and 51.63 per 1,000 male infants). Rates of maltreatment-related investigation were similar by sex for four to seven year olds (41.75 and 41.72 per 1,000 for females and males, respectively).

[Click to enlarge]

The incidence of substantiated maltreatment was nearly identical for males (13.89 per 1,000) and females (14.50 per 1,000). There was some variation by age and sex in the incidence of substantiated maltreatment, with rates being highest for infants (17.56 substantiated cases per 1,000 females and 16.64 per 1,000 males). Rates of substantiated maltreatment were similar by sex for four to seven year olds, while there were more males reported in the 8 to 11 year old group and more females reported in the adolescent group.

Documented Child Functioning

The child functioning checklist (Appendix F and definitions below) was developed in consultation with child welfare workers and researchers to reflect the types of concerns that may be identified during an investigation. The checklist is not a validated measurement instrument for which population norms have been established.²⁸ It documents only problems that are known to investigating child welfare workers and therefore may undercount the occurrence of some child functioning problems.²⁹

Workers were asked to indicate problems that had been confirmed by a diagnosis and/or directly observed by the investigating worker or another worker, or disclosed by the parent or child, as well as issues that they suspected were problems but could not fully verify at the time of the investigation. The six-month period before the investigation was used as a reference point where applicable. It is important to note that these ratings are based on the initial intake investigation and do not capture child functioning concerns that may have become evident after that time. Items were rated on a 4-point scale: "confirmed," "suspected," "no" and "unknown" child functioning concern. A child functioning concern was classified as confirmed if a problem had been diagnosed, observed by the worker or another worker, or disclosed by the caregiver or child. An issue was classified as suspected if worker's suspicions were sufficient to include the concern in their written assessment of the family or in a transfer summary to a colleague. For the purposes of the present report, the categories of confirmed and suspected have been collapsed. A comparison of the ratings will be made in subsequent analyses.

Child functioning in physical, emotional, cognitive, and behavioural domains was documented with a checklist that included the following:

Depression/Anxiety/Withdrawal: Feelings of depression or anxiety that persist for most of every day for two weeks or longer, and interfere with the child's ability to manage at home and at school.

Suicidal Thoughts: The child has expressed thoughts of suicide, ranging from fleeting thoughts to a detailed plan.

Self-Harming Behaviour: Includes highrisk or life-threatening behaviour, suicide attempts or physical mutilation or cutting.

ADD/ADHD: Attention Deficit Disorder/Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder is a persistent pattern of inattention and/or hyperactivity/ impulsivity that occurs more frequently and more severely than is typically seen in children at comparable levels of development. Symptoms are frequent and severe enough to have a negative impact on children's lives at home, at school, or in the community.

Attachment Issues: The child does not have a physical and emotional closeness to a mother or preferred caregiver. The child finds it difficult to seek comfort, support, nurturance or protection from the caregiver; the child's distress is not ameliorated or is made worse by the caregiver's presence.

Aggression: Behaviour directed at other children or adults that includes hitting, kicking, biting, fighting, bullying others or violence to property, at home, at school or in the community.

Running (multiple incidents): Has run away from home (or other residence) on multiple occasions for at least one overnight period.

Inappropriate Sexual Behaviour: Child displays inappropriate sexual behaviour, including age-inappropriate play with toys, self or others; displaying explicit sexual acts; age-inappropriate sexually explicit drawing and/or descriptions; sophisticated or unusual sexual knowledge; prostitution or seductive behaviour.

Youth Criminal Justice Act Involvement: Charges, incarceration, or alternative measures with the Youth Justice system.

Intellectual/Developmental Disability: Characterized by delayed intellectual development, it is typically diagnosed when a child does not reach his or her developmental milestones at expected times. It includes speech and language, fine/gross motor skills, and/or personal and social skills, e.g., Down's syndrome, autism and Asperger's syndrome.

Failure to Meet Developmental Milestones: Children who are not meeting their development milestones for a non-organic reason.

Academic Difficulties: Include learning disabilities that are usually identified in schools, as well as any special education program for learning difficulties, special needs, or behaviour problems. Children with learning disabilities have normal or above-normal intelligence, but deficits in one or more areas of mental functioning (e.g., language use, numbers, reading, work comprehension).

Fetal Alcohol Syndrome/Fetal Alcohol Effects (FAS/FAE): Birth defects, ranging from mild intellectual and behavioural difficulties to more profound problems in these areas related to in utero exposure to alcohol abuse by the biological mother.

Positive Toxicology at Birth: When a toxicology screen for a newborn is positive for the presence of drugs or alcohol.

Physical Disability: Physical disability is the existence of a long-lasting condition that substantially limits one or more basic physical activities such as walking, climbing stairs, reaching, lifting or carrying. This includes sensory disability conditions such as blindness, deafness or a severe vision or hearing impairment that noticeably affects activities of daily living.

Alcohol Abuse: Problematic consumption of alcohol (consider age, frequency and severity).

Drug/Solvent Abuse: Include prescription drugs, illegal drugs, and solvents.

Other: Any other conditions related to child functioning.

Table 5-2 presents the distribution of functioning issues in substantiated maltreatment investigations. In 46% of investigations (an estimated 39,460 investigations or 6.55 investigations per 1,000 children), at least one issue was indicated by the worker. Academic difficulties were the most frequently reported functioning concern (23%) and the second most common was depression/anxiety/withdrawal (19%). Fifteen percent involved aggression, while 14% indicated attachment issues. Eleven percent of investigations involved children experiencing ADD/ ADHD and 11% intellectual/ developmental disabilities.

[Click to enlarge]

Aboriginal Heritage of Investigated Children

Aboriginal heritage was documented by the CIS-2008 in an effort to better understand some of the factors that bring Aboriginal children into contact with the child welfare system. Aboriginal children were identified as a key group to examine because of concerns about their over-representation in the foster care system (Trocmé et al., 2006). Table 5-3 shows that the rate of substantiated child maltreatment investigations was four times higher in Aboriginal child investigations than non-Aboriginal child investigations (49.69 per 1,000 Aboriginal children versus 11.85 per 1,000 non- Aboriginal children).

[Click to enlarge]

Twenty-two percent of substantiated investigations involved children of Aboriginal heritage, with the following distribution among Aboriginal groups: 15% First Nations status, 3% First Nations Non-Status, 2% Métis, 1% Inuit, and 1% with other Aboriginal heritage.

Primary Caregiver Age and Sex

For each investigated child, the worker was asked to indicate the primary caregiver, and to specify her/his age and sex. Eight age groups were captured on the Intake Face Sheet, enabling the workers to estimate the caregiver’s age (Appendix F). Table 5-4 shows the age and sex distribution of primary caregivers. In 91% of substantiated investigations the primary caregiver was female. Nearly half (45%) of substantiated investigations involved caregivers between the ages of 31 and 40. Caregivers who were under 22 were relatively rare (5%), as were caregivers over 50 (4%).

[Click to enlarge]

Primary Caregiver’s Relationship to the Child

The CIS-2008 gathered information on up to two of the child’s parents or caregivers living in the home.³⁰ For each listed caregiver, workers were asked to choose a primary caregiver and the category that described the relationship between the caregiver and each child in the home. If recent household changes had occurred, workers were asked to describe the situation at the time the referral was made. The caregiver’s relationship to the child was classified as one of the following: biological parent, parent’s partner, foster parent, adoptive parent, grandparent, and other.

Table 5-5 describes the primary caregiver’s relationship to the child in substantiated maltreatment investigations in Canada in 2008. Ninety-four percent of substantiated investigations involved children whose primary caregiver was a biological parent, and 2% lived with a primary caregiver who was a parent’s partner or an adoptive parent. Two percent of substantiated child investigations involved a grandparent as primary caregiver and 1% involved children living with a primary caregiver who had an alternate relationship to the child.

[Click to enlarge]

Primary Caregiver Risk Factors

A checklist of caregiver risk factors (Appendix F and definitions below) was developed in consultation with child welfare workers and researchers to reflect the types of concerns that may be identified during an investigation. Concerns related to caregiver risk factors were reported by workers using a checklist of nine items that were asked about each caregiver. Where applicable, the reference point for identifying concerns about caregiver risk factors was the previous six months. Items were rated into four categories: “confirmed,” “suspected,” “no” and “unknown” caregiver risk factor. A caregiver risk factor or family stressor was classified as confirmed if a problem had been diagnosed, observed by the worker or another worker, or disclosed by the caregiver. An issue was classified as suspected if workers’ suspicions were sufficient to include the concern in their written assessment of the family or in a transfer summary to a colleague. For the purposes of the present report, the categories of confirmed and suspected have been collapsed. A comparison of the ratings will be made in subsequent analyses. The checklist is not a validated instrument. The checklist documents only problems that are known to investigating child welfare workers (workers were asked to check all that apply).

The checklist included:

Alcohol Abuse: Caregiver abuses alcohol.

Drug/Solvent Abuse: Abuse of prescription drugs, illegal drugs or solvents.

Cognitive Impairment: Caregiver has a cognitive impairment.

Mental Health Issues: Any mental health diagnosis or problem.

Physical Health Issues: Chronic illness, frequent hospitalizations or physical disability.

Few Social Supports: Social isolation or lack of social supports.

Victim of Domestic Violence: During the past six months the caregiver was a victim of domestic violence including physical, sexual or verbal assault.

Perpetrator of Domestic Violence: During the past six months the caregiver was a perpetrator of domestic violence including physical, sexual or verbal assault.

History of Foster Care or Group Home: Caregiver was in foster care and or group home care during his or her childhood.

Table 5-6 shows that in 78% of substantiated maltreatment investigations (an estimated 66,282 child investigations), at least one primary caregiver risk factor was identified. The most frequently noted concerns were victim of domestic violence (46%), few social supports (39%), mental health issues (27%), alcohol abuse (21%), and drug or solvent abuse (17%).

[Click to enlarge]

Household Source of Income

Workers were asked to choose the income source that best described the primary source of the caregivers’ income, using nine classifications:

Full Time Employment: A caregiver is employed in a permanent, full-time position.

Part Time (fewer than 30 hours/week): Family income is derived primarily from a single part-time position.

Multiple Jobs: Caregiver has more than one part-time or temporary position.

Seasonal: Caregiver works either fullor part-time positions for temporary periods of the year.

Employment Insurance (EI): Caregiver is temporarily unemployed and is receiving employment insurance benefits.

Social Assistance: Caregiver is currently receiving social assistance benefits.

Other Benefit: Refers to other forms of benefits or pensions (e.g., family benefits, long-term disability insurance or child support payments).

None: Caregiver has no source of legal income.

Unknown: Source of income was not known.

Table 5-7 collapses income sources into full time employment, part time employment (which include seasonal and multiple jobs), benefits/EI/social assistance, unknown and none. Fifty-one percent (43,355) of substantiated investigations involved children in families whose primary source of income came from full-time employment. Thirty-three percent (28,159) involved children whose families received other benefits/EI/social assistance as their primary source of income. Ten percent relied on part-time work, multiple jobs or seasonal employment. In 5% of substantiated investigations, the source of income was unknown by the workers, and in 2% no reliable source of income was reported.

[Click to enlarge]

Housing Type

Workers were asked to select the housing accommodation category that best described the child’s household living situation at the time of referral.

Types of housing included:

Own Home: A purchased house, condominium, or townhouse.

Rental: A private rental house, townhouse or apartment.

Band Housing: Aboriginal housing built, managed, and owned by the band.

Public Housing: A unit in a public rental housing complex (i.e., rent-subsidized, government-owned housing), or a house, townhouse or apartment on a military base.

Shelter/Hotel: An SRO hotel (single room occupancy), homeless or family shelter, or motel accommodation.

Unknown: Housing accommodation was unknown.

Other: Any other form of shelter.

Table 5-8 shows that 55% of all substantiated investigations involved children living in rental accommodations (44% private rentals and 11% public housing), and 31% involved children living in purchased homes. This contrasts with 2006 Census data, where 68% of households lived in a purchased home, and 31% rented their home (Statistics Canada, 2008). Five percent lived in band housing, 3% in other accommodations, and 2% in shelters or hotels. In 5% of substantiated investigations, workers did not have enough information to describe the housing type.

[Click to enlarge]

Family Moves

In addition to housing type, workers were asked to indicate the number of household moves within the past twelve months. Table 5-9 shows that nearly half of substantiated investigations involved families who had not moved in the previous 12 months (48% or 6.87 investigations per 1,000 children), whereas 20% had moved once (2.84 investigations per 1,000 children) and 10% had moved two or more times (1.47 investigations per 1,000 children). In 21% of substantiated investigations, this information was unknown to the worker.

[Click to enlarge]

[Click to enlarge]

Exposure to Hazards in the Home

Workers were asked to identify the presence of hazards in the home. Hazards included: the presence of accessible weapons, the presence of accessible drugs or drug paraphernalia, evidence of drug production or drug trafficking in the home, chemicals or solvents used in drug production, home injury hazards (poisons, fire implements, or electrical hazards), and other home health hazards (insufficient heat, unhygienic conditions).

At least one household hazard was noted in 12% of substantiated investigations. Other home health hazards were noted in 6% of substantiated investigations (an estimated 5,538 substantiated investigations); home injury hazards were noted in 4%, and accessible weapons in 2%. Accessible drugs or drug paraphernalia were noted in 5%, drug production/trafficking in the home in 1%, and chemicals used in drug production in 1% of substantiated investigations.

Future Directions

The CIS-1998, 2003, and 2008 datasets provide a unique opportunity to describe changes in child maltreatment investigations across Canada over the last decade. The expanded 2008 sample documents rates of investigation in five provinces as well as investigations and services provided in Aboriginal-run organizations. Furthermore, changes to the procedure for classifying investigations in 2008 will allow analysts to begin to track differences between investigations of maltreatment incidents and investigations of situations reported because of risk of future maltreatment. The CIS-2008 dataset will be made available by the Injury and Child Maltreatment Section of PHAC for secondary analyses (e-mail address: child.maltreatment@phac-aspc.gc.ca). For updates and more information on the CIS -2008, visit the Child Welfare Research Portal at http://www.cwrp.ca and PHAC’s Injury and Child Maltreatment Section.