research paper child protection

Making children safe .

Our goal is to enable policy-makers and practitioners to find and run the programmes that are most likely to work. This site brings together the rigorous evidence about ‘what works’ in child protection and institutional response to child protection; it helps you to find it; and summarises it.

What evidence exists?

What does the evidence say.

Our Guidebook summarises the evidence on the various topics.

gaps with no research yet, or only one or two studies.

What is child protection?

By ‘child protection’, we mean protecting children (people up to 18 years old) from abuse of any sort: physical, verbal, mental, sexual or neglect.

This site looks at institutional responses to child abuse : meaning, actions taken by institutions (such as schools, hospitals, sports clubs, residential care facilities, churches and other faith-based organisations) to prevent abuse / respond to abuse within the institution (e.g., by the institution’s staff) and to prevent abuse / respond to abuse outside the institution (e.g., schools teaching children about abuse so that they can recognise it and avoid it in the home).

What our evidence covers

The evidence compiled and summarised on this site is rigorous, ‘what works’ studies of institutional responses to child abuse.

The EGM & Guidebook do cover…

• Institutional* responses to child abuse ie. what organisations do to prevent abuse both in their organisations and outside.

What did the studies find.

Which effects of which programmes have been studies.

Studies at any point, and from anywhere in the world, and published in any of various languages.

Types of study that are on this site: primary causal studies which have a robust counterfactual (RCTs & QEDs), and systematic reviews.

Protocols (“recipes”) for new studies which are likely to be underway.

They don’t cover…

Most work on abuse in the home / by friends or relatives”.

Where the abuse is.

What types of abuse.

How much abuse there is.

* By ‘institution’, we mean school, pre-school nursery, church, other faith-based organisation, hospital, residential care setting, sports club, music or other clubs, holiday camps etc.

10 pointers for designing or requesting monitoring or evaluation.

There are many gaps in the existing evidence about institutional responses to child abuse. So practitioners, funders and policy-makers may need to commission new rigorous research. It’s easy to waste time and money there! This guide explains what to do and what to avoid.

About this website

This site holds an Evidence and Gap Map about institutional responses to child abuse, and Guidebook which explains that evidence. The EGM and Guidebook were produced by Giving Evidence and partners, with funding from Porticus.

Email [email protected]

• Open access
• Published: 14 June 2016

Child protection: a universal concern and a permanent challenge in the field of child and adolescent mental health

• Joerg M. Fegert 1 &
• Manuela Stötzel 2  

Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health volume  10 , Article number:  18 ( 2016 ) Cite this article

13k Accesses

10 Citations

6 Altmetric

Metrics details

For much of history, cruelty to children was viewed as a private rather than a societal concern. An early sign of change occurred in the 1870s, when the pivotal case of Mary Ellen Wilson, a severely abused child in New York City, attracted intensive coverage in influential newspapers such as the New York Times and led to the founding of the first child protection agency. Sociologist Michael King has described the media response to cases of extreme child abuse in terms of a moral agenda, saying, “In this category of agenda it is not individuals, but social systems which are being unjust to children” [ 1 ].

It would take many more years before child protection would come to be seen as the responsibility of society overall. In 1889, the British Parliament issued the first law to protect children from abuse; however, for a long time, child protection services remained the domain of private philanthropic societies rather than of the state. Awareness of the problem increased following the publication in 1962 of a revolutionary article by Kempe et al. titled “The battered child syndrome”[ 2 ], which described clinical evidence of child abuse and emphasized the importance of medical diagnostics in the field of child protection. The effect of this publication was to launch an organized movement within the medical profession to intervene in cases of child abuse and neglect.

More recently, fatal cases of abuse such as those of eight-year-old Victoria Climbié in the UK in 2000 and a two-year-old boy identified only as “Kevin” in Germany in 2006 motivated many countries to launch serious investigations into dysfunctions in the child welfare system, and inspired new legislation and changes in child protection practices. Revelations about the sexual abuse scandals of the Roman Catholic Church and various educational institutions further contributed to a change in the public’s perception of child sexual abuse, physical abuse, and neglect. Media coverage of the scandals and the ensuing political reactions helped drive advances in research, and the last 20 years has seen a vast increase in scientific publications in this area.

While individual tragedies have served to attract attention to child maltreatment, focusing on single cases can be a hindrance with respect to acknowledging the magnitude and ubiquity of the problem. What is needed are ongoing efforts, supported by adequate funding, to conduct fundamental research into the prevention and the consequences of traumatization in childhood. These efforts need to include the implementation of monitoring systems and epidemiology studies, so that data can be monitored and assessed in a comparable way across different countries. Prevention and intervention strategies need to be developed, and approaches that are found to be successful need to be implemented on a larger scale. Some efforts that have been made in recent years to address the problem at the international level and within Germany are described below.

Back in 2000, the United Nations set out its “Millennium Development Goals”, which over the following years helped to contribute to a worldwide reduction of child mortality, better maternal health, and other medical improvements. Building on this example, in 2015 the U.N. released a report titled “The Road to Dignity by 2030: Ending Poverty, Transforming All Lives and Protecting the Planet”, which laid out an agenda for formulating sustainable development goals through the promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies. One of the important goals in this agenda is “to end abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence and torture against children” [ 3 ]. This report was followed by one put out by UNICEF titled “A Post-2015 World Fit for Children” [ 4 ]. The first agenda item in the UNICEF report reads as follows:

“ End violence against children: In a world where almost one billion children under 15 suffer regular physical punishment, and nearly a quarter of all girls between the ages of 15 and 19 report experiencing physical violence, violence against children affects every country and every community. While violence against children is often invisible, its impact on individual children and their societies is profound and far - reaching, undermining developmental gains made in other areas. Because violence against children is a universal problem, investing in protecting children from violence, exploitation and abuse must be a global priority. More must be done to raise awareness of violence and encourage people to speak out when they see or suspect violence against children and to strengthen social welfare systems and services that protect children from harm and provide support to those who are already victims of violence.”

The World Health Organization (WHO) has also taken steps to address violence against children, issuing regional reports on the prevention of child maltreatment. In the report issued for Europe in 2013 [ 5 ], it proposed that all European countries develop national policies based on multi-disciplinary efforts, and that they define priorities for research. It also urged improvements in data collection for purposes of monitoring and evaluation, since such knowledge is of utmost importance in strengthening the ability of health systems to implement strategies for prevention and treatment. In addition, the WHO has produced a Toolkit for mapping the responses by legal, healthcare, and social services to child maltreatment [ 6 ].

The European Union sponsored a project titled CAN–MDS ( C oordinated Response to Child A buse and N eglect via a M inimum D ata S et) aimed at coordinating the monitoring of routine data in child protection systems in Europe. However, comparison of national data sets in Europe remains difficult because many studies use different definitions. In 2014, the WHO released a publication titled “Investing in children: The European child maltreatment prevention action plan 2015–2020” [ 7 ]. This report estimated that the global prevalence rates for child maltreatment are 16.3 % for physical neglect and 18.4 % for emotional neglect, from which it concluded: “Applying these figures to the population of children in Europe suggests that 18 million children suffer from sexual abuse, 44 million from physical abuse and 55 million from mental abuse.” It further stated, “Child maltreatment is a cause of social and health inequality within and between countries. There is strong evidence for the development of mental and physical disorders. Therefore capacity building in child and adolescent psychiatry and in mental health services for children and adolescents is crucial.”

These high estimates of prevalence rates, which were derived mainly from self-report studies, came as a shock to many clinicians as well as to the public. Their accuracy is not certain, given that data from different sources may not be comparable. However, given the likely magnitude of the problem, all societies should make the strengthening of child protection systems a national priority. Considering the low investment that has been made in research and development up to now, the WHO identifies this problem as a “best buy”, meaning that a great deal of value and advancement can be gained for a relatively small investment compared to that needed to address other health issues.

The societal costs of the consequences of child maltreatment are very high. In Germany, a study sponsored by the Ministry of Family Affairs on the annual costs to society arising from all forms of traumatization in childhood (i.e., neglect, physical abuse, and sexual abuse) found that the estimation based on a moderate model was 11 billion euros [ 8 – 10 ]. Similar costs have been found elsewhere. A US study done in 2008 estimated the societal costs related to child abuse and neglect to be USD 103.8 billion per year, not including intangible costs [ 9 ]. In Australia, a 2007 study calculated these costs at approximately AUD 4.0 billion on the basis of a population survey, and at AUD 10.7 billion on the basis of prevalence information from literature [ 10 ]. In Canada, a study done in 2003 calculated the “minimum cost to society” to be around CAD 15.7 billion [ 11 ]. As these findings were published several years ago, it seems likely that costs have gone up since then.

In Germany, following the child sexual abuse scandal that came to light in 2010, the government appointed an Independent Commissioner to gather data on the problem and provide recommendations [ 12 – 14 ]. In December 2014, in collaboration with the editor of CAPMH and supported by the Dreiländer Institute, a center for research and teaching that serves the three German-speaking countries, the Independent Commissioner invited leading international experts in the field of child abuse and neglect to a meeting in Berlin to discuss ways to implement better monitoring systems [ 15 , 16 ].

The first article in this series, by Jud et al., is based on a report edited by the Independent Commissioner [ 17 , 18 ]. That report provides an overview of international research as well as recommendations for the future development of research and monitoring in the field of child protection in Germany. The article by Trocmé et al. analyzes trends in the rate of child maltreatment and of foster care placements in Canada, and describes how there has been an increase in both the number of investigations of child abuse and in the number of children removed from their homes. Glaesmer et al. report on prevalence rates Germany that were derived using the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire [ 19 ].

While there is increased knowledge today about the prevalence of abuse, sexual abuse, and neglect of children in different settings, more research is needed on prevention and intervention. Professionals in the fields of child and adolescent psychiatry as well as in other mental health areas can play an important role in establishing a continuous monitoring system within the healthcare system, in cooperation with other professions. The scaling-up of successfully evaluated approaches is one of the greatest challenges. In addition, basic research into genetic and epigenetic effects related to early neglect and traumatization is needed. For example, while the hormonal stress reaction is quite well studied, little is understood yet about the immunological consequences of trauma.

Since 2010, the German government has invested about 50 million euros to assist abused and neglected children, with about 20 million euros going to efforts supporting research and the dissemination of research findings, such as the establishment of e-learning programs aimed at professionals. In 2013, the Editor-in-Chief of CAPMH founded a competence center in the state of Baden-Württemberg for research into child abuse and neglect; and an interdisciplinary trauma research center has been established at the University of Ulm. However, at present there is no agenda at either the national or the EU level for improved coordination of research work and clinical approaches in child protection.

When a working group created by the Independent Commissioner sent out a questionnaire on funding activities and programs to research funding bodies in 2015, the EU was among those that did not respond. It may be that a political agenda such as the “Road to Dignity” report produced by the United Nations is needed in order to underscore the importance of child protection to professionals in healthcare fields. Knowledge about adverse childhood experiences has grown [ 20 ], and much is now understood about the lifelong consequences of abuse. Experts in child and adolescent psychiatry and other areas of child mental health are the frontline workers in the diagnosis and treatment of early traumatization.

In recognition of the significance of child abuse, both standard sets of diagnostic criteria have added information specific to this problem. The recently updated version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, DSM-5, attempts to integrate more age-specific diagnostic criteria in the definition of PTSD, while the upcoming version of the International Classification of Diseases, ICD-11, due out in 2018, will outline the importance of complex and sequential traumatization to which children who are institutionalized or in foster care are sometimes subjected.

The editorial board of CAPMH invites researchers and clinicians from around the world to publish their findings on child protection in our open access journal. Child protection is an interdisciplinary issue, and open access publishing is the most appropriate way to ensure that data and information are made accessible to everybody.

King M. Moral Agendas for children’s wellfare. Abingdon: Routledge; 1999.

Kempe C, Silferman F, Steele B, Droegemueller W, Silver H. The battered-child syndrome. JAMA. 1962;181(1):17–24.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals . Accessed 8 June 2016.

http://www.unicef.org/post2015/files/P2015_issue_brief_set.pdf . Accessed 8 June 2016.

European-report-on-preventing-child-maltreatment http://www.euro.who.int/en/publications/abstracts/european-report-on-preventing-child-maltreatment-2013 .

Toolkit for mapping the responses by legal, healthcare, and social services to child maltreatment. http://www.apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/155237/1/9789241549073_eng.pdf .

Investing in children—the Eureopean child maltreatment prevention action plan. http://www.euro.who.int/en/about-us/governance/regional-committee-for-europe/past-sessions/64th-session/documentation/working-documents/eurrc6413-investing-in-children-the-european-child-maltreatment-prevention-action-plan-20152020 .

Habetha S, Bleich S, Weidenhammer J, Fegert JM. A prevalence-based approach to societal costs occurring in consequence of child abuse and neglect. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2012;6(1):35.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Wang C, Holton J. Total estimated cost of child abuse and neglect in the United States. Economic impact Study. Illinois: Prevent Child Abuse America; 2007.

Tayler P, Moore P, Pezzullo L, Goddard C, De Bortoli L. The cost of child abuse in Australia. Melbourne: Australian Childhood Foundation and Child Abuse Prevention Research; 2008.

Google Scholar  

Bowlus A, McKenna, K. Day T, Wright D. The economic costs and consequences of child abuse in Canada. Ottawa: Law Commission of Canada; 2003.

Rassenhofer M, Spröber N, Schneider T, Fegert JM. Listening to victims: use of a critical incident reporting system to enable adult victims of childhood sexual abuse to participate in a political reappraisal process in Germany. Child Abuse Negl. 2013;37(9):654–63.

Article   Google Scholar  

Fegert JM, Rassenhofer M, Schneider T, Seitz A, König L, Spröber N. Endbericht der wissenschaftlichen Begleitforschung zur Anlaufstelle der Unabhängigen Beauftragten zur Aufarbeitung des sexuellen Kindesmissbrauchs Dr. Christine Bergmann, Bundesministerin a. D. http://beauftragter-missbrauch.de/course/view.php?id=28 . 2011.

Rassenhofer M, Zimmer A, Spröber N, Fegert JM. Child sexual abuse in the Roman Catholic Church in Germany: comparison of victim-impact data collected through church-sponsored and government-sponsored programs. Child Abuse Negl. 2015;40:60–7.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Rassenhofer M, Spröber N, Fegert JM: Ergebnisse der Anlaufstelle der UBSKM in Bezug auf Institutionen. In: Fegert JM, Wolff M, editors. Kompendium, Sexueller Missbrauch in Institutionen“. Entstehungsbedingungen, Prävention und Intervention. 1st ed. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa; 2015:50–58.

https://beauftragter-missbrauch.de/presse-service/meldungen/detail/news/internationales-fachgespraech-zu-haeufigkeitsangaben-sexuellen-missbrauchs/?tx_news_pi1%5Bcontroller%5D=News&tx_news_pi1%5Baction%5D=detail&cHash=096bb4914cde4a0f4c694ca21e271824 . Accessed 8 June 2016.

Fegert JM, Rassenhofer M, Witt A, Jud A. Häufigkeitsangaben sexuellen Missbrauchs und Inanspruchnahme von Hilfen. Trauma Gewalt. 2015;9(2):175–8.

Jud A, Rassenhofer M, Witt A, Münzer A, Fegert JM: Häufigkeitsangaben zum sexuellen Missbrauch: Internationale Einordnung, Bewertung der Kenntnislage in Deutschland, Beschreibung des Entwicklungsbedarfs: Berlin: Unabhängiger Beauftragter für Fragen des sexuellen Missbrauchs; 2016.

Klinitzke G, Romppel M, Häuser W, Brähler E, Glaesmer H. Die deutsche Version des Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ)—psychometrische Eigenschaften in einer bevölkerungsrepärentativen Stichprobe. Psychother Psych Med. 2012;62:47–51.

Felitti VJ, Anda RF, Nordenberg D, Williamson DF, Spitz AM, Edwards V, Koss MP, Marks JS. Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading cuases of death in adults. the adverse childhood experiences (ace) study. Am J Prev Med. 1998;14(4):245–58.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This thematic series and the international meeting of experts in child abuse were made possible by funding provided by the Independent Commissioner for Questions Related to Child Sexual Abuse of the German government and by the “Dreiländer Institut”.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Psychotherapy, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany

Joerg M. Fegert

Independent Commissioner for Child Sex Abuse Issues, Berlin, Germany

Manuela Stötzel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joerg M. Fegert .

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Fegert, J.M., Stötzel, M. Child protection: a universal concern and a permanent challenge in the field of child and adolescent mental health. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health 10 , 18 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-016-0106-7

Download citation

Received : 24 February 2016

Accepted : 27 May 2016

Published : 14 June 2016

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-016-0106-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health

ISSN: 1753-2000

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Critical child protection studies: an introduction.

Conflicts of Interest

• Davies, Liz, and Nora Duckett. 2008. Proactive Child Protection and Social Work . Exeter: Learning Matters. [ Google Scholar ]
• Munro, Eileen. 2019. Effective Child Protection , 3rd ed. London: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Myers, John E. B. 2006. Child Protection in America: Past, Present, and Future . Oxford: Oxford University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Waldfogel, Jane. 1998. The Future of Child Protection: How to Break the Cycle of Abuse and Neglect . Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson, Kate, and Adrian L. James, eds. 2007. The Child Protection Handbook: The Practitioner’s Guide to Safeguarding Children , 3rd ed. London: Elsevier. [ Google Scholar ]

Share and Cite

Parton, N.A. Critical Child Protection Studies: An Introduction. Soc. Sci. 2022 , 11 , 444. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11100444

Parton NA. Critical Child Protection Studies: An Introduction. Social Sciences . 2022; 11(10):444. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11100444

Parton, Nigel Ashmore. 2022. "Critical Child Protection Studies: An Introduction" Social Sciences 11, no. 10: 444. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11100444

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Elsevier - PMC COVID-19 Collection
• PMC10160522

A qualitative analysis of child protection professionals' challenges during the COVID-19 pandemic

Sidnei r. priolo filho.

a Laboratório de Pesquisa, Prevenção e Intervenção em Psicologia Forense, Universidade Tuiuti do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil

b Florida International University, Miami, FL, United States of America

Ayesha Bhakta

Bárbara renata moura, bianca borges correia, jackeline da silva santos, thaisy luana sieben, deborah goldfarb, associated data.

Data will be made available on request.

Child Protection Professionals (CPPs) play a key role in providing insights into the child protection system and how it can best support children's right to personal security, particularly during trying times like the COVID-19 pandemic. Qualitative research provides one potential tool to tap into this knowledge and awareness. This research thus expanded earlier qualitative work on CPPs' perceptions of the impact of COVID-19 on their work, including potential struggles and barriers, into the context of a developing country.

A total of 309 CPPs from all five regions in Brazil answered demographics, pandemic-related resilient behaviors, and open-ended questions regarding their profession during the pandemic.

Data went through a three-step process of analysis: (1) pre-analysis; (2) category creation; and (3) coding of responses. Five categories emerged from the analysis: the Pandemic's Impact on CPPs' Work; the Impact of the Pandemic on CPP-Involved Families; Occupational Concerns during the Pandemic; Politics and the Pandemic; and Vulnerability due to the Pandemic.

Conclusions

Our qualitative analyses showed the pandemic resulted in increased challenges for CPPs across several fronts within their workplace. Although each of these categories is discussed separately, they all influenced one another. This highlights the need to continue efforts to support CPPs.

1. Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic placed an incredible strain on both Child Protective Services (CPS) and Child Protection Professionals (CPPs). A study by Katz, Katz et al. (2021) found deleterious impacts of the pandemic on child protection systems in different countries worldwide, indicating a global phenomenon caused by COVID-19. When considering how CPPs face adversities and challenges under contexts such as the COVID-19 pandemic, qualitative research provides unique insights into CPPs' perspectives and opinions about the challenging task of protecting children. Hearing CPPs' voices and perspectives in prior research created opportunities for change within the child protection system, enabling it to better serve the children and families it seeks to support ( Katz, Katz, et al., 2021 ; Katz, Priolo Filho, et al., 2021 ; see Fig. 1 ). For example, Whitt-Woosley et al. (2022) investigated how foster care parents and professionals in the United States described the impact of COVID-19 on their lives and professional practice in 2020. The authors reported 15 different themes, showing both increased pressure and challenges faced by the system and its professionals during the pandemic. What is unclear from the current research, however, is whether such themes would replicate within the context of a developing nation, such as Brazil.

Model by Katz, Priolo Filho et al. (2021) adapted with participants' quotes.

CPPs have become an increasingly vital part of Brazilian society since the democratization of Brazil in 1990, which led to greater legal recognition of children's right to personal safety ( Lopes & Ferreira, 2010 ). Brazil currently has an integrated child protection system with professionals from different fields, such as child protection, healthcare, education, and law, responsible for assessing, responding to, and maintaining children's safety in their homes. CPPs have mandatory reporting regarding suspicious cases of child abuse ( Ministry of Health, 2002 ; Rates et al., 2015 ). As mandatory reporters, these CPPs must be trained on and able to provide the child and family with access to care across different professionals realms and areas (i.e., social work, healthcare), including the specialized Conselho Tutelar (Child Protective Services). Legislation created since democratization in the 1980s was an attempt to build a coordinated protection network in which health, education, social work, and the legal system prevent, intervene, and improve the condition of child maltreatment ( Prinz, 2016 ). Despite its centralized structure, child protection varies across Brazil. Funding, number of services, and number of professionals vary according to local city council decisions.

Brazil's child protection system has a federal governing body that oversees state and local CPS ( Gonçalves & Garcia, 2007 ). Suspicious cases of child abuse must be reported by professionals to their local CPS or police corps, with the possibility of providing an anonymous report ( Ministry of Health, 2002 ; Rates et al., 2015 ). CPS must investigate the case, sometimes with the support of the police, and ultimately report whether the report was founded or unfounded. During this period of investigation, CPS may provide referrals for the family, including medical support and social welfare support. CPS also works with schools to obtain information to guide their investigation and future interventions.

The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic placed a strain on this nascent but promising Brazilian system. Due to concerns about viral spread and to protect public health, new measures and actions in the child protection system were necessary. For example, home visits in a time of social distancing were not possible, even though assessments of the ‘home condition’ are considered vital in child neglect and maltreatment investigations ( Ferguson, 2009 ). In Brazil, the lack of proper funding for CPS before and during the pandemic, and the absence of a national policy during the pandemic for those professionals, compounded the CPPs' struggles to provide services. Priolo Filho et al. (2020) and Goldfarb et al. (2022) surveyed Brazilian CPPs about their working conditions during 2020 and 2021 COVID-19 pandemic. They found that CPPs reported an increase in work hours, a lack of information regarding the number of child abuse cases during the pandemic, and that resilience predicted lower mental distress during those enduring times. No work yet, however, has qualitatively analyzed CPPs' beliefs about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in their activities on a developing nation and compared those to results found in a developed nation, such as the United States ( Whitt-Woosley et al., 2022 ).

1.1. Present study

Here, we sought to address that gap. Specifically, we conducted a qualitative analysis of CPPs' perceptions of the protection of children and their working conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic. The ongoing pandemic provides a unique context within which to study CPPs' perceptions of the struggles and barriers they face during a time of acute crisis. Additionally, given that Brazil's government has undergone many political and structural changes in recent years, there is no historical precedence on how CPPs manage their work in a challenging time like the COVID-19 pandemic. Such data can help improve CPPs' working environment during the pandemic, as well as provide guidance to CPPs in the event of a future catastrophic event (e.g., natural disaster). This will enable professionals to better secure children's right to safety.

Surveys are a useful method for gathering qualitative data, especially when a larger sample is necessary, as was the case here, to investigate social norms and social experiences that were differentially experienced depending on participants' occupation, education, and geographic location ( Braun et al., 2021 ). Given that this data was gathered during times of social isolation and were on topics that had previously not been studied, an online survey permitted longer responses without requiring the increased bandwidth necessary for online video interviews ( Burton et al., 2012 ; Torrentira, 2020 ). Surveys also allowed us to reach a large number of participants, while still maintaining privacy in smaller communities with fewer CPS workers. Privacy was particularly important here as we were exploring a sensitive theme during the pandemic ( Braun et al., 2021 ; Burton et al., 2012 ; Sousa & Santos, 2020 ). Online qualitative data collection balanced the needs arising from pandemic data collection with the weaknesses of such an approach ( Braun et al., 2021 ; Burton et al., 2012 ; Sousa & Santos, 2020 ; Torrentira, 2020 ).

2.1. Participants

Three hundred and nine professionals, all of whom worked in child protection-related fields (e.g., psychologists, social workers, teachers, pediatricians, nurses, and legal professionals), participated in this study (89.05 % female). Participants were recruited from five different regions in Brazil (i.e., North, Northeast, Central, Southeast, and South). The average age of participants was 40.26 years ( SD age  = 10.27), with a mean of 14.17 ( SD age  = 10.19) years of experience. A majority of the participants worked as educators (38.5 %), followed by psychologists (27.5 %), healthcare professionals (17.5 %), legal professionals (9.4 %), social workers (5.2 %), and other professionals (2.5 %). Further details about the sample can be found in Priolo Filho et al. (2020) .

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. demographic measure.

Participants answered demographic questions about their age, gender, profession, the number of years that they had worked in the child protection-related field, and weekly workload during the COVID-19 pandemic.

2.2.2. State of CPP practice in the pandemic

The survey was created by the authors and contained a qualitative and a quantitative section. The quantitative area contained the CPPs' Perceptions of Work Conditions during the Pandemic and Professional Resilient Behaviors Measure. Quantitative analyses are available in Priolo Filho et al. (2020) After the quantitative questions, the participants answered the two open-ended questions that asked CPPs about their current practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, participants were asked: “In your opinion, what are the biggest challenges for Brazilian child protection professionals during the pandemic?” and “Would you like to tell us more about protecting children, your work, or the pandemic, or anything else that we have not addressed?”. All questions and instructions to participants were in Brazilian Portuguese.

2.3. Procedure

Participants were invited to participate in the study through social media and professional networks. Participants were asked to send the study invitation to their colleagues or coworkers through a snowball sampling that is thought to be particularly beneficial for reaching participants with unique characteristics, such as CPPs ( Baltar & Brunet, 2012 ). The study invitation included a link to the consent form. Once consent was obtained, participants were redirected to the demographic questionnaire, a measure of pandemic-related resilient behaviors (see Priolo Filho et al., 2020 for further details), and the two open-ended questions regarding their professional experiences during the pandemic. At the end of the survey, participants received links to resources on resilience such as relaxation videos, crossword puzzles, and a research paper about resilience importance and engagement ( Priolo Filho & Rodrigues, 2018 ).

2.4. Data analysis

A qualitative content analysis was used here ( Bardin, 2011 ; Sousa & Santos, 2020 ). The methodology has been used in previous studies of professionals' perceptions of child maltreatment (see Dahlbo et al., 2017 ); The specific qualitative content analysis here has three phases (pre-analysis, category creation, and coding, and interpretation) and involves frequent team discussions regarding the coding process (i.e., consensus workshops). During the pre-analysis phase, the coders reviewed the participants' responses to gain familiarity with the content within and across responses. Second, in the category creation and coding phase, the five coders (authors on this paper) each independently reported the categories they thought emerged from the responses and then met to develop a consensus as to the categories the team saw in the data. In the end, the coders reported five categories (see Table 1 for the five categories). The coders then divided participants' responses into registry units (e.g., a sentence, a fragment of a sentence, a whole paragraph). Coders identified 232 units in the participants' responses to the first question (i.e., the biggest challenges for CPPs in the pandemic) and 89 units in response to the second question (i.e., tell us more about protecting children, your work, or the pandemic).

Five categories and definitions obtained after data analysis procedure.

Next, the five coders categorized each unit into the five identified categories, with every unit only being able to be classified into one category. The coders then met again to determine whether all 5 coders agreed on the categorization of the units. Raters revealed a high rate of agreement in categorization, with 98 % agreement across all five coders across all the codes.

The third and final phase of the analysis, the interpretation of the results, includes the interpretation of the coding. The same five judges as in the second phase analyzed all of the responses, codes, categories, and stages of categorization and discussed their interpretation of the results. The responses, the categories, and the interpretation are all discussed below.

The average length of each response was 21.24 words. Table 2 shows the percentage of the CPPs' responses that addressed each of the five categories. Responses are further divided into the five different CPP fields represented in our sample. This division permitted insight into which of the categories was most frequently addressed depending on the participants' professional field. For instance, overall, professionals most frequently discussed the Pandemic's Impact on CPPs' Work , except for social workers who focused on Vulnerability due to the Pandemic. Each of the categories is addressed below. The original responses were provided by the participants in Portuguese and translated into English. We attempted to maintain the participants' original words and phrasing. Due to this fact, minor grammatical issues may persist in the quotations below.

Participants' responses in each category by profession.

Note: the numbers outside the parentheses are raw frequencies.

3.1. Pandemic's impact on CPPs' work

The Pandemic category refers to responses concerning the impact of COVID-19 on CPPs' work and/or CPP-involved families. For example, CPPs mentioned that they had not been able to assess children's safety in the children's homes because of social distancing guidelines . One participant stated, “Being able to see if something is wrong with the families due to social distancing, as the children are not attending school, it becomes more difficult to perceive something” (ID13, Female, 33-year-old, Teacher, Paraná, Human Development Index (HDI) 0.655). Similarly, CPPs expressed their frustration with not being able to have face-to-face monitoring of children's safety: “The biggest challenge is the distance and the impossibility of visiting them” (ID249, Male, 22-year-old, Teacher, Santa Catarina, HDI 0.755); “Not having access to the children and monitoring their development, not knowing if they are in a toxic environment or not” (ID52, Female, 62-year-old, Pre-school teacher, Paraná, HDI 0.672). This same concern was expressed by two legal professionals: “In my work, we are avoiding home visits and face-to-face contacts, but it is very difficult to observe a family from whom there are reports of ill-treatment without any direct contact” (ID299, Female, 23-year-old, Lawyer, São Paulo, HDI 0.700); “Professional structure and equipment for monitoring, monitoring and assistance for these children, as well as for the families” (ID175, Female, 39-year-old, Lawyer, Paraná, HDI 0.699). The professionals stated that the lack of active monitoring due to the pandemic could have devastating consequences on children's safety.

Another concern expressed in the responses that fell under the Pandemic category was the loss of the school system as an avenue for reporting maltreatment and an agent of prevention of maltreatment . “There is, then, a reduction in access to public and institutional support systems, such as schools, daycare centers, churches, which makes it difficult to seek help and protection” (ID82, Male, 46-year-old, Prosecutor, Paraná, HDI 0.782). Another participant, a teacher, similarly expressed concerns that they were unable to physically assess children in the neutral school environment: “When you see the child at school, for example, it is sometimes possible to notice a bruise or behavioral change” (ID56, Female, 33-year-old, Pre-school Teacher, Paraná, HDI 0.823). CPPs were thus concerned about how the pandemic has negatively affected safety measures that are used to protect children.

Lastly, CPPs mentioned that they have been increasingly focusing on children's mental health during the pandemic . “The social isolation itself. Many children staying at home can get anxiety and thus demanding more from their parents” (ID159, Female, 23-year-old, Psychologist, Paraná, HDI 0.823); “I would include how to deal with the stress of these children inside the house without leaving for anything” (ID36, Male, 36-year-old, Juvenile Correction Officer, São Paulo, HDI 0.823). Medical professionals also noted increasing concerns about mental health: “I am a pediatrician and I realize that both parents and children are much more stressed/nervous/insecure about the pandemic, which makes children more irritable/insecure/disobedient/anxious” (ID53, Male, 53-year-old, Pediatrician, Paraná, HDI 0.782). CPPs reported teaching children the value of having a daily routine to prevent or decrease acute anxiety and stress during uncertain times, including setting a wake-up time, scheduling mealtimes, doing daily activities, then going to bed.

3.2. Impact of the pandemic on CPP-involved families

The Impact of the Pandemic on CPP-Involved Families category captured CPPs' difficulty in assessing families during the pandemic and the challenges families faced during this particular time. Some professionals noted that the pandemic was increasing stressors that were, in turn, hampering families' abilities to meet their children's needs . For instance, one professional mentioned struggling with helping families adjust to their new environment and was focusing on teaching parents how to interact with their children in isolation, “Playing with children, understanding their fun and how parents can interact” (ID276, Male, 26-year-old, Lawyer, Rio de Janeiro, HDI 0.716).

CPPs also expressed concerns about families' current living situations, particularly where children were now living full-time with their alleged aggressor . Indeed, CPPs often used phrases like “increased time with the ‘abuser’ at home” (ID197, Female, 30-year-old, Nurse, São Paulo, HDI 0.778). They were also concerned that children being restricted to their homes decreased children's ability to access resources (“Absence from school and the time the child spends at school/daycare helps to stimulate development and social relationships, in addition to providing access to meals. Often, the domestic environment does not provide adequate conditions for development and the school partially compensates for this” (ID245, Female, 32-year-old, Nurse, São Paulo, HDI 0.785), while also damaging family dynamics and increasing risk (“…increase in anxiety and stress experienced by adults is also dangerous for the children, which can decrease patience and increase physical and psychological violence” (ID48, Female, 40-year-old, Psychologist, Paraná, HDI 0.823)). Indeed, many CPPs reported that “parents and children are way more stressed during the pandemic than before” (ID116, Female, 56-year-old, Pediatrician, São Paulo, HDI 0.750), and that “parents are too stressed because of all the problems of the pandemic, and that stress carries to us, professionals” (ID194, Female, 44-year-old, Nurse, Santa Catarina, HDI 0.827).

3.3. Occupational concerns during the pandemic

The Occupational Concerns during the Pandemic category captured professionals' workplace challenges in general, as well as those attributable to the pandemic. Many CPPs reported the need for additional training to respond to the challenges arising from the pandemic . A significant number of CPPs expressed the need for more training on identifying and intervening in violent situations. For example, a professional stated, “Unfortunately, some professionals fail to notice the small warning signs that a child gives in their actions and even in their parents' complaints” (ID30, Male, 52-year-old, Nurse, Paraná, HDI 0.823). Another professional responded, “Knowing how to identify warning signs that a child experiences during contact with them” (ID298, Female, 55-year-old, Educational Psychologist, Minas Gerais, HDI 0.789). As a result of a lack of training, CPPs are concerned that cases of child maltreatment end up not being identified and reported.

Participants also described the lack of teamwork, collaboration, and support between child-protection-focused agencies . For example, a professional stated, “Work in an intersectional way, create and maintain solid dialogues between health policy, social work and especially education policies. Make these dialogues reach the top workers in the form of more effective actions, in the reduction of bureaucracies, etc.” (ID47, Female, 27-year-old, Child Protective Services Agent, São Paulo, HDI 0.840). Another professional mentioned, “The biggest challenge is not being able to count on some agencies of the safety net, as some of them do not even attend the meetings to discuss the referrals to be taken in situations of social vulnerability” (ID83, Female, 46-year-old, Prosecutor, Paraná, 0,763). One key aspect noted by the CPPs was the need to grow such support from leaders in their organization: “support from the managers, in the sense of seeking to understand the role of each tool/service and professional, so that they validate the necessary actions” (ID54, Female, 31-year-old, Lawyer, Santa Catarina, HDI 0.681).

Professionals also expressed concerns as to their workplaces adequately responding to and preparing them for the COVID-19 pandemic . One professional detailed the lack of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in her workplace– “there is protection, but it is not enough, because they often spend many hours with the same PPE” (ID272, Female, 47-year-old, Teacher, Paraná, HDI 0.742). Others were concerned about the lack of support for remote working. In addition, disparities in access to new technology among professionals interfered with CPPs' responsibilities. Professionals mentioned the “lack of skill in the use of online platforms” (ID207, Female, 57-year-old, CPS agent, Rio de Janeiro, HDI 0.716) and “lack of habit of a large part of the population in online communication, even though the technology is present in most homes, including smartphones” (ID217, Male, 48-year-old, Lawyer, São Paulo, HDI 0.781).

3.4. Politics and the pandemic

The responses in the Politics and the Pandemic category reflect criticisms of public policies . For instance, a professional reported, “There is no technical guidance in this regard [to the challenges during the pandemic]” (ID32, Female, 52-year-old, Teacher, Paraná, HDI 0.823). Another professional stated, “I would like there to be greater national mobilization and a look at this demand” (ID256, Female, 42-year-old, Lawyer, São Paulo, HDI 0.800). CPPs also pointed out that public policies for child protection need more attention. For instance, a professional responded, “May the safety services network actually work, even when we report the child protective services network act slowly or do not even take notice of cases when we contact them to discuss it” (ID215, Female, 34-year-old, Nurse, São Paulo, HDI 0.805). One CPP noted the explicit connection between public policies and potential harm for families and children: “The lack of public policies increases the vulnerabilities of families, and children” (ID220, Female, 56-year-old, Teacher, Paraná, HDI 0.823).

3.5. Vulnerability due to the pandemic

The Vulnerability Due to the Pandemic category included responses indicating potential risks of increased violence and vulnerability to children . One participant mentioned, “Many children do not have access to the internet and do not even know this reality, so they do not even know that they can ask for help” (ID48, Female, 48-year-old, Nurse, São Paulo, HDI 0.805). Another participant reported, “Many do not have access to technology and those who do, do not always have quality internet access” (ID258, Male, 37-year-old, Psychologist, Rio Grande do Sul, HDI 0.805). CPPs also were concerned that delays and failures in resolving cases resulted in sending victimized children back home making the children more vulnerable to violence: “The mismatch of information leads to delays in resolving situations presented in the CPS” (ID153, Female, 45-year-old, CPS Agent, São Paulo, HDI 0.798). For instance, one participant mentioned, “The biggest challenge is the mismatch of information. It takes a long time to resolve the situations presented in the Protection Network. Complicated when the victim returns to the aggressor's house” (ID29, Female, 42-year-old, Pediatrician, Paraná, HDI 0.700).

4. Discussion

Here, we qualitatively analyzed over 300 CPPs' reflections on the struggles and barriers faced by their profession during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our analyses revealed five key categories across the statements, many of them centered on concerns about protecting children's right to safety. Below, we review the key findings from these analyses, discuss how the research aligns with prior work, and note the interrelated nature of these five categories. Finally, we discuss the application of this research to professional and research settings.

Across all five categories (P andemic's Impact on CPPs' work; Impact of the Pandemic on CPP-Involved Families, Occupation Concerns During the Pandemic; Politics and the Pandemic; and Vulnerability Due to the Pandemic ), CPPs reported a concern that the pandemic was hampering their ability to adequately do their job, potentially decreasing their ability to protect children from an increasingly alarming situation. These findings align with prior quantitative analyses within the same sample ( Priolo Filho et al., 2020 ) and theoretical and empirical research with CPPs internationally ( Katz, Katz, et al., 2021 ; Renov et al., 2021 ; Teo & Griffiths, 2020 ; Whitt-Woosley et al., 2022 ). Indeed, despite cultural and organizational differences between CPS in Brazil and the United States, similar categories were identified here and in Whitt-Woosley et al.'s (2022) qualitative analysis of American CPPs. CPPs in both countries noted that it was more difficult to conduct assessments, the pandemic negatively impacted cases, and that it was a challenge to balance work and home life. Politics did not appear to be mentioned as frequently by the CPPs working in the United States, with Brazilian CPPs presenting complaints regarding the lack of guidelines from the government during the pandemic. This might be due to a centralized child protection system and a more centralized response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have led to more of a uniformity in experience in the connection between the two for CPPs in Brazil.

Our sample has a wide range of types of professionals who were interviewed as CPPs. However, this study shows that despite working in different fields, such as education, law, or medicine CPPs in Brazil still share similar concerns and challenges during the pandemic. We believe this is because all CPPs are part of the centralized child protection system in Brazil ( Ministry of Health, 2002 ), therefore, their responsibilities as CPPs shares areas of overlap even though they would be dealing with children in different circumstances. Thus, this study highlights the impact of a unified response while investigating different professional categories during the pandemic.

Brazil has one of the highest numbers of cases and deaths due to COVID-19 ( Johns Hopkins, 2022 ) and concerns have been raised regarding whether the government sufficiently responded to the pandemic ( The Lancet, 2020 ). Although finding commonalities in struggles across CPPs throughout the world can be disheartening, it is also a reminder of the value and strength of international research. Hearing the voices of CPPs from one country can also be informative and a source of insight for professionals in other countries.

Fig. 1 presents the model by Katz, Priolo Filho, et al. (2021) with quotes from our participants placed within the relevant category of the ecological model. Katz and colleagues' proposed ecological framework encourages researchers to consider the interrelated and interdependent nature of individual and interpersonal interactions (e.g., school closings, parent' behavior), neighborhood and communities (e.g., family-services communication), and societal and cultural context (e.g., policy) on CPPs' and the families that they serve. Although each of our five categories were discussed separately above, many of the CPPs' responses reflect the interrelated nature encouraged by this framework. For instance, one CPP noted that the lack of policies had a direct impact on failures to protect children. Others, however, noted that the decrease in community-level services had impacted parent's behavior, which in turn could have resulted in decreased safety for children. These results highlight that a single-component response to the pandemic's effects on CPPs cannot capture the full impact of such a crisis on both the professionals themselves but also on the families that they support.

Across both our qualitative and quantitative analyses ( Goldfarb et al., 2022 ; Priolo Filho et al., 2020 ), CPPs noted the central importance of the workplace in bolstering their resiliency to this pandemic. CPPs here provided further insight into how they thought that such change might be necessary on a policy level to help increase coordination of agencies and professionals who protect children. Such policy change within Brazil may be particularly powerful given the federal nature of child protection and the geographic size of the country.

Although the data here was gathered during the pandemic, which provided a unique lens through which to study CPPs' work environment, it is vital to note that resolving this international health crisis is not a panacea for these issues. CPPs deal with families during crises and must support and guide children through one of those most difficult times in their life; such work has consistently been found to be stressful and to potentially lead to burnout ( Bride et al., 2007 ; Drake & Yadama, 1996 ; Griffiths et al., 2018 ; Tavormina & Clossey, 2017 ). The pandemic may have exacerbated many of these issues, but these problems existed prior to the outbreak of COVID-19. Policies thus must bolster support for CPPs. One potential pathway for support may be a continued focus on providing CPPs with space to practice resilient behaviors and analyzing the unmet needs of CPPs both during and after the pandemic concludes ( Goldfarb et al., 2022 ; Liu et al., 2017 , Liu et al., 2020 ; Priolo Filho et al., 2020 ).

5. Conclusion

As evidenced by the responses gathered from CPPs, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted and exacerbated the vulnerabilities of the child protection system in Brazil. The five categories compiled in this study aim to bring attention and awareness to the struggles faced by the CPPs during a time when vulnerable populations were placed even more at risk. The qualitative analysis here, however, has the additional benefit of allowing professionals to state their concerns in their own words and allows the identification of themes that may not be apparent in quantitative research. Providing CPPs with a voice to talk about their work may bolster CPPs' mental health and decrease burnout ( Griffiths & Royse, 2017 ; Tavormina & Clossey, 2017 ). As one professional stated, “Everything I have answered in this research is important to me. We have to take care of our minds before, during, and after the pandemic. Thank you for this” (ID139, Female, 39-year-old, Teacher, São Paulo, HDI 0.805). This work, hopefully, provides a powerful window into the incredible value of the work conducted by these professionals and allows us to hear the reforms that can further enable them to protect children's safety.

Declaration of competing interest

The Author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest or funding provided for this research.

Acknowledgments

We want to thank the participants for their continuous effort during COVID-19 to protect children and families.

Data availability

• Baltar F., Brunet I. Social research 2.0: virtual snowball sampling method using Facebook. Internet Research. 2012; 22 (1):57–74. doi: 10.1108/10662241211199960. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bardin L. Almedina; São Paulo: 2011. Análise de conteúdo [Content analysis] [ Google Scholar ]
• Braun V., Clarke V., Boulton E., Davey L., McEvoy C. The online survey as a qualitative research tool. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2021; 24 (6):641–654. doi: 10.1080/13645579.2020.1805550. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bride B.E., Jones J.L., MacMaster S.A. Correlates of secondary traumatic stress in child protective services workers. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work. 2007; 4 (3–4):69–80. doi: 10.1300/J394v04n03_05. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Burton W.B., Civitano A., Steiner-Grossman P. Online versus paper evaluations: differences in both quantitative and qualitative data. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. 2012; 24 :58–69. doi: 10.1007/s12528-012-9053-3. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dahlbo M., Jakobsson L., Lundqvist P. Keeping the child in focus while supporting the family: Swedish child healthcare nurses experiences of encountering families where child maltreatment is present or suspected. Journal of child health care. 2017; 21 (1):103–111. doi: 10.1177/1367493516686200. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Drake B., Yadama G.N. A structural equation model of burnout and job exit among child protective services workers. Social Work Research. 1996; 20 (3):179–187. doi: 10.1093/swr/20.3.179. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ferguson H. Performing child protection: Home visiting, movement and the struggle to reach the abused child. Child & Family Social Work. 2009; 14 (4):471–480. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2206.2009.00630.x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldfarb D., Zibetti M.R., Liu J.J., Priolo Filho S.R., Aznar-Blefari C. Resilience during times of enduring challenge: Brazilian Child Protection Professionals' resilience and psychological distress one year into the COVID-19 pandemic. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2022; 134 doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2022.105925. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gonçalves H.S., Garcia J. Youth and rights system in Brazil. Psicologia: Ciência e Profissão. 2007; 27 :538–553. doi: 10.1590/S1414-98932007000300013. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Griffiths A., Royse D. Unheard voices: Why former child welfare workers left their positions. Journal of Public Child Welfare. 2017; 11 (1):73–90. doi: 10.1080/15548732.2016.1232210. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Griffiths A., Royse D., Walker R. Stress among child protective service workers: Self-reported health consequences. Children and Youth Services Review. 2018; 90 :46–53. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2018.05.011. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johns Hopkins . Johns Hopkins – Coronavirus Resource Center; 2022. COVID-19 dashboard. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html [ Google Scholar ]
• Katz I., Katz C., Andresen S., Bérubé A., Collin-Vézina D., Fallon B., Fouché A., Haffejee S., Masrawa N., Muñoz P., Priolo-Filho S.R., Tarabulsy G., Truter E., Varela N., Wekerle C. Child maltreatment reports and child protection service responses during COVID-19: Knowledge exchange among Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Germany, Israel, and South Africa. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2021; 116 doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105078. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Katz C., Priolo Filho S.R., Korbin J., Bérubé A., Fouche A., Haffejee S., Kaawa-Mafgiri D., Maguire-Jack K., Muñoz P., Spilsbury J., Tarabulsy G., Tiwari A., Levine D.T., Truter E., Varela N. Child maltreatment in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic: A proposed global framework on research, policy and practice. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2021; 116 doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.1048249. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu J.J., Reed M., Fung K.P. Advancements to the Multi-System Model of Resilience: Updates from empirical evidence. Heliyon. 2020; 6 (9) doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04831. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu J.J., Reed M., Girard T.A. Advancing resilience: An integrative, multi-system model of resilience. Personality and Individual Differences. 2017; 111 :111–118. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.02.007. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lopes J.P., Ferreira L.M. Breve Histórico dos Direitos das Crianças e dos Adolescentes e as Inovações do Estatuto da Criança e do Adolescente – Lei 12.010/09 [Brief history of children and adolescents rights and innovations in the statute for children and adolescents – law 12.010/09] Revista Do Curso de Direito. 2010; 7 (7):70–86. doi: 10.15603/2176-1094/rcd.v7n7p70-86. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ministry of Health.(2002). Notificação de maus-tratos contra crianças e adolescentes pelos profissionais de saúde [Child and adolescent abuse Reporting by healthcare professionals]. Ministério da Saúde, Brasília Available at. https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/publicacoes/notificacao_maustratos_criancas_adolescentes.pdf .
• Prinz R.J. Parenting and family support within a broad child abuse prevention strategy: Child maltreatment prevention can benefit from public health strategies. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2016; 51 :400–406. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.10.015. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Priolo Filho S.R., Goldfarb D., Zibetti M.R., Aznar-Blefari C. Brazilian child protection professionals' resilient behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2020; 110 doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104701. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Priolo Filho S.R., Rodrigues M.B. Resilience and healthy development promotion on childhood, adolescence and adulthood: new discussions on psychological definitions. Psicologia Argumento. 2018; 36 (92):163–174. doi: 10.7213/psicolargum.36.92.AO02. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rates S.M.M., Melo E.M.D., Mascarenhas M.D.M., Malta D.C. Violence against children: an analysis of mandatory reporting of violence, Brazil 2011. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2015; 20 :655–665. doi: 10.1590/1413-81232015203.15242014. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Renov V., Risser L., Berger R., Hurley T., Villaveces A., DeGue S., Ragavan M.… The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on child protective services caseworkers and administrators. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2021; 105431 doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105431. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sousa J.R., Santos S.C.M. Content analysis in qualitative research: Way of thinking and doing. Pesquisa e Debate em Educação. 2020; 10 (2):1396–1416. doi: 10.34019/2237-9444.2020.v10.31559. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tavormina M., Clossey L. Exploring crisis and its effects on workers in child protective services work. Child & Family Social Work. 2017; 22 (1):126–136. doi: 10.1111/cfs.12209. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Teo S.S.S., Griffiths G. Child protection in the time of COVID-19. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health. 2020; 56 (6):838–840. doi: 10.1111/jpc.14916. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• The Lancet COVID-19 in Brazil: “So what?” Lancet. 2020; 395 (10235):1461. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31095-3. London, England. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Torrentira M. Combating COVID-19 pandemic: The best management practices of a designated hospital in southern Philippines. Journal of Business and Management Studies. 2020; 2 (2):11–15. https://al-kindipublisher.com/index.php/jbms/article/view/462 Retrieved from. [ Google Scholar ]
• Whitt-Woosley A., Sprang G., Eslinger J. Foster care during the COVID-19 pandemic: A qualitative analysis of caregiver and professional experiences. Child Abuse & Neglect. 2022; 124 doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105444. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Child Protection: A Child Rights Approach for Schools

• First Online: 19 May 2020

Cite this chapter

• Christina M. Fiorvanti 4 , 5 &
• Marla R. Brassard 5  

1057 Accesses

2 Citations

This chapter describes how child protection – protecting children from abuse and neglect and promoting their well-being – is conceptualized in a child-rights informed school psychology practice framework. The goal of such practice is to prevent violence and neglect before it occurs by valuing all children and creating school environments and communities that promote their full development. This approach focuses on promotion and prevention by raising consciousness about human and child rights, creating open dialogue, teaching skills (including how to protect oneself from abuse and speak up if it occurs), building stronger relationships, implementing and evaluating effective policy, increasing child participation, and embracing advocacy – all of which improve school climates. When maltreatment does occur, the goal is to respond in a way that both protects and supports the child and the family. The chapter describes effective child protection practice from an international perspective, recommends country and local goal setting for monitoring progress relevant to child protection, lists resources organized by student age and tier in a multitier framework from universal prevention (i.e., tier 1) to targeted intensive intervention (i.e., tier 3), presents a case study to illustrate aspects of the framework, and calls for school psychologists to participate in integrated developmental and intervention science and advocacy as part of global efforts focused on child rights and children’s well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Child Friendly Schools: Challenges and Issues in Creating a Positive and Protective School Environment

Building Strong Children Together: Ending Child Maltreatment in Our Lifetime Through Disruption of Educational Systems and Approaches

Child Protection Across Worlds: Young People’s Challenges Within and Outside of Child Protection Programmes in UK and Zanzibar Schools

The training manual is available as an online accompanying resource to this volume. See also Tulane University Child Rights Team (TURC, 2013 ) and Table 2 for information about the self-study version.

Association of International Schools in Africa. (2014). Child protection handbook: For teachers, administrators, and board members (3rd ed.). Retrieved from https://www.aisa.or.ke/images/PDF/AISA_-_Child-Protection-Handbook_3rd_Edition.pdf

Bajaj, M. (2011). Teaching to transform, transforming to teach: Exploring the role of teachers in human rights education in India. Educational Research, 53 (2), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2011.572369

Article   Google Scholar  

Beckmann, K. A., Knitzer, J., Cooper, J. L., & Dicker, S. (2010). Supporting parents of young children in the child welfare system. National Center for Children in Poverty. Retrieved from Columbia University Academic Commons: https://hdl.handle.net/10022/AC:P:8864

Biglan, A., Flay, B. R., Embry, D. D., & Sandler, I. N. (2012). The critical role of nurturing environments for promoting human well-being. American Psychologist, 67 (4), 257–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026796

Blum, R. (2007). Best practices: Building blocks for enhancing school environment . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Google Scholar  

Booren, L. M., & Handy, D. J. (2009). Students’ perceptions of the importance of school safety strategies: An introduction to the IPSS survey. Journal of School Violence, 8 (3), 233–250.

Bradshaw, C. P. (2015). Translating research to practice in bullying prevention. American Psychologist, 70 (4), 322–332. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039114

Brassard, M. R., & Donovan, K. M. (2006). Defining psychological maltreatment. In M. Feerick, J. F. Knutson, P. K. Trickett, & S. Flanzer (Eds.), Child abuse and neglect: Definitions, classifications, and framework for research (pp. 151–197). Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.

Brassard, M. R., & Fiorvanti, C. M. (2015). School-based child abuse prevention programs. Psychology in the Schools, 52 (1), 40–60. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21811

Brassard, M. R., & Rivelis, E. (2006). Psychological and physical abuse. In G. Bear & K. Minke (Eds.), Children’s needs III: Understanding and addressing the developmental needs of children (pp. 799–820). Bethesda, MD: NASP.

Brassard, M. R., Rivelis, E., & Diaz, V. (2009). School-based counseling of abused children. Psychology in the Schools, 46 (3), 206–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20365

Brendgen, M., Wanner, B., & Vitaro, F. (2006). Verbal abuse by the teacher and child adjustment from Kindergarten through grade 6. Pediatrics, 117 (5), 51585–51598. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2005-2050

Briggs, R. D., Stettler, E. M., Silver, E. J., Schrag, R. D., Nayak, M., Chinitz, S., & Racine, A. D. (2012). Social-emotional screening for infants and toddlers in primary care. Pediatrics, 129 (2), e377–e384. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2010-2211

Britto, P. R., & Ulkuer, N. (2012). Child development in developing countries: Child rights and policy implications. Child Development, 83 (1), 92–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01672.x

Caspi, A., Harrington, H., Moffitt, T. E., Milne, B. J., & Poulton, R. (2006). Socially isolated children 20 years later: Risk of cardiovascular disease. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 160 (8), 805–811.

Catterall, C. D. (1979a). Children’s psychological rights. School Psychology International, 1 (1), 6–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/014303437900100103

Catterall, C. D. (1979b). Children’s rights. School Psychology International, 1 (1), 32. https://doi.org/10.1177/014303437900100115

Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2015). Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey . Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/index.htm

Center for Supportive Schools. (undated). Peer Group Connection . Retrieved from http://www.supportiveschools.org/solutions/peer-group-connection/

Center on the Social and Emotional Foundations of Early Learning [CSEFEL]. (undated). Retrieved from http://csefel.vanderbilt.edu/

Child Welfare Information Gateway. (2011). About CAPTA: A legislative history . Washington, D.C.: Children’s Bureau, Administration on Children, Youth, and Families. Retrieved from https://www.childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/about.pdf

Children’s Bill of Rights Secretariat. (1996). Children’s bill of rights . Bethesda, MD. Retrieved from http://www.newciv.org/ncn/cbor.html

Cohen, J., McCabe, E. M., Michelli, N. M., & Pickeral, T. (2009). School climate: Research, policy, practice, and teacher education. Teachers College Record, 111 (1), 180–213.

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning [CASEL]. (undated). Classroom-based social emotional learning programs . Retrieved from http://www.casel.org

Committee for Children. (1985–2001). Talking about touching . Seattle, WA. Retrieved from http://www.cfchildren.org/child-protection/talking-about-touching

Committee for Children. (2001). Steps to respect: A bullying prevention program. Seattle, WA. Retrieved from http://www.cfchildren.org/steps-to-respect

Committee for Children. (2008). Second step: Student success through prevention program . Seattle, WA. Retrieved from http://www.cfchildren.org/second-step

Committee for Children. (2014). Second step: Child protection unit . Seattle, WA. Retrieved from http://www.cfchildren.org/child-protection

Crosson-Tower, C. (2003). The role of educators in preventing and responding to child abuse and neglect. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office on Child Abuse and Neglect. Washington, D.C.: National Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect.

Department of Education and Skills. (1999). Child protection procedures for primary and post-primary schools. Department of Education and Skills Northern Ireland. Retrieved from https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Child-Protection/cp_procedures_primary_post_primary_2011.pdf

Dignity in Schools Campaign. (2013). The model code on education and dignity: Presenting a human rights framework for schools . Retrieved from www.dignityinschools.org/files/Model_Code_2013.pdf

Downey, L. (2007). Calmer classrooms: A guide to working with traumatized children . Victoria, Australia: Child Safety Commissioner. Retrieved from http://www.traumainformedcareproject.org/resources/calmer_classrooms.pdf .

Durrant, J. E. (2003). Legal reform and attitudes toward physical punishment in Sweden. The International Journal of Children’s Rights, 11 (2), 147–173. https://doi.org/10.1163/092755603322397241

Engelbrecht, L. (2014). Assessment of International Schools and child protection systems: Filling in the gaps when effective systems are not in place. International Task Force on Child Protection: School Policies and Resources Committee. Retrieved from http://www.cois.org/uploaded/Documentation/About_CIS/International_Task_Force_on_Child_Protection_%E2%80%93_Updates/Community_Assessment_of_Child_Protection_Practices.pdf

Erwin, J. C. (2004). The classroom of choice: Giving students what they need and getting what you want . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Essex, M., Boyce, W. T., Hertzman, C., Lam, L. L., Armstrong, J. M., Neumann, S. M. A., & Kobor, M. S. (2013). Epigenetic vestiges of early developmental adversity: Childhood stress exposure and DNA methylation in adolescence. Child Development, 84 (1), 58–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j/1467-8624.2011.01641.x

Faber, A. (1995). How to talk so kids will learn . New York, NY: Scribner.

Faber, A., & Mazlish, E. (2012). How to talk so kids will listen, and listen so kids will talk . New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Felitti, V. J., Anda, R. F., Nordenburg, D., Williamson, D. F., Spitz, A. M., Edwards, V., … Marks, J. S. (1998). Relationship of childhood abuse and household dysfunction to many of the leading causes of death in adults: The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 14 (4), 245–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(98)00017-8

Fiorvanti, C. M. (2015). Family-school communication notebooks: An effective tool for promoting learning in young children with special needs? (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Columbia University Academic Commons, https://doi.org/10.7916/D8F76BBC

Fiorvanti, C. M., & Brassard, M. R. (2014). Advancing child protection through respecting children’s rights: A shifting emphasis for school psychology. School Psychology Review, 43 (4), 349–366.

Fletcher, A. F. C. (2013). SoundOut student voice curriculum: Teaching students to change schools . Olympia, WA: Common Action Consulting. Retrieved from http://www.SoundOut.org

Forrest, C. B., & Riley, A. W. (2004). Childhood origins of adult health: A basis for life-course health policy. Health Affairs, 23 (5), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.23.5.155

Foshee, V. A., Bauman, K. E., Ennett, S. T., Linder, G. F., Benefield, T., & Suchindran, C. (2004). Assessing the long term effects of the Safe Dates Program and a booster in preventing and reducing adolescent dating violence victimization and perpetration. American Journal of Public Health, 94 , 619–624.

Foshee, V. A., & Langwick, S. (2004). Safe dates: An adolescent dating abuse prevention curriculum . Center City, MN: Hazelden Publishing & Educational Services.

Georgetown University Center for Early Childhood Mental Health [CECMHC]. (undated). Early childhood mental health consultation. Retrieved from http://www.ecmhc.org/

Glasser, W. (1969). Schools without failure . New York, NY: Harper & Row.

Gottman, J. M. (1999). The marriage clinic: A scientifically based marital therapy . New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Gottman, J. M. (2001). Meta-emotion, children’s emotional intelligence, and buffering children from marital conflict. In C. D. Ryff & H. B. Singer (Eds.), Emotion, social relationships, and health. Series in affective science (pp. 23–40). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Greene, R. W. (2008). Lost at School: Why our kids with behavioral challenges are falling through the cracks and how we can help them . New York, NY: Scribner.

Greene, R. W. (undated). The collaborative and proactive solutions model . Retrieved from http://www.cpsconnection.com/

Hamm, J. V., Framer, T. W., Dadisman, K., Gravelle, M., & Murray, R. A. (2011). Teachers’ attunement to students’ peer group affiliations as a source of improved student experiences of the school social-affective context following the middle school transition. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 32 , 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2010.06.003

Harris, J., Davidson, L., Hayes, B., Humphreys, K., LaMarca, P., Berliner, B., … Van Houten, L. (2014). Speak Out, Listen Up! Tools for using student perspectives and local data for school improvement (REL 2014–035) . Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory West. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/west/pdf/REL_2014035.pdf

Hart, S. N. (2014). Child rights and school psychology: Toward a new social contract . Invited essay posted on Sage website: http://spi.sagepub.com/site/special_issues/childrights.xhtlm

Hart, S. N., Brassard, M. R., Davidson, H. A., Rivelis, E., Diaz-Thompson, V., & Binggelli, N. (2011). Psychological maltreatment. In J. E. B. Myers & APSAC (Eds.), The APSAC handbook on child maltreatment (3rd ed., pp. 125–144). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hart, S. N., & Hart, B. W. (2014). Children’s rights and school psychology: Historical perspective and implications for the profession. School Psychology International, 35 (1), 6–28.

Hertzman, C. (1999). The biological embedding of early experience and its effects on health in adulthood. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 896 , 85–95. PMID: 10681890.

Higgins-D’Alessandro, A., & Sadh, D. (1998). The dimensions and measurement of school culture: Understanding school culture as the basis for school reform. International Journal of Educational Research, 27 (7), 553–569.

Holmes, C., Levy, M., Smith, A., Pinne, S., & Neese, P. (2015). A model for creating a supportive trauma-informed culture for children in preschool settings. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 24 (6), 1650–1659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-9968-6

Horwitz, A. V., Widom, C. S., McLaughlin, J., & White, H. R. (2001). The impact of child abuse and neglect on adult mental health: A prospective study. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 42 (2), 184–201.

Institute of Community Integration at University of Minnesota. (undated). Check and connect. Retrieved from http://checkandconnect.umn.edu/

Jaffee, S. R., & Christian, C. W. (2014). The biological embedding of child abuse and neglect: Implications for policy and practice. SRCD: Social Policy Report, 28 (1), 1–19.

Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (2002). Teaching students to be peacemakers: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Education, 12 (1), 25–39.

Karcher, M. J. (2004). Connectedness and school violence: A framework for developmental interventions. In E. Gerler (Ed.), Handbook of school violence (pp. 7–42). Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press.

Kessler, R. C., Davis, C. G., & Kendler, K. S. (1997). Childhood adversity and adult psychiatric disorder in the US National Comorbidity Survey. Psychological Medicine, 27 (5), 1101–1119. PMID: 9300515

Khoury-Kassabri, M. (2011). Student victimization by peers in elementary schools: Individual, teacher-class, and school-level predictors. Child Abuse & Neglect, 35 (4), 273–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2011.01.004

Kraizer, S., & Coalition for Children. (1994–2005). The safe child program . Coalition for children . Retrieved from http://www.SafeChild.org

Kumpfer, K. L., Pinyuchon, M., de Melo, A. T., & Whiteside, H. O. (2008). Cultural adaptation process for international dissemination of the Strengthening Families Program. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 31 (2), 226–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278708315926

Lane, M., Robker, R. L., & Robertson, S. A. (2014). Parenting before conception. Science, 345 (6198), 756–760. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1254400

Lansdown, G. (2011). A framework for monitoring and evaluating children’s participation: A preparatory draft for piloting. Retrieved from crin.org

Lansford, J. E., & Deater-Deckard, K. (2012). Childrearing discipline and violence in developing countries. Child Development, 83 (1), 62–75. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01676.x

Larkins, C., Lansdown, G., & Jimerson, S. (2020). Participation, agency and school psychology. In B. Nastasi, S. N. Hart, & S. Naser, The international handbook on school psychology and child rights, pages xxx. New York, NY: Springer.

Lee, L. E., & Zimmerman, M. (1999). Passion, action and a new vision: Learnings from the Manitoba school improvement program Inc . Winnipeg, MB: Sun Valley Software.

Leff, S. S., Thomas, D. E., Vaughn, N. A., Thomas, N. A., MacEvoy, J. P., Freedman, M. A., … Fein, J. A. (2010). Using community-based participatory research to develop the PARTNERS Youth Violence Prevention Program. Progress in Community Health Partnerships: Research, Education, and Action, 4 (3), 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2010.0005

Leff, S. S., Gullan, R. L., Paskewich, B. S., Abdul-Kabir, S., Jawad, A. F., Grossman, M., … Power, T. J. (2009). An initial evaluation of a culturally adapted social problem solving and relational aggression prevention program for urban African American relationally aggressive girls. Journal of Prevention and Intervention in the Community, 37 (4), 260–274.

Lines, C., Miller, G. E., & Arthur-Stanley, A. (2011). The power of family-school partnering (FSP): A practical guide for school mental health professionals and educators . New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

MacIntyre, D., & Lawlor, M. (1991). The stay safe programme . Dublin, Ireland: Department of Health, Child Abuse Programme. Retrieved from http://www.staysafe.ie

MacMillan, H. L., Thomas, B. H., Jamieson, E., Walsh, C. A., Boyle, M. H., Shannon, H., & Gafni, A. (2005). Effectiveness of home visitation by public-health nurses in prevention of the recurrence of child physical abuse and neglect: A randomized control trial. Lancet, 365 , 1786–1793. PMID: 15910951

Marcynyszyn, L. A., Maher, E. J., & Corwin, T. W. (2011). Getting with the (evidence-based) program: An evaluation of the Incredible Years Parent Training Program in child welfare. Children and Youth Services Review, 33 , 747–757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2010.11.021

Mcloughlin, C. S., & Hart, S. N. (2014). Children’s rights and school psychology: An introduction to the multiple-journal series honoring the 25 th anniversary of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. School Psychology International, 35 (1), 3–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034313508876

Mitra, D. L. (2004). The significance of students: Can increasing “student voice” in schools lead to gains in youth development. Teachers College Record, 106 (4), 651–688.

National Association of School Psychologists. (2006). School psychology: A Blueprint for training and practice III . Bethesda, MD: NASP.

National Child Traumatic Stress Network. (2010). Caring for children who have experienced trauma. Retrieved from http://www.nctsn.org/products/caring-for-children-who-have-experienced-trauma

National Research Council & Institute of Medicine of the National Academies Committee on the Prevention of Mental Disorders and Substance Abuse among Children, Youth, and Young Adults: Research Advances and Promising Interventions. (2009). In M. E. O’Connell, T. Boat, & K. E. Warner (Eds.), Preventing mental, emotional, and behavioral disorders among young people: Progress and possibilities . Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.

Newcomer, L. (2007). Classroom systems of positive behavior support . Retrieved from http://opi.mt.gov/pdf/MBI/14SessionIV/AR/ClassroomPBSPlanningGuideLoriNewcomer.pdf

Noble, K. G., Houston, S. M., Brito, N. H., Bartsch, H., Kan, E., Kuperman, J. M., … Sowell, E. R. (2015). Family income, parental education and brain structure in children and adolescents. Nature Neuroscience, 18 (5), 773–778. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3983

Pianta, R. C., Mashburn, A. J., Downer, T. J., Hamm, B. K., & Justice, L. (2008). Efforts of web-mediated professional development on teacher-child interactions in pre-kindergarten classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23 , 431–451. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.02.001

Plummer, C. (2013). Using policies to promote child sexual abuse prevention: What is working? Harrisburg, PA: VAWnet, a project of the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence.

Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports: OSEP Technical Assistance Center. (undated). Retrieved from http://www.pbis.org

Power, F. C., & Higgins-D’Alessandro, A. (2008). The Just Community approach to moral education and the moral atmosphere of the school. In L. P. Nucci & D. Narvaez (Eds.), Handbook of moral and character education (pp. 230–247). New York, NY: Routledge.

Public Counsel. (undated). Fix school discipline toolkit for educators . Retrieved from http://fixschooldiscipline.org/

Ready, D. D. (2010). Socioeconomic disadvantage, school attendance, and early cognitive development: The differential effects of school exposure. Sociology of Education, 83 (4), 271–286.

Saarento, S., Boulton, A. J., & Salmivalli, C. (2015). Reducing bullying and victimization: Student- and classroom-level mechanisms of change. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43 (1), 61–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-013-9841-x

Sanders, M. R., & Kirby, J. N. (2014). A public-health approach to improving parenting and promoting children’s well-being. Child Development Perspectives, 8 (4), 250–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12086

Sanders, M. R., Turner, K. M. T., & Markie-Dadds, C. (1998). Practitioner’s manual for Enhanced Triple P . Brisbane, Australia: Families International Publishing.

Save the Children. (2006). Safe You and Safe Me: Child-friendly version of the Study on Violence Against Children . Retrieved from http://srsg.violenceagainstchildren.org/sites/default/files/images/childrens_corner/Safe_You_and_Safe_Me.pdf

Schilling, E. A., Aseltine, R. H., Jr., & Gore, S. (2007). Adverse childhood experiences and mental health in young adults: A longitudinal survey. BMC Public Health, 7 , 30. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-7-30

Shonkoff, J. P., Boyce, W. T., & McEwen, B. S. (2009). Neuroscience, molecular biology, and the childhood roots of health disparities: Building a new framework for health promotion and disease prevention. Journal of the American Medical Association, 301 (21), 2252–2259. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2009.754

Shonkoff, J. P., & Fisher, P. A. (2013). Rethinking evidence-based practice and two-generation programs to create the future of early childhood policy. Development and Psychopathology, 25 , 1635–1653. https://doi.org/10.1017/S09545794130000813

Stoner, J. B., & Angell, M. E. (2006). Parent perspectives on role engagement: An investigation of parents of children with ASD and their self-reported roles with education professionals. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 21 (3), 177–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/10883576060210030601

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: Schoolwide positive behavior supports. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 24 (1), 23–50. https://doi.org/10.1300/J019v24n01_03

Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting positive youth development through school-based social and emotional learning interventions: A meta-analysis of follow-up effects. Child Development, 88 (4), 1156–1171. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12864

Thomas, C., Hypponen, E., & Power, C. (2008). Obesity and type 2 diabetes risk in midadult life: The role of childhood adversity. Pediatrics, 121 , e1240–e1249. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2403

Troop-Gordon, W. (2015). The role of the classroom teacher in the lives of children victimized by peers. Child Development Perspectives, 9 (10), 55–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12106

Tulane University Child Rights Team [TUCRT]. (2013). Online self-study curriculum on child rights for school-based mental health professionals . New Orleans, LA: School Psychology Program, Tulane University. For more information, contact Bonnie Nastasi, [email protected]. [see also the training manual that is available as an accompanying resource to this volume].

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). (2007a). A human rights-based approach to education for all . Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/publications/files/A_Human_Rights_Based_Approach_to_Education_for_All.pdf .

United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). (2007b). Child poverty in perspective: An overview of child well-being in rich countries, Innocenti Report Card 7, 2007 . Florence, Italy: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.

United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF]. (2012). Measuring and monitoring child protection systems: Proposed core indicators for the East Asia and Pacific Region, strengthening child protection series no. 2 . Bangkok, Thailand: UNICEF EAPRO.

United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF]. (2015). A fair chance for every child: UNICEF Executive Board Special Section on equity – Conference room paper; Progress for children: Beyond averages – Learning from MDG’s; and committing to child survival: A promise renewed – Progress report 2015 . NY: UNICEF.

United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF]. (undated-a). Child-friendly version of the convention on the rights of the child. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/rightsite/files/uncrcchilldfriendlylanguage.pdf

United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF]. (undated-b). Multiple overlapping derivation analysis . Florence, Italy: Innocenti Research Centre. Retrieved from http://www.unicef-irc.org/MODA

United Nations Children’s Fund [UNICEF]. (undated-c). United Nations Secretary General’s Study on Violence Against Children adapted for children and young people . Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/violencestudy/pdf/Study%20on%20Violence_Child-friendly.pdf

United Nations General Assembly. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. Retrieved from http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx

United Nations General Assembly. (2011). General Comment 13, Committee on the rights of the child. Retrieved from www2.ohchr.org/English/bodies/crc/comments.htm

Webster-Stratton, C. (2006). The incredible years: A trouble-shooting guide for parents of children aged 2–8 years . Seattle, WA: The Incredible Years.

Webster-Stratton, C. (2011). The Incredible Years parents, teachers, and children’s training series: Program content, methods, research, and dissemination 1980–2011 . Seattle, WA: The Incredible Years.

Webster-Stratton, C. (2012). Incredible teachers: Nurturing children’s social, emotional, and academic competence . Seattle, WA: The Incredible Years.

Wolfe, D. A., Crooks, C. V., Hughes, R., & Jaffe, P. (2001). The Fourth R: A relationship-based approach to preventing violence and associated risk behaviours in school and communities . Retrieved from http://www.youthrelationships.org

Wolfe, D. A., Crooks, C. V., Jaffe, P., Chiodo, D., Hughes, R., Ellis, W., … Donner, A. (2009). A school-based program to prevent adolescent dating violence: A cluster randomized trial. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 163 (8), 692–699.

World Health Organization. (2016). INSPIRE: Seven strategies for ending violence against children . Geneva, Switzerland: WHO.

World Vision International. (2012). Child protection advocacy: Effective interventions for strengthening the child protection system at the local level. World Vision Guidance for Development Programmes.

Wuermli, A. J., Tubbs, C. C., Petersen, A. C., & Aber, J. L. (2015). Children and youth in low-and middle-income countries: Toward an integrated developmental and intervention science. Child Development Perspectives, 9 (1), 61–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12108

Youth for Human Rights. (2002–2017). Youth for Human Rights information kits . Retrieved from http://www.youthforhumanrights.org/freeinfo.html

Zolotor, A. J., Runyan, D. K., Dunne, M. P., Jain, D., Péturs, H. R., Ramirez, C., … Isaeva, O. (2009). ISPCAN Child Abuse Screening Toll Children’s Version (ICAST-C). Child Abuse and Neglect, 33 , 833–841.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Montefiore Medical Group, Bronx, NY, USA

Christina M. Fiorvanti

Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

Christina M. Fiorvanti & Marla R. Brassard

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Christina M. Fiorvanti or Marla R. Brassard .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA

Bonnie Kaul Nastasi

International Institute for Child Rights and Development, Victoria, BC, Canada

Stuart N. Hart

Department of Psychology, Cleveland State University, Cleveland, OH, USA

Shereen C. Naser

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Fiorvanti, C.M., Brassard, M.R. (2020). Child Protection: A Child Rights Approach for Schools. In: Nastasi, B.K., Hart, S.N., Naser, S.C. (eds) International Handbook on Child Rights and School Psychology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37119-7_15

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37119-7_15

Published : 19 May 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-37117-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-37119-7

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Child Protection Policy Awareness of Teachers and Responsiveness of the School: Their Relationship and Implications

• December 2020
• Shanlax International Journal of Education 9(1):1-10
• CC BY-SA 4.0

• Gordon College, Olongapo

• Department of Education of the Philippines

• Schools Division of City of Meycauayan

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Onoriode Collins Potokri

• Rafael Christian S. Aguilar
• PhD Sonia S. Carbonell
• Gerly B. De Castro

• Rosywin A Bautista

• عماد الدين أحمد السيد عبد المقصود

• Serap Öztürk
• Edward Jimenez
• John Meldwin B. Baronia

• CHILD YOUTH SERV REV

• Margaret Nohilly

• CHILD MALTREATMENT

• Emmanuel S. Gnanamanickam
• Ha T. Nguyen

• Jenny Driscoll

• Ejalal Jalal
• Treena Bhakta

• Annie Gjelsvik

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

An official website of the United States government Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Biden-Harris Administration Proposes Ban on Family Seating Junk Fees Charged by Airlines

Proposal would lower the cost of flying with young children by requiring airlines to provide fee-free family seating as part of a whole-of-government crackdown on unfair pricing

WASHINGTON – Today, the Biden-Harris Administration proposed a new rule that would ban airlines from charging junk fees to seat families together on a flight. The Department of Transportation’s (DOT) proposed rule would require airlines to seat parents next to their young children for free when adjacent seating is available at booking. Mandating fee-free family seating would lower the cost of flying with young children -- saving a family of four as much as $200 per roundtrip if seat fees are $25. DOT's proposed family seating junk fee ban is part of President Biden’s whole-of-government push to crackdown on corporate rip-offs that can unfairly raise prices for consumers.

“Many airlines still don’t guarantee family seating, which means parents wonder if they’ll have to pay extra just to be seated with their young child. Flying with children is already complicated enough without having to worry about that,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. “The new rule we’re proposing today, which would ban airlines from charging parents a fee to sit with their children, is another example of the Biden-Harris Administration using all the tools at our disposal to lower costs for families and protect consumers from unfair practices.”

For many families, being seated next to their children is not optional, especially when they are too young to feed themselves, fasten their own seatbelt, go to the bathroom, and, in some cases, communicate. But despite adjacent seating being essential for young families, many airlines continue to force parents to choose between paying to lock in assigned seats or risk being seated apart. These fees add up and effectively raise the final cost of air transportation for many families traveling with young children.

Parents who decide not to pay family seating junk fees are stuck figuring out how to sit next to their children in the midst of the hectic boarding process. This can lead to problems for the other passengers on the flight. Once boarded, airlines may ask these passengers to “voluntarily” forfeit their seats, which they may have paid for in advance, and move to a less desirable seat so that a parent and child can sit together. If passengers choose not to swap seats, they may be seated next to an unsupervised child, causing stress for the child, parent, and surrounding travelers.

In 2023, President Biden called on Congress to ban family seating junk fees in his State of the Union address. Secretary Buttigieg then pressed the ten largest airlines to voluntarily ban these fees, four airlines – Alaska, American, Frontier, and JetBlue have done so. The Department has published a dashboard displaying which airlines guarantee fee-free family seating at flightrights.gov . Secretary Buttigieg also submitted a legislative proposal to Congress that would ban these junk fees and wrote letters to Congressional leadership in support of the ban. Congress gave DOT explicit authority to propose a rule to ban family seating junk fees as part of the bipartisan FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024.

DOT’s notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) specifically proposes to:

• Ban family seating junk fees: The proposed rule would ban airlines from charging junk fees to assign seats for a young child (age 13 or under) next to their parent or accompanying adult. 
• The proposal defines adjacent family seating as seats next to each other in the same row and not separated by an aisle.  
• Airlines would be required to make adjacent family seats available in every class of service and prohibited from defining class in a way that limits availability of family seating, such as structuring basic economy to consist of only middle seats.   
• In situations where it is impossible to provide adjacent seating for multiple young children, airlines would be required to seat them across the aisle from, directly in front of, or directly behind the parent or accompanying adult.  
• Mandate refunds, free rebooking, and other options when adjacent family seating is not available: If adjacent family seats are not available at booking, airlines would be required to provide passengers the choice between receiving a full refund or waiting for family seating to become available later. If a passenger chooses to wait and adjacent seats do not free up before other passengers begin boarding, an airline must give families the option to rebook for free on the next flight with available family seating or stay on the flight in seats that are not adjacent. 
• Require upfront disclosure of right to fee-free family seating: Under the proposed rule, airlines would be required to disclose clearly and conspicuously that passengers have the right to fee-free family seating. This includes disclosing on their public-facing online platforms and when a customer calls the airline’s reservation center to inquire about a fare or to book a ticket. The disclosure is also required to specify any airline requirements for check-in and boarding that may impact the ability to secure adjacent seats. 
• Impose a penalty for each family seating junk fee: Under the proposed rule, each family seating junk fee imposed by an airline and each young child that is not seated next to their parent or accompanying adult as required would be considered a separate violation. Airlines that fail to comply with the fee-free family seating requirements would be subject to civil penalties for each violation. 

DOT’s proposed rule clarifies that family seating is considered a basic service, essential for adequate air transportation, that must be included in the ticket fare. The proposal also invites comment on what, if any, other services should also be considered basic and essential, and therefore included as part of the fare. 

The Biden-Harris Administration has taken historic action to improve airline passenger rights and oversight of the airline industry: 

• The rule makes clear that airline passengers are entitled to a refund when their flight is canceled or significantly changed and they no longer wish to take that flight or be rebooked, when their checked baggage is significantly delayed, or when extra services they paid for – like Wi-Fi – are not provided. The rule also requires refunds to be automatic, prompt, in the original form of payment, and in the full amount paid. Airlines must comply with the rule by late October.  
• Provisions of the final rule on airline refunds were fortified through the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024 that President Biden signed into law on May 16, 2024. 
• The rule fosters a more competitive airline market by requiring airlines to disclose critical extra fees upfront – like change fees and baggage fees – to ensure consumers can better understand the true cost of their travel. The rule also bans “bait-and-switch” advertising tactics and requires airlines to clearly tell passengers upfront that a seat is included with the cost of their ticket, and they don’t need to pay extra. This rule is expected to save consumers over half a billion dollars every year.  
• Set up a system to expand the Department’s capacity to review air travel service complaints by partnering with a bipartisan group of state attorneys general , which will help hold airlines accountable and protect the rights of the traveling public. Attorneys general who have signed a memorandum of understanding with DOT will be able to access the new complaint system this fall. 
• Launched the flightrights.gov dashboard, after which all 10 major U.S. airlines guaranteed free rebooking and meals when an airline issue causes a significant delay or cancellation. These are new commitments the airlines added to their customer service plans that DOT can legally ensure they adhere to through enforcement action. 
• Secured nearly $4 billion in refunds and reimbursements owed to airline passengers – including over $600 million owed to passengers affected by the Southwest Airlines holiday meltdown in 2022.  
• Issued nearly $170 million in penalties against airlines for consumer protection violations since President Biden took office. In comparison, between 1996 and 2020, DOT collectively issued just over $70 million in penalties against airlines for consumer protection violations.