Child Protective Services Guidelines for Substantiating Exposure to Domestic Violence as Maltreatment and Assigning Caregiver Responsibility: Policy Analysis and Recommendations.

The purpose of this study was to examine the range of policy approaches used by child welfare systems in the United States to guide workers in classifying and substantiating child exposure to domestic violence (CEDV) as an actionable form of maltreatment. To that end, we conducted a qualitative document analysis of child protective services (CPS) policy manuals from all state-administered child welfare systems in the U.S. (N = 41). Our findings indicate that a majority of state-administered systems (71%) have adopted policy requiring workers to demonstrate that children have endured harm or the threat of harm before substantiating CEDV-related maltreatment. Many state systems (51%) also include policy directives that require workers to identify a primary aggressor during CPS investigations involving CEDV, while far fewer (37%) provide language that potentially exonerates survivors of domestic violence from being held accountable for failure to protect on the basis of their own victimization. Based on our findings and identification of policy exemplars, we offer a recommended set of quality policy indicators for states to consider in the formulation of their policy guidelines for substantiating children's exposure to domestic violence that promotes the safety and wellbeing of both children and adult survivors of domestic violence.

Child Protective Service Referrals Involving Exposure to Domestic Violence: Prevalence, Associated Maltreatment Types, and Likelihood of Formal Case Openings.

Childhood exposure to domestic violence (CEDV) is widely understood as potentially harmful to children. Accordingly, many child welfare systems in the United States construe CEDV as maltreatment when the exposure results in harm or threatened harm to the child. The purpose of the current study was to investigate substantiated child welfare referrals directly related to CEDV to better understand the prevalence and patterns of CEDV-related maltreatment and how child welfare workers respond under the "harm or threatened harm" standard. Data were drawn from 23,704 substantiated referrals between 2009 and 2013 in a large Midwestern child welfare system. Approximately 20% of substantiated referrals were CEDV related. A plurality of CEDV-related referrals included both a male caregiver and female caregiver who were co-substantiated for maltreatment. The most common maltreatment types substantiated for these referrals were neglect based rather than abuse based, and just under a quarter (23%) of CEDV-related referrals were formally opened for services. Referrals involving co-occurring substance abuse were most likely to be opened for services based on predicted probabilities derived from multilevel modeling. Implications for policy and practice are considered.

Exposure to domestic violence as abuse and neglect: Constructions of child maltreatment in daily practice.

Research finds that exposure to domestic violence can adversely affect the emotional, behavioral, and physical health of children. These effects have led some child advocates and policymakers in the United States to conclude that child exposure to domestic violence (CEDV) is a type of child maltreatment warranting state intervention. However, few states have defined CEDV as a type of maltreatment in statute and little is known about how child welfare agencies respond to allegations of CEDV in the absence of other safety threats. This study considers that CEDV itself might prompt an initial child welfare referral and may be construed by workers as a type of statutory maltreatment. Using a random sample (n = 295) of case records, this study analyzed one large child welfare agency's response to referrals alleging CEDV between 2011 and 2012. Findings indicate that CEDV itself did trigger investigation. At time of referral, workers used statutory maltreatment typologies to construe alleged CEDV as a type of maltreatment; however, CEDV was not consistently construed as a safety threat and few allegations were substantiated. Instead most families were referred to community-based domestic violence services. Findings indicate that CEDV was not consistently construed as a type of statutory maltreatment and infrequently resulted in ongoing child welfare services. Findings suggest that training is needed to help workers better assess CEDV-related safety threats. Findings also raise questions about what types of interventions are needed to protect children from domestic violence and which types of agencies are best positioned to deliver those interventions.