Analyse The Factors That Influence The Victim Of Child Decision Making With Children

During Ms Luczaks pregnancy with Baby Adam the domestic abuse continued and reports of violence were made. It was considered that no child protection concerns were raised at present but the conversation had been recorded in case of any further incidents and MS Luczak had been informed of this conversation that took place between then midwife and social worker. This had only been recorded on Adams file and not the other children.

The article is stimulating to know that others states take action quickly to shield children from further abuse in their homes. The Indiana's Child Protective Services (CPS), offers a service to prevent out-home placement, and assistance to rejoin children with their families in situations where the children can return home (Indiana, 2015). This service is good, if the parents are able to resume the responsibility of taking care of their children.

A state that undertakes custody of a child is declaring that it can do a better job providing protection. This system is a powerful agent of support, providing positive nurturing environments that enable a child to reach his or her potential. Nonetheless, when children suffer additional abuse in the system, this government intervention should be questioned.

Unless the child is at risk of harm, a child should not be taken from their family without family’s agreement

One popular example is the case of Neville & Neville [2007] where there was a dispute on who had custody of the child. The courts ruled that since the child had a ‘strong emotional connection’ with the mother, that she was to live with her mother but also share substantial time with her father as both shares equal parental responsibilities. However, the best interest of the child is not necessarily what they personally explicitly want, as shown in the successful appeal by the father in the case Moose & Moose [2007]. In a situation such as this, despite the children apparently afraid of their fathers ‘sexual abuse’, the courts decided that a once- monthly visit in a supervised contact centre would be beneficial as he was a ‘person who can advance their welfare’ and that such a connection ‘should not be severed’. Such a decision may be deemed as questionable due to the severity of the claims.

A parent have to be there for their child mentally, physically, educated them, and instruct them of what may be ahead for them in the near future. If the parent is the abuser it can be difficult for the child to learn all of these methods when they are terrified of their parents and when this happening it will be the responsibility of a human service professional to use primary interventions to help with the present abuse as well as preventing any future abuse. The first primary intervention and method that used is setting up an assessment, this will help the Human service professional determine who the individuals are, what they struggle with, their strengths, and weaknesses. Finding out personal information from the parent will help to assists them with change and finding the right program to help them to stop the abuse as well as becoming a better parent. “Primary preventions programs are usually local in nature. They may be developed from a national

Child Protective Services (CPS) is a complex system of assessments, investigations, and conclusions. CPS is the central agency in each communities child abuse and neglect service system. It is responsible for ensuring that preventative, investigative, and treatment services are available to children and families endangered by child abuse and neglect. As a result, CPS workers must perform a variety of functions when responding to situations of child maltreatment and play a variety of roles throughout their involvement with child protective clients. Reporting a suspective case of child maltreatment to the local CPS agency (or a family member’s own request for help with the problem) initiates

When the child's parents are unable or unwilling to protect them, child protection services may be needed. Protecting children at risk of harm requires immediate and serious attention.

Accounts of neighbors, bystanders or the child themselves need to be considered, and in some cases, more heavily than a visit by the caseworker. Emotions can be staged, it’s easy to lie, and a bystander could a valuable witness- they offer an objective evaluation- clearly impossible while following the family preservation model, and a family member may see the family more often than the caseworker, and therefore have a better evaluation of the situation. An important aspect is objectivity. Yes, the caseworker is going to become attached, but the main operation is to understand the situation, establish if abuse or neglect is occurring and find the best solution for the child. The family preservation model is not ineffective, but it produces an obligation for caseworkers to operate in the interest of the whole family, which can overlook certain problems for the betterment of the whole. As much as the model needs clear and precise guidelines and procedures, it restricts the ability to operate in a variety of situations. For me the problem resides in the contradictory job of being a mediator and enforcer. One would think that being a mediator helps to understanding how to effectively enforce, but the overlap produces inconsistencies, as you can never equally fulfill both roles. The caseworker is asked to too much at once, abuse is abstractly developed and enforced and sometimes rooted in more than

The United Nations reported that each year in Canada an estimated 362,000 children witness or experience family violence these figures are hard to reflect on when we look at the amount of women affected by IPV that could be their mothers (UNICEF, 2006). When we look further at research that shows children who witness violence are more likely to grow up to become victims or abusers themselves this is where many would agree to the fullest that children in an IPV atmosphere should be removed to prevent them any problems in the long run (Royal Canadian Mounted Police, 2012).

Daughters of non-institutionalized mothers are more vulnerable and they are at high risk of sexual abuse and molestation from the family members and the external world. At the same time they are always in the shadow of verbal and physical abuse of the sick mother. They are not even safe inside the family. These girls are unable to raise their voice, nor protect against abuse. They are facing multiple barriers from the family and the society. It was mainly hidden behind the four walls of the house. Those within the family and the victims did not wish to speak about it.

Child maltreatment is a widespread issue that affects thousands of children every year. There are four common types of child maltreatment; sexual abuse, physical abuse, emotional abuse and neglect. All of these types of abuse are very serious and can have many consequences for the children and families. The most common consequence of severe child maltreatment is the removal of that child from their home (Benbenishty, Segev, Surkis, and Elias, 2002). Most social workers trying to determine the likelihood of removal evaluate the type and severity of abuse, as well as the child’s relationship with their parents (Benbenishty et al., 2002). When children are removed from their homes there are many options of alternative housing. The

Domestic Violence is a problem sweeping the nation. This problem can affect anyone from anywhere but is generally acting out upon children and adult women in abusive relationships. Domestic violence is emotionally and physically scarring for anyone involved, and as a result could take multiple intervention meetings to begin to understand the issue, alleviate the associated problems, and to assist the victim in getting back on his or her feet. The consequences of abuse include anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and self-harm. Children may begin to act differently to their usual behavior - withdrawal is very common, as is self-harming (Khan, 2012). There are two ways that people can consider interventions for victims of

I understand what you're going through child protective services always after my auntie. That's why she's always state to state. Yes she slips up but everybody makes mistakes. Seeing your child get taken away hurts the most. After its all said and done child protective services needs to come up with new rules and regulations. They take your kid because of what they hear. It varies either way it depends on the caseworker or the case. Some are more concerned for kids who aren't being abused instead of the kids who are. They are focused on the littlest situation of the big . They do a little investigating and that's that. They need better environments for the kids. Bad things happen in there and it's nothing the kids can help because they're trapped until adulthood. They miss their parents and the parents miss

The role of different agencies and professionals within the process of safeguarding children and young people are the police which failed during this case because they did not share information with any agency to protect and safeguard Daniel Pelka and that the domestic violence was a risk to