“Not in the Same Sandbox”: Cross-Systems Collaborations Between Early Intervention and Child Welfare Systems
- 688 Downloads
Maltreatment and disability often coexist in the lives of young children, as children who are maltreated are at a higher risk for developing a disability, and, conversely, children with a disability are at a higher risk of being maltreated. Despite being supported by multiple service systems, young children with disabilities who have experienced maltreatment are often not optimally supported by these service systems. We utilized a mixed methods design to explore how early intervention and child welfare collaborate to support young children with disabilities who have experienced maltreatment. Implications and future directions for research, policy and practice are discussed.
KeywordsEarly intervention Child welfare Maltreatment Disability System collaboration
This research was supported in part by funding from the Doris Duke Child Well-Being Fellowship from Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago and the Office of Special Education Programs, U.S. Department of Education: Project Blend (H325D110037). The authors thank Dr. Susan Fowler, Dr. Headda Meaddan, Dr. Jennifer Greene and the Doris Duke Child Well-Being Fellowship at Chapin Hall for their support and assistance with this project.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
Drs. Corr and Santos declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
Human and Animal Rights
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Azzi-Lessing, L. (2010). Growing together: Expanding roles for social work practice in early childhood settings. Social Work, 55, 255–263. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20632660.
- Barth, R. P., Scarborough, A., Lloyd, E. C., Losby, J., Casanueva, C., & Mann, T. (2007). Developmental status and early intervention service needs of maltreated children. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
- Corr, C., & Santos, R. M. (under review). Jocelin: A “best-case” scenario for young children with disabilities who have experienced abuse? Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
- Derrington, T., & Lippitt, J. (2008). From science to policy to practice: The evolving implementation of federally mandated referrals from child welfare to Part C early intervention. Zero to Three, 28, 18–24.Google Scholar
- Gateway, Child Welfare Information. (2011). Supporting brain development in traumatized children and youth. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Children’s Bureau.Google Scholar
- Greene, J. C. (2006). Toward a methodology of mixed methods social inquiry. Research in the Schools, 13, 93–99.Google Scholar
- Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed methods in social inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Howell, D. C. (2010). Statistical methods for psychology (7th ed.). London, UK: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
- Krathwol, D. (2009). Methods of educational and social science research: The logic of methods. Long Grove, IL: Waveland.Google Scholar
- Larson, S. A., & Anderson, L. (2006). Children with disabilities and the child welfare system: Prevalence data. Impact, 19, 6–7.Google Scholar
- Litzelfelner, P., & Petr, C. G. (1997). Case advocacy in child welfare. Social Work, 42, 392–402. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9228832
- Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Musheno, K. (2006). Children with disabilities and the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act. Impact, 19, 13.Google Scholar
- Orelove, F. P., Hollahan, D. J., & Myles, K. T. (2000). Maltreatment of children with disabilities: Training needs for a collaborative response. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24, 185–194. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10695514
- Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Sedlak, A. J., Mettenburg, J., Basena, M., Petta, I., McPherson, K., Greene, A., & Li, S. (2010). Fourth national incidence study of child abuse and neglect (NIS-4): Report to Congress, executive summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families.Google Scholar
- Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Suhr, D. (1999). Guidelines for reliability, confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis for the scale of athletic priorities. Greeley, CO: University of Northern Colorado.Google Scholar
- Taylor, O. A. (2009). Identification of maltreatment type in children with disabilities using the national child abuse and neglect data system (NCANDS). Houston, TX: The University of Texas School of Public Health.Google Scholar
- Tomison, A. M. (1996). Child maltreatment and disability. Issues in Child Abuse Prevention, 7, 1–11.Google Scholar