Implications for Child Abuse and Neglect Interventions from Early Educational Interventions

  • Barbara Hanna Wasik
Chapter
Part of the Issues in Clinical Child Psychology book series (ICCP)

Abstract

Family impoverishment as evidenced by low income, low educational levels, and unemployment is the strongest predictor of poor developmental outcomes for children. Two domains in particular, school failure and abuse and neglect, are highly associated with poverty and have been at the center of many prevention and intervention efforts during the past three decades. Separate groups and organizations, however, have worked independently to address these two concerns about children. Predictably, most of the attention to reducing school failure originated in the fields of education and child development, where the goals are to enhance children’s cognitive development and school performance. By contrast, the attention to reducing abuse and neglect derived from social services and health organizations, and aims to protect the child from further abuse and neglect, provide treatment and, more recently, develop prevention strategies. In addition to being influenced by different professions and different objectives for the child, these two areas of concern have also been characterized by different intervention procedures.

Keywords

Child Development Child Outcome Early Intervention Program Disadvantaged Child Early Childhood Program 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexander, K. L., & Entwisle, D. R. (1996). Schools and children at risk. In A. Booth & J. F. Dunn (Eds.), Family school links: How do they affect educational outcomes? (pp. 67–88). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Barnett, W. S. (1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on cognitive and school outcomes. Future of Children 5(3), 25–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Behrman, R. E. 1992. (Ed.). (1992). U.S. health care for children. Future of Children, 3(2).Google Scholar
  4. Bell, R. Q. (1974). Contributions of human infants to caregiving and social interaction. In M. Lewis & R. A. Rosenblum (Eds.), The effect of the infant on its caregiver. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  5. Benasich, A. A., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Clewell, B. C. (1992). How do mothers benefit from early intervention programs? Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 13, 311–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bloom, B. S., Davis A., & Hess R. (1965). Compensatory education for cultural deprivation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  7. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1974). Is early intervention effective? Teacher’s College Record, 76, 279–303.Google Scholar
  8. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22, 723–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bronfenbrenner, U., & Crouter, A. C. (1983). The evolution of environmental models in developmental research. In P. H. Müssen (Series Ed.) & W. Kessen (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. I. History, theory, and methods (4th ed., pp. 357–414). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Brooks-Gunn, J., McCarton, C. M, Casey, P. H., McCormick, M. C, Bauer, C. R, Bernbaum, J. C, Tyson, J., Swanson, M., Bennett, F. C, Scott, D. T., Tonascia, J., & Meinert, C. L. (1994). Early intervention in low-birth-weight premature infants: Results through age 5 years from the Infant Health and Development Program. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272(16), 1257–1262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bryant, D. M., & Maxwell, K. (1997). The effectiveness of early intervention for disadvantaged children. In M. Guralnick (Ed.), The effectiveness of early intervention (pp. 23–46). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
  13. Campbell, E A., & Ramey, C. T. (1994). Effects of early intervention on intellectual and academic achievement: A follow-up study of children from low-income families. Child Development, 65, 684–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duncan, G. J. (1991). The economic environment of childhood. In A. C. Houston (Ed.), Children in poverty: Child development and public policy (pp. 23–50). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Duncan, G. J., Brooks-Gunn, J., & Klebanov, P. K. (1994). Economic deprivation and early-childhood development. Child Development, 65, 296–318.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Farran, D. C. (1990). Effects of intervention with disadvantaged and disabled children: A decade of review. In S. J. Meisels & J. P. Shonkoff (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (pp. 501–539). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Feiner, R. D., Brand, S., DuBois, D. L., Adan, A. M., Mulhall, P. F., & Evans, E. G. (1995). Socioeconomic disadvantage, proximal environmental experiences, and socioemotional and academic adjustment in early adolescence: Investigation of a mediated effects model. Child Development, 66, 774–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fuerst, J. S., & Fuerst, D. (1993). Chicago experience with an early childhood program: The special case of the child parent center program. Urban Education, 28(1), 69–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Garbarino, J. (1990). The human ecology of early risk: In S. J. Meisels & J. P. Shonkoff (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (pp. 78–96). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Garbarino, J., & Crouter, A. (1978). Defining the community context of parent-child relations. Child Development, 49, 604–616.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Garbarino, J., & Sherman, D. (1980). High-risk neighborhoods and high-risk families: The human ecology of child maltreatment. Child Development, 51, 188–198.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Garber, H. L., & Heber, R. (1981). The efficacy of early intervention with family rehabilitation. In M. Begab, H. C. Haywood, & H. L. Garber (Eds.), Psychosocial influences in retarded performance (pp. 71–82). Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
  23. Gomby, D. S., Larner, M. B., Stevenson, C. S., Lewit, E. M., & Behrman, R. E. (1995). Long-term outcomes of early childhood programs: Analysis and recommendations. Future of Children, 5(3), 6–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gordon, I. J., & Guinagh, B. J., (1978). A home learning center approach to early stimulation. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology, 8 (6), Ms. No. 1634.Google Scholar
  25. Gray, S. W., & Klaus, R. A. (1970). The early training project: A seventh-year report. Child Development, 41, 909–924.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Guralnick M. J. (1989). Recent developments in early intervention efficacy research: Implications for family involvement in P. L. 99–457. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 9(3), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gutelius, M. F., Kirsch, A. D., MacDonald, S., Brooks, M. R., & McErlean, T. (1977). Controlled study of child health supervision: Behavioral results. Pediatrics, 60, 294–304.Google Scholar
  28. Hart, B., & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Baltimore: Brookes.Google Scholar
  29. Honig, A. S., & Lally, J. R. (1982). The Family Development Research Program: Retrospective review. Early Child Development and Care, 10, 41–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hunt, J. M. (1961). Intelligence and experience. New York: Ronald Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hutchins, V. L., & McPherson, M. (1991). National agenda for children with special health needs: Social policy for the 1990’s through the 21st century. American Psychologist, 46,141–143.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Huxley, P. (1990). Effective community mental health services. London: Athenaeum Press.Google Scholar
  33. Infant Health and Development Program Consortium (IHDP). (1990). Enhancing the outcomes of low birth weight, premature infants: A multi-site randomized trial. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 3035–3042.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Johnson, B. H., McGonigel, M. J., & Kauffman, R. K. (1989). Guidelines and recommended practices for the individualized family service plan. Washington, DC: Association for the Care of Children’s Health.Google Scholar
  35. Johnson, D. L., & Walker, T. (1991). A follow-up evaluation of the Houston Parent-Child Development Center: School performance. Journal of Early Intervention, 15(3), 226–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kempe, H. (1976). Approaches to preventing child abuse: The health visitor concept. American Journal of Diseases of Children, 130, 941–947.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Klaus, R. A, & Gray, S. W. (1968). The Early Training Project for Disadvantaged Children: A report after five years. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 33 (4, Serial No. 120).Google Scholar
  38. Knitzer, J. (1982). Unclaimed children: The failure of public responsibility to children and adolescents in need of mental health services. Washington, DC: Children’s Defense Fund.Google Scholar
  39. Koop, C. E. (1987). Surgeon general’s report: Children with special health care needs. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.Google Scholar
  40. Lazar I., Darlington, R., Murray, H., Royce, J., & Snipper, A. (1982). Lasting effects of early education: A report from the consortium for longitudinal studies. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 47(2–3, Serial No. 195).Google Scholar
  41. Lee, V. E., Brooks-Gunn, J. U., Schnur, E., & Liaw, G. (1990). Are Head Start effects sustained? A longitudinal follow-up comparison of disadvantaged children attending Head Start, no preschool, and other preschool programs. Child Development, 61(2), 495–507.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Levenstein, P., O’Hara, J., & Madden, J. (1983). The Mother-Child Program of the Verbal Interaction Project. In Consortium for Longitudinal Studies, As the twig is bent... Lasting effects of preschool programs (pp. 237–263). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  43. Levine M., & Levine, A. (1970). The social history of the helping services: Clinic, court, school and community. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
  44. Levine, M., & Levine, A., (1992). Helping children: A social history. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  45. McLoyd, V. C. (1990). The impact of economic hardship on black families and children: Psychological distress, parenting, and socioemotional development. Child Development, 61, 311–346.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Oakland, T., & Ghazaleh, H. A. (in press). Primary prevention of handicapping conditions among Palestinian children in Gaza. Cited in D. Bryant & K. Maxwell (1997). The effectiveness of early intervention for disadvantaged children.Google Scholar
  47. Olds, D. L., Henderson, C. R, Tatelbaum, R., & Chamberlin, R. (1986). Improving the delivery of prenatal care and outcomes of pregnancy: A randomized trial of nurse home visitation. Pediatrics, 77, 16–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Olds, D. L., Henderson, C. R, Tatelbaum, R, & Chamberlin, R. (1988). Improving the life-course development of socially disadvantaged mothers: A randomized trial of nurse home visitation. American Journal of Public Health, 78 (11), 1436–1445.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Olds, D. L., & Kitzman, H. (1993). Review of research on home visiting for pregnant women and parents of young children. Future of Children, 3 (3), 53–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Powell, C, & Grantham-McGregor, S. (1989). Home visiting of varying frequency and child development. Pediatrics, 84, 157–164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Ramey, C. T. (1982). Commentary. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 47 (2–3, Serial No. 195).Google Scholar
  52. Ramey, C. T., Bryant, D. M., Wasik, B. H., Sparling, J. J., Fendt, K. H., & LaVange, L. M. (1992). The Infant Health and Development Program for low birthweigt, premature infants: Program elements, family participation, and child intelligence. Pediatrics, 3, 454–465.Google Scholar
  53. Ramey, C. T., MacPhee, D., & Yeates, K. O. (1982). Preventing developmental retardation: A general systems model. In J. M. Joffee & L. A. Bond (Eds.), Facilitating infant and early childhood development (pp. 343–401). Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  54. Ramey, C. T., Ramey, S. L., Gaines, K. R., & Blair, C. (1995). Two-generation early intervention programs: A child development perspective. In I. E. Sigel (Series Ed.) & S. Smith (Vol. Ed.), Advances in applied developmental psychology: Vol. 9. Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 199–228). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  55. Ramey, C. T., Sparling, J. J., Bryant, D. M., & Wasik, B. H. (1982). Primary prevention of developmental retardation during infancy. Journal of Prevention and Human Services, 1, 61–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ramey, C. T., Yeates, K. O., & Short, E. J. (1984). The plasticity of intellectual development: Insights from preventive intervention. Child Development, 5, 1913–1925.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ramey, S. L., & Ramey, C. T., (1992). Early educational intervention with disadvantaged children: To what effect? Applied & Preventive Psychology, 1, 131–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Roberts, R. N., & Wasik, B. H. (1996). Evaluating the 1992 and 1993 CISS projects. In J. M. Marquart & E. Konrad (Eds.), New Directions in Program Evaluation (NDPE): Evaluation of human services intention (pp. 35–49). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  59. Sameroff A. J., & Chandler, M. J. (1975). Reproductive risk and the continuum of caretaking casualty. In F. D. Horowitz, M. Hetherington, S. Scarr-Salapatek, & G. Siegel, (Eds.), Review of child development research (Vol. 4, pp. 187–244). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  60. Sameroff, A. J., Seifer, R., Barocas, B., Zax, M., & Greenspan, S. (1987). IQ scores of 4-year-old children: Social-environmental risk factors. Pediatrics, 79 (3), 343–350.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1988). Far from home: An experimental evaluation of the mother-child home program in Bermuda. Child Development, 59 (3), 531–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schaefer, E. S., & Aaronson, M. (1977). Infant Education Research Project: Implementation and implications of the home tutoring program. In M. E. Day & R. K. Parker (Eds.), The preschool in action (2nd ed., pp. 52–71). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
  63. Schweinhart, L. J., Barnes, H. V., Weikart, D. P., Barnett, W. S, & Epstein, A. S. (1993). Significant benefits: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through age 27. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.Google Scholar
  64. Seitz, V., Rosenbaum, L. K., & Apfel, N. H. (1985). Effects of family support intervention: A ten year follow-up. Child Development, 56, 376–391.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Skeels, H. M. (1966). Adult status of children from contrasting early life experiences. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 31 (3, Serial No. 105).Google Scholar
  66. Skodak, M., & Skeels, H. M. (1949). A final follow-up study of one hundred adopted children. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 75, 85–125.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Smith, S. (1995). Evaluating two-generation interventions: Current efforts and directions for Future Research. In I. E. Sigel (Series Ed.) & S. Smith (Vol. Ed.), Advances in applied developmental psychology: Vol. 9. Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 251–270). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  68. Smith S., & Zaslow, M. (1995). Rationale and policy context for two-generation interventions. In I. E. Sigel (Series Ed.) & S. Smith (Vol. Ed), Advances in applied developmental psychology: Vol. 9. Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 1–36). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  69. Sparling, J., & Lewis, I. (1979). Learning for the first three years: A guide to parent-child play. New York: Walker.Google Scholar
  70. Sparling, J., & Lewis, I. (1984). Learning for threes and fours: A guide to adult and child play. New York: Walker.Google Scholar
  71. St. Pierre, R., Goodson, B., Layzer, J., & Bernstein, L. (1994). National evaluation of the Comprehensive Child Development Program: Report to Congress. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.Google Scholar
  72. St. Pierre, R. G., Layzer, J. L., & Barnes, H. V. (1995). Two-generation programs: Design, cost and shortterm effectiveness. The Future of Children, 5 (3), 51–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. St. Pierre, R. G., & Swartz, J. P. (1995). The Even Start Family Literacy Program. In I. E. Sigel (Series Ed.) & S. Smith (Vol. Ed.), Advances in applied developmental psychology: Vol. 9. Two generation programs for families in poverty: A new intervention strategy (pp. 37–66). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  74. St. Pierre, R., Swastz, J. P., Gamse, B., Murray, S., Deck, D., & Nickel, P. (1995). National evaluation of the Even Start Family Literacy Program: Final Report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.Google Scholar
  75. Ullmann L. P., & Krasner L. (1965). Case studies in behavior modification. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  76. Wasik, B. A. & Karweit, N. L. (1994). Off to a good start: Effects of birth to three interventions on early school success. In R. E. Slavin, N. L. Karweit, & B. A. Wasik (Eds.), Preventing early school failures: Research, policy and practice (pp. 13–57). Needham, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  77. Wasik, B. H. (1993a, April). Research and evaluation strategies for family literacy. Paper presented at the National Center on Family Literacy Conference, Louisville, KY.Google Scholar
  78. Wasik, B. H. (1993b). Theoretical and social shifts in early intervention: Implications for researchers and evaluators. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  79. Wasik, B. H., Bryant, D. M., & Lyons, C. (1990). Home visiting: Procedures for helping families. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  80. Wasik, B. H., Bryant, D. M., Lyons, C, Sparling, J. J., & Ramey, C. T. (1997). Home visiting in the Infant Health and Development Program. In R. T. Gross, D. Spiker, & C. Haynes (Eds.), The Infant Health and Development Program (pp. 27–41). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Wasik, B. H., Bryant, D. M., Ramey, C. T., & Sparling, J. J. (1997). Maternal problem solving. In R. T. Gross, D. Spiker, & C. Hayes (Eds.), The Inf ant Health and Development Program (pp. 276–289). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  82. Wasik, B. H., Ramey, C. T., Bryant, D. M., & Sparling, J. J. (1990). A longitudinal study of two early intervention strategies: Project CARE. Child Development, 62 (6), 1682–1696.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Wasik, B. H., & Roberts, R. N. (1994). Survey of home visiting programs for abused and neglected children and their families. Child Abuse & Neglect, 18 (3), 271–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Wasik, B. H., Roberts, R. N., & Lam, W. K. K. (1994, July). The myths and realities of family-centered community-based, coordinated, cuiturally-competent systems of care. Paper commissioned for the Maternal and Child Health Bureau Research Priorities Conference, Columbia, MD.Google Scholar
  85. Wolfe, D. A. (1987). Child abuse: Implications for child development and psychopathology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  86. Yoshikawa, H. (1995). Long-term effects of early childhood programs on social outcomes and delinquency. Future of Children, 5 (3), 51–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Zigler, E. F. (1995). Can we “cure” mild mental retardation among individuals in the lower socioeconomic stratum? American Journal of Public Health, 85, 302–304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Zigler, E. F., & Freeman, J. (1987). Head Start: A pioneer of family support. In S. L. Kagan, D. R. Powell, B. Weissbourd, & E. F. Zigler (Eds.), America’s family support programs, perspectives, and prospects (pp. 57–76). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Hanna Wasik
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EducationUniversity of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations