Yafit Sulimani-Aidan

PhD. candidate, Bar Ilan University, Israel

Presenter:

Dr. Rami BenbenishtyBar Ilan University, Israel

Haruv Institute, Israel

 Funded by: the Haruv Institute

In collaboration with: Ministry of Welfare and Social Services

Local child maltreatment rates and protective service responses:

The role of ethnicity and community socio-economic characteristics

AN OVERVIEW

A methodological noteA brief review of the literature on

community characteristics and maltreatment

Child maltreatment and ethnicityA brief description of the situation in

IsraelMethodsFindingsDiscussion, limitations, conclusions &

implications

AN INTRODUCTORY METHODOLOGICAL NOTE

Child indicators as a form of monitoring on national and regional level

Commonly discussed in terms of policy implications A powerful scientific method, which has many

strengths, and of course some weaknesses as well Need to be further developed to take advantage of

the power in secondary analyses and data mining of large (either representative or ‘census-like’ data bases.

The importance of replication over time and caution in interpretation

INTRODUCTION I

Child maltreatment is viewed as resulting from complex factors, across multiple ecological levels

The rates of maltreatment are influenced. Among other ecological factors by family and community characteristics (e.g. poverty)

INTRODUCTION II

Ethnic minority groups and maltreatment In many cases are more vulnerable when they are

associated with poverty and stressful life eventsMay have cultural approaches that either protect

children or increase maltreatment (as defined in Western cultures).

Separate maltreatment from maltreatment reportingLower report to protect groupAre more vulnerable to intrusion by state

authorities

THE SITUATION IN ISRAELIsraeli Arabs have lower socio-

economic status, hence Arabs are expected to have higher rates of maltreatment

Cultural values (e.g., physical punishment of children, Ben-Arieh & Haj-Yhaia, 2006; Benbenishty et al., 2002)- hence Arabs are expected to have higher levels of maltreatment

CURRENT FINDINGS IN ISRAEL

Still, findings regarding differences in child maltreatment reports between Arabs and Jews are inconsistent

Potentially, offsetting cultural strengths Potentially, issues of reporting Practitioners in Arab localities are social workers

who may have conflicts reporting maltreatment because of their National/ethnic/minority identity Community connectedness Extended family loyality

More research is required to disentangle these issues

EXPLORING LOCAL RESPONSES TO MALTREATMENT

Responses of the child welfare system may vary on the continuum between family support and interventions and punitive/legal responses.

Responses to maltreatment vary by: Child welfare regimes Countries Localities

Sources for variance: Cultural values Child Welfare regimes and organizational structures Historical developments Resources

Little/no research on local variations

STUDY AIMS

Examine the contribution of the

community's socio economic and ethnic

characteristics to child maltreatment in

Israel.

Examine local responses to maltreatment

Examine differences between mainly

Jewish and mainly Arab localities 

STUDY VARIABLES

Child maltreatment• Rates• Types

Protective services responses

• reports to police• Court orders• Family interventions

Demographic factors• Locality Size• Age Distribution

Economic factors• Income• Unemployment

Education level• % of Students• % of high school diploma

Dependent variables

Independent variables

METHOD

Sample 231 localities out of a total of 256 2,133,376 number of children (97.9% of

the total population of children)

Data sources Annual reporting system on all local

maltreatment reports in Israel Census information provided by Israel's

Central Bureau of Statistics on each locality.

RATES PER THOUSAND CHILDREN

3.871.59

5.75

4.58

6.97

6.05

-1.00

1.00

3.00

5.00

7.00

9.00

11.00

13.00

15.00

17.00

19.00

21.00

23.00

25.00

Jewish (N = 28,498) Arab (N = 5253)

Neglect

Physical

Sexual

14.8%

33.5%

51.5%

21.8%

35.1%

43.1%

PROTECTIVE SERVICE RESPONSES (AS PERCENT OF ALL REPORTS IN

LOCALITY) Jews

N=78-147Arabs

N=52-75

MSDMSD

Family intervention (no legal intervention)

63.48241.5361.6397.69

Declare child in need 29.47100.5137.66122.95

Reports to police 22.8317.5019.4523.63

Request to override report

11.3831.035.9315.39

Intermediate order 7.2914.895.297.92

Order to remove6.5418.152.254.46

Supervision Order 6.4125.124.0011.98

Emergency Order 2.737.645.0113.97

Protective Order 0.804.074.1215.82

PROTECTIVE SERVICE RESPONSES (AS PERCENT OF ALL REPORTS IN

LOCALITY

PEARSON CORRELATIONS - JEWISH AND ARAB LOCALITIES

VariablePhysicalSexualNeglectTotalLocality population-.34**

-.20

-.31**

.02

-.31**

-.33

-.26**

-.27Age 0-4

-.16*

.37*

-.23**

.11

-.03

.56**

-.32**

.56**Rate of 75)%( +

-.26**

-.26

-.32**

-.17

-.05

-.35*

-.37**

-.38**Unemployment

.51**

.04

.51**

.06

.28**

.04

.49**

.03Socio-economic status.06

.15

.08

-.07

-.09

-.02

.19**

.01High school diploma.18**

.02

.07

-.10

.14*

.09

.13

-.08

SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS

Rates of maltreatment reports are lower in Arab localities

Relative prevalence of different types of reports is different between Jewish and Arab localities

Socioeconomic factors, age factors and educational level correlate with child maltreatment, especially in Jewish localities

Fewer children are removed from home and fewer court orders are issued in Arab localities

CONCLUSIONS II

Variability among localities is very large Perhaps there is a conceptual mismatch between

community and locality; There may be different mechanisms operating on

these two conceptually different units of analyses

POTENTIAL INTERPRETATIONS

Differences in values and cultural perceptions regarding physical punishment

• Willingness to use social services and involvement of the community in family problems

• Differential access to social services

THE SOCIAL SERVICES ROLE

Differences in reaction of the social services to maltreatment

Resources

Cultural differences as to what is considered appropriate response

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Availability of social workers

Cultural sensitivity

Strengthening the community

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge the collaboration of Israel’s Ministry of Welfare and Social Services and of Child Protective Services staff

Funding was provided by:

Haruv Institute, Jerusalem, Israel

THANK YOU!

RAMI BENBENISHTY – RAMIBENBEN@GMAIL.COM

YAFIT SULIMANI-AIDAN - YAFITSOUL@WALLA.CO.IL

& SHALOM!

THANK YOU!RAMI BENBENISHTY – RAMIBENBEN@GMAIL.COM YAFIT SULIMANI-AIDAN - YAFITSOUL@WALLA.CO.IL