Contact with Child Protective Services is pervasive but unequally distributed by race and ethnicity in large US counties

被引:68
作者
Edwards, Frank [1 ]
Wakefield, Sara [1 ]
Healy, Kieran [2 ]
Wildeman, Christopher [2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Rutgers State Univ, Sch Criminal Justice, Newark, NJ 07102 USA
[2] Duke Univ, Dept Sociol, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[3] ROCKWOOL Fdn, Res Unit, DK-1472 Copenhagen, Denmark
关键词
child maltreatment; foster care; termination of parental rights; racial/ethnic inequality; MALTREATMENT; PREVALENCE;
D O I
10.1073/pnas.2106272118
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
This article provides county-level estimates of the cumulative prevalence of four levels of Child Protective Services (CPS) contact using administrative data from the 20 most populous counties in the United States. Rates of CPS investigation are extremely high in almost every county. Racial and ethnic inequality in case outcomes is large in some counties. The total median investigation rate was 41.3%; the risk for Black, Hispanic, and White children exceeded 20% in all counties. Risks of having a CPS investigation were highest for Black children (43.2 to 72.0%). Black children also experienced high rates of later-sta ge CPS contact, with rates often above 20% for confirmed maltreatment, 10% for foster care placement, and 2% for termination of parental rights (TPR). The only other children who experienced such extreme rates of later-stage CPS interventions were American Indian/Alaska Native children in Middlesex, MA; Hispanic children in Bexar, TX; and all children except Asian/Pacific Islander children in Maricopa, AZ. The latter has uniquely high rates of late-stage CPS interventions. In some jurisdictions, such as New York, NY, (0.2%) and Cook, IL (0.2%), very few children experienced TPR. These results show that early CPS interventions are ubiquitous in large counties but with marked variation in how CPS systems respond to these investigations.
引用
收藏
页数:3
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]  
Edwards, CPS LIFETABLES COUNT
[2]   Neighborhood inequality in the prevalence of reported and substantiated child maltreatment [J].
Fong, Kelley .
CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT, 2019, 90 :13-21
[3]   Child Maltreatment 1 Burden and consequences of child maltreatment in high-income countries [J].
Gilbert, Ruth ;
Widom, Cathy Spatz ;
Browne, Kevin ;
Fergusson, David ;
Webb, Elspeth ;
Janson, Staffan .
LANCET, 2009, 373 (9657) :68-81
[4]  
Kim H, 2017, AM J PUBLIC HEALTH, V107, P274, DOI [10.2105/AJPH.2016.303545, 10.2105/ajph.2016.303545]
[5]   Predictors of child protective service contact between birth and age five: An examination of California's 2002 birth cohort [J].
Putnam-Hornstein, Emily ;
Needell, Barbara .
CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW, 2011, 33 (08) :1337-1344
[6]   Measuring child maltreatment risk in communities: a life table approach [J].
Sabol, W ;
Coulton, C ;
Polousky, E .
CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT, 2004, 28 (09) :967-983
[7]   Entryway into the child protection system: The impacts of child maltreatment reporting policies and reporting system structures [J].
Steen, Julie A. ;
Duran, Lloyd .
CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT, 2014, 38 (05) :868-874
[8]   Rethinking the paradigm for child protection [J].
Waldfogel, J .
FUTURE OF CHILDREN, 1998, 8 (01) :104-119
[9]   The Cumulative Prevalence of Termination of Parental Rights for US Children, 2000-2016 [J].
Wildeman, Christopher ;
Edwards, Frank R. ;
Wakefield, Sara .
CHILD MALTREATMENT, 2020, 25 (01) :32-42
[10]   Somebody's Children or Nobody's Children? How the Sociological Perspective Could Enliven Research on Foster Care [J].
Wildeman, Christopher ;
Waldfogel, Jane .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF SOCIOLOGY, VOL 40, 2014, 40 :599-618