The heuristic divergence between community reporters and child protection agencies : negotiating risk amidst shifting sands Emily Keddell, Sarah Colhoun, Pauline Norris and Esther Willing
By: Keddell, Emily
.
Contributor(s): Colhoun, Sarah | Norris, Pauline | Willing, Esther.
Material type: 
ArticleSeries: Children and Youth Services Review.Publisher: Elsevier, 2024Subject(s): Oranga Tamariki, Ministry for Children | CHILD PROTECTION | CHILD WELFARE | DATA ANALYSIS | FAMILIES | INTERVENTION | RISK MANAGEMENT | SOCIAL SERVICES | SUPPORT SERVICES | NEW ZEALANDOnline resources: DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2024.107532 (Open access) | Read elated news item, RNZ, 9 May 2024
In:
Children and Youth Services Review, 2024, 159: 107532Summary: ackground
Children enter the statutory part of ‘notify-investigate’ child protection systems via the reports of others, combined with acceptance by the statutory agency. This key nexus determines entry or deflection from statutory child protection services.
Objective
To examine the decision reasoning and processes of community (non-governmental organisation) workers that underpin reports to statutory services.
Participants and setting
Participants are non-governmental organisation (NGO) workers in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Methods
The methods are focus groups, interviews and a ‘think – aloud’ vignette-based protocol, used to elicit reporting decision rationales and experiences. Theoretical concepts of heuristics, institutional co-responsibility, and policy change are used to explore the study findings.
Results
Most cases are reported only after NGO workers ‘build a picture’ in the context of relationships with families and efforts to address risks. Reporting is a last resort option and occurs after ‘tipping point’ changes in the balance of protective and risk factors. Participants note a rising threshold and changes to the criteria for report acceptance by Oranga Tamariki (the statutory agency) in recent years, due to changing policy aims, abuse definitions, an ‘add value’ principle, and workload pressures. This heuristic change results in many reports not accepted or acted on, leading to frustration, anxiety, and ethical ambivalence for NGO workers.
Conclusions
The rising threshold and ‘adding value’ principle while aimed at collective responsibility to family issues, is perceived by NGO workers as a deflection heuristic by Oranga Tamariki. In their view, it is applied too broadly, acts as a blunt tool that does not account for differences in role and power, and is used to deflect risk responsibility. Implications for children and whānau, (extended families) the possibilities for ‘co-responsibility’, ethical reasoning, and the data generated by reports are discussed. (Authors' abstract). Record #8589
| Item type | Current location | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Access online
|
Family Violence library | Online | Available | ON24030030 |
Children and Youth Services Review, 2024, 159: 107532
ackground
Children enter the statutory part of ‘notify-investigate’ child protection systems via the reports of others, combined with acceptance by the statutory agency. This key nexus determines entry or deflection from statutory child protection services.
Objective
To examine the decision reasoning and processes of community (non-governmental organisation) workers that underpin reports to statutory services.
Participants and setting
Participants are non-governmental organisation (NGO) workers in Aotearoa New Zealand.
Methods
The methods are focus groups, interviews and a ‘think – aloud’ vignette-based protocol, used to elicit reporting decision rationales and experiences. Theoretical concepts of heuristics, institutional co-responsibility, and policy change are used to explore the study findings.
Results
Most cases are reported only after NGO workers ‘build a picture’ in the context of relationships with families and efforts to address risks. Reporting is a last resort option and occurs after ‘tipping point’ changes in the balance of protective and risk factors. Participants note a rising threshold and changes to the criteria for report acceptance by Oranga Tamariki (the statutory agency) in recent years, due to changing policy aims, abuse definitions, an ‘add value’ principle, and workload pressures. This heuristic change results in many reports not accepted or acted on, leading to frustration, anxiety, and ethical ambivalence for NGO workers.
Conclusions
The rising threshold and ‘adding value’ principle while aimed at collective responsibility to family issues, is perceived by NGO workers as a deflection heuristic by Oranga Tamariki. In their view, it is applied too broadly, acts as a blunt tool that does not account for differences in role and power, and is used to deflect risk responsibility. Implications for children and whānau, (extended families) the possibilities for ‘co-responsibility’, ethical reasoning, and the data generated by reports are discussed. (Authors' abstract). Record #8589
