1 / 24

Richard Thompson Juvenile Protective Association

Listening to children from LONGSCAN: What 12-year olds tell us about witnessing violence. Richard Thompson Juvenile Protective Association Jonathan Kotch, Terri Lewis, Des Runyan, Jamie Smith University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Acknowledgements.

emmy
Télécharger la présentation

Richard Thompson Juvenile Protective Association

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Listening to children from LONGSCAN: What 12-year olds tell us about witnessing violence Richard Thompson Juvenile Protective Association Jonathan Kotch, Terri Lewis, Des Runyan, Jamie Smith University of North Carolinaat Chapel Hill

  2. Acknowledgements • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children, Youth, and Families Children's Bureau Office on Child Abuse and Neglect • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services National Institutes of Health National Institute of Child Health and Human Development  

  3. The Prevalence of Witnessed Violence • Nearly 40% of American teenagers witness violence every year (Kilpatrick et al., 2000). • 15% witness violence using a weapon, and 30% witness violence without a weapon (Finkelhor et al., 2005). • In areas dealing with war or high rates of violence, child exposure to violence is likely to be much higher.

  4. Impact of Witnessed Violence • Mental health problems: depression, PTSD • Social problems: poor peer relationships, school failure • Risk-taking/aggression: juvenile justice involvement, substance use • WHO:Witnessing violence predisposes youth to engage in violence, and to be victims of violence later on (Krug et al., 2002).

  5. Child Report vs. Parent Report • Problems with reliability of child report in very young (age 6) children (Thompson et al. 2006). • Parents underestimate child exposure to violence, relative to child report (Litrownik et al., 2003). • Child reports of witnessed violence better than parent reports of child witnessing in prediction of child outcomes: aggression, depression, anger, anxiety (Johnson et al., 2002).

  6. Main Hypotheses • Modest agreement between children and parents on child exposure to violence. • Child reports of exposure willpredictchild outcomes, even after controlling for parent reports and for other risk factors (demographics and maltreatment history). • Effects will be present for both family and non-family violence.

  7. Measures: Overview • Independent variables • Demographic information • Race • Gender • Adult male in home • Other control variables • Caregiver Depression: CES-D • Child Maltreatment history: Official records • Child exposure to violence • Caregiver report • Child report • Dependent variables: Child behavioral outcomes: • YSR: Child report (internalizing and externalizing) • CBCL: parent report (internalizing and externalizing) • TSC-C: Trauma Symptom Checklist for Children

  8. Independent Variables: Demographics

  9. Independent Variables: Other Control Variables

  10. Independent Variables: Exposure to Violence • Child Report: History of Witnessed Violence Scale • 8 items assessing witnessed violence • Clarified whether violence included family or non-family • Frequency ever witnessed: Likert scale from none (0) to 4 or more times (3).

  11. Independent Variables: Exposure to Violence (cont.) • Caregiver Report: Child Life Events • 6 items focused on witnessed violence from longer scale • Clarified whether violence included family or non-family • Frequency witnessed in last year: Likert scale from none (0) to 4 or more times (3).

  12. Dependent Variables: Child Behavioral Outcomes

  13. Method: Analysis • All subjects with age 12 interview • Subjects with incomplete data dropped • Correlations • Series of hierarchical regression analyses • Step 1: Models with caregiver reports • Family violence • Non-family violence • Step 2: Child reports added • Family violence • Non-family violence

  14. Subjects: Complete vs. Incomplete Data • LONGSCAN sample with age 12 data: 949 • Analysis sample (complete data): 781 • Analysis sample less likely to be Hispanic (6% vs. 12% in sample with missing data) • Analysis sample lower mother depression (11.0 vs. 13.9) • Analysis sample less internalizing (YSR): (48.4 vs. 51.5) • Site Differences • No differences on other factors.

  15. Child Exposure to Family Violence: Parent-Child Agreement • Agreement significant BUT very modest

  16. Violence Exposure as a Predictor of Child Outcome (YSR)

  17. Violence Exposure as a Predictor of Child Outcome (CBCL)

  18. Violence Exposure as a Predictor of Child Outcome (TSC)

  19. Summary of Results • Child reports of both family and non-family violence predict child reports of internalizing and externalizing behaviors and trauma symptoms. • Neither caregiver reports of family or non-family violence predict child reports of internalizing or externalizing behaviors, or trauma symptoms. • Caregiver report only of family violence predicts caregiver report of internalizing and externalizing behaviors. • child report only of non-family violence predicts caregiver report of internalizing and externalizing behaviors.

  20. Summary of Results (cont.) • There is a significant but modest correlation between child and caregiver report of both family and non-family witnessed violence. • Caregiver depression predicts five of seven adverse child behavioral outcomes and depression. • Child maltreatment predicts only two (caregiver report of externalizing behavior and child report of depression) of the seven outcomes.

  21. Limitations • Systematic, not representative, sample • Cross-sectional, not longitudinal • Some differences between total sample and sample used in analysis (differences controlled for) • Site differences (controlled for) • Difference measures used for caregiver witnessing and child witnessing

  22. Implications for Research and Clinical Practice • Pay attention to child reports of witnessing violence • Child report is a better predictor of child’s self-reported behaviors than caregiver report. • Caregiver may be a valid source of child-witnessed family violence, but not of child-witnessed non-family violence, especially as the child grows older.

  23. Implications for Research and Clinical Practice (cont.) • Among children at risk of maltreatment, witnessed violence happening to others in the family and the community may be associated with adverse outcomes. • Researchers should include children’s reports of witnessing violence in studies of maltreatment outcomes. • For more information, visit our website at http://www.iprc.unc.edu/longscan/

  24. References • Finkelhor et al. 2005. The victimization of children and youth: A comprehensive, national survey. Child Maltreatment 10:5-25. • Johnson et al. 2002. Adverse behavioral and emotional outcomes from childhood exposure to violence. Child Maltreatment7:179-186. • Kilpatrick et al. 2000. Risk factors for adolescent substance abuse and dependence: Data from a national sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 68: 19-30 • Krug et al., eds. World report on violence and health. Geneva : World Health Organization, 2002. • Litrownik et al. 2003. Exposure to family violence in young at-risk children: A longitudinal look at the effects of victimization and witnessed physical and psychological aggression. Journal of Family Violence 18: 59-73. • Thompson et al., 2006. Children’s self-reports about violence exposure: An examination of the Things I Have Seen and Heard scale. Manuscript under review.

More Related