Law enforcement investigation of non-sexual child abuse: Physical abuse, neglect and Abusive Head Trauma

IF 0.7 2区 社会学 Q2 LAW International Journal of Evidence & Proof Pub Date : 2021-04-01 DOI:10.1177/13657127211002284
S. Shaffer, N. S. Compo, J. Z. Klemfuss, Joanna Peplak, Julio Mejias
{"title":"Law enforcement investigation of non-sexual child abuse: Physical abuse, neglect and Abusive Head Trauma","authors":"S. Shaffer, N. S. Compo, J. Z. Klemfuss, Joanna Peplak, Julio Mejias","doi":"10.1177/13657127211002284","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study examined the experiences of law enforcement in investigating physical abuse, neglect and Abusive Head Trauma (AHT). Law enforcement (N = 388) in the United States were surveyed regarding case characteristics, investigative strategy, interrogative approaches, frequency/content of perpetrator admissions and interagency interaction across cases of physical abuse, neglect and AHT. Results revealed that exposure rates matched those of national statistics. AHT perpetrators reported to admit guilt less often than suspects of physical abuse and neglect. Participants reported that suspects explain physical abuse and AHT by referencing poor self-control as a common cause. Lack of financial resources was commonly reported as the explanation for neglect. Potentially coercive interviewing techniques were reported across abuse types but were more frequent in cases of AHT. AHT cases were reportedly hardest to prove/prosecute partially due to conflicting medical diagnoses. Potential implications for law enforcement investigative (interviewing) policies and future research are discussed.","PeriodicalId":54168,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","volume":"25 1","pages":"75 - 92"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/13657127211002284","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Evidence & Proof","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13657127211002284","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examined the experiences of law enforcement in investigating physical abuse, neglect and Abusive Head Trauma (AHT). Law enforcement (N = 388) in the United States were surveyed regarding case characteristics, investigative strategy, interrogative approaches, frequency/content of perpetrator admissions and interagency interaction across cases of physical abuse, neglect and AHT. Results revealed that exposure rates matched those of national statistics. AHT perpetrators reported to admit guilt less often than suspects of physical abuse and neglect. Participants reported that suspects explain physical abuse and AHT by referencing poor self-control as a common cause. Lack of financial resources was commonly reported as the explanation for neglect. Potentially coercive interviewing techniques were reported across abuse types but were more frequent in cases of AHT. AHT cases were reportedly hardest to prove/prosecute partially due to conflicting medical diagnoses. Potential implications for law enforcement investigative (interviewing) policies and future research are discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非性虐待儿童的执法调查:身体虐待、忽视和虐待性头部创伤
本研究考察了执法部门在调查身体虐待、忽视和虐待性头部创伤(AHT)方面的经验。调查了美国执法部门(N=388)的案件特征、调查策略、审讯方法、承认施暴者的频率/内容以及身体虐待、忽视和AHT案件中的跨部门互动。结果显示,接触率与国家统计数据相匹配。据报告,AHT犯罪者承认有罪的频率低于身体虐待和忽视的嫌疑人。参与者报告称,嫌疑人通过将自制力差作为常见原因来解释身体虐待和AHT。据报告,缺乏财政资源通常是造成忽视的原因。据报道,虐待类型中存在潜在的胁迫性访谈技巧,但在AHT病例中更为常见。据报道,AHT病例最难证明/起诉,部分原因是医学诊断相互矛盾。讨论了对执法调查(访谈)政策和未来研究的潜在影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
20.00%
发文量
15
期刊最新文献
Preponderance, proportionality, stepwise liability Stepwise liability: Between the preponderance rule and proportional liability The skewing effect of outcome evidence The economic case for conviction multiplicity What matters for assessing insider witnesses? Results of an experimental vignette study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1