Cargando…

Child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations

OBJECTIVE: To determine difference in frequency of referral for child protection medical examination (CPME) in children subject to special guardianship order (SGO), subject to child protection plan (CPP) or neither. DESIGN: Service evaluation analysing data from CPME reports. SETTING: Acute and comm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Garstang, Joanna, Hallett, Nutmeg, Cropp, Gabrielle, Kenyon-Blair, Davina, Morgans, Clare, Taylor, Julie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8256753/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34307901
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001103
_version_ 1783718161259954176
author Garstang, Joanna
Hallett, Nutmeg
Cropp, Gabrielle
Kenyon-Blair, Davina
Morgans, Clare
Taylor, Julie
author_facet Garstang, Joanna
Hallett, Nutmeg
Cropp, Gabrielle
Kenyon-Blair, Davina
Morgans, Clare
Taylor, Julie
author_sort Garstang, Joanna
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To determine difference in frequency of referral for child protection medical examination (CPME) in children subject to special guardianship order (SGO), subject to child protection plan (CPP) or neither. DESIGN: Service evaluation analysing data from CPME reports. SETTING: Acute and community healthcare providers in Birmingham UK, during 2018. PATIENTS: All children aged 0–18 years requiring CPME. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Details were obtained from CPME reports on: age, SGO status, CPP status, reason for CPME, injuries sustained, presence of non-accidental injury. Population data were obtained from the local children’s safeguarding board and national statistics. RESULTS: Reports were available for 292/298 (98%) CPME, relating to 288 children. 5 children were subject to SGO, 39 were subject to CPP, none subject to both. Non-accidental injury was substantiated in 189/288 (66%). The child population was 288 000. 1665 children were subject to CPP and approximately 750 subject to SGO. The relative risk (RR) for children subject to SGO requiring a CPME compared with children not subject to SGO or CPP is 7.86, p<0.0001 with 95% CI (3.26 to 19.02). The RR for children subject to a CPP requiring CPME compared with children not subject to SGO or CPP is 27.65, p<0.0001 with 95% CI (19.78 to 38.63). CONCLUSIONS: This is a small study and findings need interpreting cautiously. Children subject to SGO may potentially be at higher risk of abuse than the general population despite living with carers who have passed social care parenting assessments. There is no register of children subject to SGO so professionals may be unable to offer families additional support. SGO families should be offered enhanced support and monitoring routinely. Children subject to CPP are not being adequately protected from further abuse.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8256753
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82567532021-07-23 Child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations Garstang, Joanna Hallett, Nutmeg Cropp, Gabrielle Kenyon-Blair, Davina Morgans, Clare Taylor, Julie BMJ Paediatr Open Child Abuse OBJECTIVE: To determine difference in frequency of referral for child protection medical examination (CPME) in children subject to special guardianship order (SGO), subject to child protection plan (CPP) or neither. DESIGN: Service evaluation analysing data from CPME reports. SETTING: Acute and community healthcare providers in Birmingham UK, during 2018. PATIENTS: All children aged 0–18 years requiring CPME. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Details were obtained from CPME reports on: age, SGO status, CPP status, reason for CPME, injuries sustained, presence of non-accidental injury. Population data were obtained from the local children’s safeguarding board and national statistics. RESULTS: Reports were available for 292/298 (98%) CPME, relating to 288 children. 5 children were subject to SGO, 39 were subject to CPP, none subject to both. Non-accidental injury was substantiated in 189/288 (66%). The child population was 288 000. 1665 children were subject to CPP and approximately 750 subject to SGO. The relative risk (RR) for children subject to SGO requiring a CPME compared with children not subject to SGO or CPP is 7.86, p<0.0001 with 95% CI (3.26 to 19.02). The RR for children subject to a CPP requiring CPME compared with children not subject to SGO or CPP is 27.65, p<0.0001 with 95% CI (19.78 to 38.63). CONCLUSIONS: This is a small study and findings need interpreting cautiously. Children subject to SGO may potentially be at higher risk of abuse than the general population despite living with carers who have passed social care parenting assessments. There is no register of children subject to SGO so professionals may be unable to offer families additional support. SGO families should be offered enhanced support and monitoring routinely. Children subject to CPP are not being adequately protected from further abuse. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-07-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8256753/ /pubmed/34307901 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001103 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Child Abuse
Garstang, Joanna
Hallett, Nutmeg
Cropp, Gabrielle
Kenyon-Blair, Davina
Morgans, Clare
Taylor, Julie
Child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations
title Child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations
title_full Child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations
title_fullStr Child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations
title_full_unstemmed Child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations
title_short Child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations
title_sort child abuse in children living with special guardians, a service evaluation of child protection medical examinations
topic Child Abuse
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8256753/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34307901
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjpo-2021-001103
work_keys_str_mv AT garstangjoanna childabuseinchildrenlivingwithspecialguardiansaserviceevaluationofchildprotectionmedicalexaminations
AT hallettnutmeg childabuseinchildrenlivingwithspecialguardiansaserviceevaluationofchildprotectionmedicalexaminations
AT croppgabrielle childabuseinchildrenlivingwithspecialguardiansaserviceevaluationofchildprotectionmedicalexaminations
AT kenyonblairdavina childabuseinchildrenlivingwithspecialguardiansaserviceevaluationofchildprotectionmedicalexaminations
AT morgansclare childabuseinchildrenlivingwithspecialguardiansaserviceevaluationofchildprotectionmedicalexaminations
AT taylorjulie childabuseinchildrenlivingwithspecialguardiansaserviceevaluationofchildprotectionmedicalexaminations