Key Findings from Key Findings from the National Survey the National Survey

of Children’s of Children’s Exposure to Violence Exposure to Violence

& Implications for & Implications for AssessmentAssessmentSherry HambySherry Hamby

Sewanee, the University of the SouthSewanee, the University of the South

David Finkelhor, & Heather TurnerDavid Finkelhor, & Heather TurnerCrimes Against Children Research Center, UNHCrimes Against Children Research Center, UNH

Presented at the Defending Childhood Initiative Grantee Presented at the Defending Childhood Initiative Grantee Meeting, Meeting,

Washington, DC, January 25-27, 2011Washington, DC, January 25-27, 2011For more info contact sherry.hamby@sewanee.eduFor more info contact sherry.hamby@sewanee.edu

1

National Survey of Children’s National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV, Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV,

Finkelhor, Turner, Ormrod, & Finkelhor, Turner, Ormrod, & Hamby, 2009)Hamby, 2009)

Telephone survey conducted January 2008- May Telephone survey conducted January 2008- May 20082008

National RDD sample of 4549 children age 1 month-National RDD sample of 4549 children age 1 month-1717 2454 caregivers of children age 0-92454 caregivers of children age 0-9 2095 youth age 10-172095 youth age 10-17

Respondents promised confidentiality and paid $20Respondents promised confidentiality and paid $20 Oversample of African American, Hispanic, & low Oversample of African American, Hispanic, & low

incomeincome Interviews completed with 71% of eligible Interviews completed with 71% of eligible

respondents respondents contacted (63% with oversample of contacted (63% with oversample of minorities and low minorities and low income)income)

More than 40 types of victimization assessed.More than 40 types of victimization assessed. 2

Victimization in Last YearVictimization in Last YearTotal and Selected AggregatesTotal and Selected Aggregates

(Children 0-17, N=4549)

61

46

610

25 25

#1: Children’s #1: Children’s Lives Aren’t Lives Aren’t

Organized by Organized by Research Research

Disciplines, Disciplines, Institutional Institutional Mandates, or Mandates, or

Professional RolesProfessional Roles4

The The “Stovepipes”“Stovepipes”

ofof

ChildChildVictimizationVictimization

Graphic prepared by Kelly Foster

Assessment, Prevention, & Assessment, Prevention, & Intervention Tend to Focus Intervention Tend to Focus

On a Single Problem….On a Single Problem….

6

But many children are But many children are victimized in multiple victimized in multiple

ways…ways…

1.8

2.5

1.8

4.2

2.1

2.4

1.8

3.3

0 1 2 3 4 5

Property

Witness

Physical

Sexual

LifetimePast year

If Maltreated, If Maltreated,

OR (adjusted) for Risk OR (adjusted) for Risk of of

Other Victimization Other Victimization TypeType

7

..and, across violence ..and, across violence subdisciplines, we are subdisciplines, we are

largely studying the same largely studying the same kidskids

2.7

2.5

4.1

5

2.5

2.9

5.3

6.2

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Property

Witness

Maltreatment

Sexual

LifetimePast year

If Physically Assaulted, If Physically Assaulted,

OR (adjusted) for Risk OR (adjusted) for Risk of of

Other Victimization Other Victimization TypeType

8

Even polyvictims (>10 unique Even polyvictims (>10 unique victimizations) comprise a victimizations) comprise a high % of any particular high % of any particular victimization categoryvictimization category

16

38

15

50

37

21

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Assault Maltreatment Peer/Sib Sexual Witness Familyviol

Expos CommViol

Per

cen

t of

Vic

tim

s.

9

#2: Children’s #2: Children’s families aren’t families aren’t

defined by defined by current adult current adult

romantic romantic relationshipsrelationships

10

A Well-Known Decline in 2-A Well-Known Decline in 2-parent Households…parent Households…

11

..but even this can mask the ..but even this can mask the large numbers of children large numbers of children experiencing the end of experiencing the end of

parental unionsparental unions

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 year 5 years 10 years

Cohabiting couplesMarital couples

Child’s Age

%

Based on 1995 NSFG data; from Manning et al., 2004 12

Children Are Exposed to Children Are Exposed to Multiple Parental and Multiple Parental and

Caregiver RelationshipsCaregiver Relationships

Mom, boyfriend, half-siblings

Grandparents or other in-home caregivers who supervise child 50+ hours/week while parent worksDad, stepmother, half-

sibling

Others: Parents’ ex-boyfriends, ex-girlfriends, foster parents, in-home relatives, other caregivers

13

Many Parents, Intimate Many Parents, Intimate Partners, & Relatives Partners, & Relatives

Perpetrate Partner Violence in Perpetrate Partner Violence in Front of ChildrenFront of Children

Fathers62%Mothers

12%

Boyfriend of mother

11%

Other males8%

Other females7%

14

#3 Witnessing #3 Witnessing Partner Violence is Partner Violence is

Not Only Not Only Associated with Associated with Child Physical Child Physical Abuse, but All Abuse, but All

Forms of Forms of MaltreatmentMaltreatment

15

Witnessing Partner Violence Witnessing Partner Violence (WPV): Common & co-occurs w/ (WPV): Common & co-occurs w/

child abusechild abuse13

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

%

AdultswhorememberWPV

AlsoabusedNotabused

WPV YouthReview by Appel & Holden, 1998

41%

From Straus, 1992 (1985 NFVR)

1616

Physical Abuse & WPVPhysical Abuse & WPV

17All odds ratios control for several demographics and have Zhang & Yu correction applied

17

Psychological Abuse & Psychological Abuse & WPVWPV

18From Hamby, Finkelhor, Turner, & Ormrod, 2010

18

Sexual Abuse by Known Sexual Abuse by Known Adult Adult & WPV& WPV

1919

Neglect & WPVNeglect & WPV

2020

Custodial Interference & Custodial Interference & WPVWPV

2172% of family abductions occurred in

WPV homes! 21

#4 Exposure to #4 Exposure to Family Violence is Family Violence is

Not Just About Not Just About Inter-parental Inter-parental

ViolenceViolence

22

Other Household Members Other Household Members Assault Each Other at Assault Each Other at

Significant RatesSignificant Rates

4.6

7.8

10.3

15.8

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Parent assault of sibling Teen or grown-up assaultrelative

All youth14 to 17 yo

%

Lifetime rates from Hamby, Finkelhor, Turner, & Ormrod, forthcoming

23

Perpetrators & Victims of Perpetrators & Victims of Other Household Assault in Other Household Assault in

NatSCEVNatSCEV

Adolescentbrother

Father

Adolescentsister

Mother

Other male

Otherfemale

SiblingMotherFatherOther

Perpetrators Victims

24

Targets of Household Offenses Targets of Household Offenses Resulting in Law Enforcement Resulting in Law Enforcement

ContactContact

Parent

Child

Boy/ girlfr

Other IP

Sibling

Other

ParentChildBoy/ girlftOther IPSiblingOther

Juveniles Offenders

Adult Offenders

NIBRS data, Snyder & McCurley, 2008 25

#5 Current Trauma #5 Current Trauma Symptoms Are Symptoms Are More Tied to More Tied to Variety and Variety and Number of Number of

Exposures than to Exposures than to Specific Specific

Victimization TypesVictimization Types 26

Figure 1. Trauma Symptom Levels Figure 1. Trauma Symptom Levels by Total Number of Victimization by Total Number of Victimization

TypesTypes**

* cases with 11+ victimizations aggregated due to smaller Ns.** mean standardized symptoms scores at different numbers of victimization types, controlling for demographic variables

27

Polyvictimization matters more than any

particular typeMaltreatment, for example, has a medium-sized association with trauma symptoms, after controlling for age, gender, and other demographics but NOT poly-victimization.

0.05

0.32Without PV With PV *

Remarkably, this association is close to zero if you add poly-victimization to the equation—it explains nearly all of the variability accounted for by maltreatment.

The strongest predictor gets to explain as much variance as it can, leaving only “unique” variance for other variables. It turns out there is little “unique” about maltreatment.

Polyvictimization (PV) Swamps Effects Polyvictimization (PV) Swamps Effects of of

Individual Victimizations on TraumaIndividual Victimizations on TraumaAssaultAssault

MaltreatmentMaltreatment

Peer/SiblingPeer/Sibling

0.05

0.32

* Standardized Regression coefficient, controlling for age, gender, race, ethnicity, SES, family structure.

SexualSexual

VictznVictzn

Witness Witness

Fam ViolFam Viol

Expos toExpos to

Comm ViolComm Viol

0.07

0.35

0.07

0.32

0.01

0.27

0.05

0.35

0.28

-0.03

Without PV With PV * Without PV With PV *

29

Figure 2: Trauma Symptom Scores across Figure 2: Trauma Symptom Scores across Victim GroupsVictim Groups

Peer-Sib Victims

Sexual Victims

Maltreatment VictimsProperty Victims

Witness Community Viol Victims

Witness Family Viol Victims

non-vic

vic – low chron

vic – high chron

vic – poly vic

non-vic

vic – low chron

vic – high chron

vic – poly vicnon-vic

vic – low chron

vic – high chron

vic – poly vic

non-vic

vic – low chron

vic – high chron

vic – poly vic

non-vic

vic – low chron

vic – high chron

vic – poly vic

non-vic

vic – low chron

vic – high chron

vic – poly vic

30

Using the JVQ-R2, the Victimization

Questionnaire from NatSCEV

What Does the JVQ What Does the JVQ Measure?Measure?

The Juvenile Victimization The Juvenile Victimization Questionnaire has Questionnaire has 5 5 modules:modules: Conventional crimeConventional crime

(theft, assault, kidnapping)(theft, assault, kidnapping) Child maltreatmentChild maltreatment

(physical abuse, sexual abuse, (physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect)neglect)

Peer VictimizationPeer Victimization (includes bullying)(includes bullying)

Sexual VictimizationsSexual Victimizations (includes sexual harassment, (includes sexual harassment,

statutory sex offenses)statutory sex offenses) Witnessing and Indirect Witnessing and Indirect

VictimizationVictimization (includes witnessing DV, war zone)(includes witnessing DV, war zone)

JVQ ref: Hamby, Finkelhor, Ormrod, & Turner, 2004

32

Advantages of the JVQ-R2 Advantages of the JVQ-R2 ModelModel

#1 Can track developmental #1 Can track developmental pathwayspathways

#2 Can identify overlap among #2 Can identify overlap among typestypes

#3 Powerful determinant of #3 Powerful determinant of symptomssymptoms

#4 Comprehensive; includes #4 Comprehensive; includes violence across settings and violence across settings and perpetratorsperpetrators

#5 Designed to map more closely #5 Designed to map more closely onto common institutional onto common institutional categoriescategories 33

Challenges of the JVQ-R2 Challenges of the JVQ-R2 modelmodel

Institutional categories do not Institutional categories do not always have consistent definitions always have consistent definitions or clear boundaries among types or clear boundaries among types of victimization, and sometimes of victimization, and sometimes even vary across institutions.even vary across institutions. Ex. A: Child protective services typically Ex. A: Child protective services typically

examine caregiver perpetrators for examine caregiver perpetrators for physical abuse & neglect, but others for physical abuse & neglect, but others for sexual abuse.sexual abuse.

Some degree of scoring overlap is Some degree of scoring overlap is hard to eliminate across hard to eliminate across victimization types.victimization types.

We have encountered some We have encountered some resistance at “accepting” the resistance at “accepting” the large numbers of victims id’d large numbers of victims id’d through this modelthrough this model

34

Help for Conceptual Help for Conceptual IssuesIssues

Be clear about definitions and how they Be clear about definitions and how they overlap (or don’t) with institutional overlap (or don’t) with institutional definitions.definitions.

Collect enough incident data to be Collect enough incident data to be flexible in your definitions for different flexible in your definitions for different settings/uses.settings/uses.

Provide multiple statistics that identify Provide multiple statistics that identify different levels of severity.different levels of severity.

We have spent a lot of time reviewing We have spent a lot of time reviewing the reports and re-classifying as the reports and re-classifying as needed.needed.

The good news: in our earlier study, we The good news: in our earlier study, we compared numerous scoring compared numerous scoring alternatives, including simple counts alternatives, including simple counts from screeners, and found them all from screeners, and found them all quite similar (Finkelhor, Ormrod, quite similar (Finkelhor, Ormrod, Turner, & Hamby, 2005).Turner, & Hamby, 2005). 35

JVQ-R2 Steps in DevelopmentJVQ-R2 Steps in Development

Item FormulationItem Formulation Expert ReviewExpert Review Focus Groups of Youth and Focus Groups of Youth and

ParentsParents Cognitive InterviewsCognitive Interviews National Household SurveyNational Household Survey

JVQ ModulesJVQ Modules Module A: Conventional Crime

– Robbery– Personal Theft– Vandalism– Assault with Weapon– Assault without Weapon– Attempted Assault– Kidnapping– Bias Attack

Module B: Child Maltreatment– Physical Abuse by Caregiver– Psychological/Emotional Abuse– Neglect– Custodial Interference/Family Abduction

Module C: Peer & Sibling Victimization– Gang or Group Assault– Peer or Sibling Assault– Nonsexual Genital Assault– Physical Intimidation– Relational Aggression– Dating Violence

Module D: Sexual Victimization– Sexual Assault by Known Adult– Sexual Assault by Unknown Adult– Sexual Assault by Peer/Sibling– Forced Sex (including attempts)– Flashing/Sexual Exposure– Verbal Sexual Harassment– Statutory Rape & Sexual Misconduct

Module E: Witnessing & Indirect Victimization– Witness to Domestic Violence– Witness to Parent Assault of Sibling– Witness to Assault with Weapon– Witness to Assault without Weapon– Burglary of Family Household– Murder of Family Member or Friend– Exposure to Random Shootings, Terrorism or Riots– Exposure to War or Ethnic Conflict

JVQ-R2 Supplemental ItemsJVQ-R2 Supplemental Items

Exposure to Community Violence– Exposure to Sexual Assault– Exposure to Robbery– Exposure to Threatened Assault with Weapon

Exposure to Family Violence & Abuse– Parent Verbally Threatened– Parental Displaced Aggression– Parent Pushed– Parent Hit or Slapped– Parent Severely Physically Assault– Other Family Violence Exposure

School Violence & Threat– School Threat of Bomb or Attack– School Vandalism

Electronic Victimization– Internet Harassment– Cell Phone Harassment– Unwanted Internet Sex Talk

Other Severe Assaults– Assault by Adult– Assault with Injury

Supplemental Peer Relational Aggression Items

– Social Discrediting by Peers– Social Exclusion by Peers

Supplemental Neglect Items– Neglect from Parental Incapacitation– Neglect from Parental Absence– Neglect from Inappropriate Adults in

Home– Neglect from Unsafe Environment– Neglect from Lack of Hygiene

Supervision

JVQ-R2: ChoicesJVQ-R2: Choices GoldGold standard: Full JVQ ( standard: Full JVQ (

www.unh.edu/ccrc/jvq) ) SilverSilver: JVQ short form, : JVQ short form,

screener, or abbreviated screener, or abbreviated interviewinterview

BronzeBronze: A brief screen, much : A brief screen, much in the same way many of you in the same way many of you routinely ask about SI or HI:routinely ask about SI or HI:

““Have you been hurt by someone Have you been hurt by someone in the last year, or do you ever in the last year, or do you ever feel scared or unsafe at home, feel scared or unsafe at home, school, in your neighborhood?”school, in your neighborhood?”

Ask in private setting!!Ask in private setting!!39

Body map

JVQ-R2 Formats Full JVQ, including all supplemental

screeners and all follow-ups More than 50 forms of victimization 39 follow-ups, some asked of all or most

screeners, some specific to certain victimizations

Screener only version No follow-up items

Abbreviated interview 34 core JVQ items, with limited follow-ups

Reduced item version 12 items that include at least one screener

from each major victimization domain.

Sample ItemsSample Items In the last year, did anyone steal In the last year, did anyone steal

something from you and never give something from you and never give it back? Things like a backpack, it back? Things like a backpack, money, watch, clothing, bike, stereo, money, watch, clothing, bike, stereo, or anything else? or anything else?

In the last year, did any kid, even a In the last year, did any kid, even a brother or sister, hit you? brother or sister, hit you? Somewhere like: at home, at school, Somewhere like: at home, at school, out playing, in a store, or anywhere out playing, in a store, or anywhere else?else?

Building a Child-Centered Building a Child-Centered Approach into AssessmentApproach into Assessment

Although some exemplary programs exist, Although some exemplary programs exist, many programs, including the important many programs, including the important gateways of CPS & schools, seldom ask about gateways of CPS & schools, seldom ask about victimizations aside from those related to victimizations aside from those related to initial report.initial report.

We’d like to see all children who receive CPS We’d like to see all children who receive CPS referrals asked about bullying, nonfamily referrals asked about bullying, nonfamily assault, and exposure to community violence.assault, and exposure to community violence.

We’d like to see all school children referred We’d like to see all school children referred for bullying or depression asked about family for bullying or depression asked about family violence.violence. 42

All the Victims in a Family All the Victims in a Family Need ServicesNeed Services

Assess parents as well as children. Assess parents as well as children. Parents can’t implement treatment Parents can’t implement treatment plans if they can’t freely choose their plans if they can’t freely choose their actions.actions.

Assess children as well as parents. Assess children as well as parents. What must it be like for a child in a What must it be like for a child in a shelter, a full-time residential program, shelter, a full-time residential program, to either not receive any services at all to either not receive any services at all or to get perhaps an hour of week of or to get perhaps an hour of week of group therapy?group therapy?

Use tools like the VIGOR (Hamby 2009) Use tools like the VIGOR (Hamby 2009) to formally incorporate children’s to formally incorporate children’s needs into safety planning.needs into safety planning.

43

Bigger Implications?Bigger Implications? Need to re-think service delivery and consider Need to re-think service delivery and consider

alternative models.alternative models. Zero-to-3 programs offer one model that might Zero-to-3 programs offer one model that might

be extended across the span of childhood.be extended across the span of childhood. Developmental focusDevelopmental focus Integrate as many services as possibleIntegrate as many services as possible Family-centeredFamily-centered

Big brother/big sister/coaches/ministers. Big brother/big sister/coaches/ministers. Trusted adults are one key aspect of Trusted adults are one key aspect of resilience, but these natural helpers don’t resilience, but these natural helpers don’t limit themselves to one domain of a child’s limit themselves to one domain of a child’s life.life.

44