TO: Students in CJ 141 (Victims in Society)
FROM: R. B. Taylor
RE: Child Abuse and Neglect
DATE: 10/3/00 

The Issue
     As we discussed in class on Monday, the methodology of the NCVS was not adapted to revealing crimes perpetrated on young children, which would include child abuse and neglect. As I see it, the issue is not only one of values -- it is not just that no one cares about children -- but the issue is also one of methodology. Of course the Uniform Crime Reports does contain information on "offenses against family and children." This is a Part II crime. For more information consult the SOURCEBOOK OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE STATISTICS, available on-line. (Go to criminal justice links on my home page.) Of course this is just for crimes reported to the police. How do we get at the "hidden" figures?
National Estimates of Child Abuse and Neglect: Political Angles
     Last year when students in FA 99 Victimis and Society expressed an interest in this area, I followed up on concerns about information on child abuse and neglect and did some research.  Andrea Sedlak is a researcher at Westat. Westat is a national survey research firm with an excellent reputation. Dr. Sedlak has been the principal investigator on all three National Incidence and Prevalence Surveys of Child Abuse and Neglect. These studies are referred to as NIS-1 (1979-1980), NIS-2 (1986), and NIS-3 (1993). Their purpose is to generate national-level estimates of the prevalence and incidence of child abuse and neglect. They have been funded by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) and are Congressionally mandated, usually as part of the re-authorization of various parts of legislation such as the Child Protection Act.
     The funding of NIS on a regular basis is by no means assured, Dr. Sedlak reported in our phone conversation of 9/14/99. The funding for these studies is meagre in comparison to other studies on children's issues such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Due to internal changes within DHHS the political stature of the NIS studies has been reduced, and is "hanging on by the fingernails." I asked her if she thought the NIS was more politically vulnerable than the annual funding for the NCVS and she agreed it was. In short, Dr. Sedlak seems to agree that child victims have lower priority than adult victims.
     A particular interesting question is why would this be the case. I'm sure you have your own thoughts on this. I would like to hear them (send me a card in class, or send me e-mail.) One thought suggested to me was that the religious right's views may play a role. To the extent that child abuse and neglect are documented as significant issues, that may suggest government intervention. According to the religious right, family matters are family matters, the family unit is generally unviolable, and government intervention is to be avoided. Victimization of children within a family cannot be prevented by the victims themselves, but would rather seem to call for intervention.
National Estimates of Child Abuse and Neglect: The Research Methods
    To read the latest summary report on NIS-3 click here. (http://www.calib.com/nccanch/pubs/statinfo/nis3.htm) It makes for some darn interesting reading, especially on how the rate has changed in just the last few years. As I mentioned in class yesterday, validating claims of child abuse or neglect is problematic, and probably not something achieved within the format of the NCVS.      Indeed, it turns out that the NIS has an extremely different methodology. In addition to getting data from CPSs, information from "sentinels" are also gathered over a period of time. It uses a representative sample of 42 counties nationwide (out of 3,000 plus counties).

The NIS-3 offers an important perspective on the scope of child abuse and neglect. The NIS includes children who were investigated by child protective service (CPS) agencies, but it also obtains data on children seen by community professionals who were not reported to CPS or who were screened out by CPS without investigation. This means that the NIS estimates provide a more comprehensive measure of the scope of child abuse and neglect known to community professionals, including both abused and neglected children who are in the official statistics and those who are not. The NIS follows a nationally representative design, which means that the estimates represent the numbers of abused and neglected children in the United States who come to the attention of community professionals. (http://www.calib.com/nccanch/pubs/statinfo/nis3.htm#background)

     The study uses a "harm standard" and an "endangerment standard" (see the report on the web for details) to define child abuse and/or neglect. The study finds interesting gender differences, changes in the age distribution since the earlier studies, but a persistent lack of race differences over time. I recommend you take a look at the report for more details.
     You will note in last week's reading on economic consequences of victimization that the authors made efforts to get child abuse and neglect into their national victimization cost estimates.
     If you are interested in actually learning what research is out there, take a look at the National Data Archive on Child Abuse and Neglect (http://www.ndacan.cornell.edu) You can learn about what particular studies are available and even browse frequency distibutions at their current holdings (WARNING: browsing frequency distributions is extremely hazardous and may cause severe but temporary blindness unless you already have had CJ 160 or CJ 161 or its equivalent.)