TE HER IN BRITI H COLUMBIA: EXAMINING THE EXPERIEN E OF REPORT! G U PE TED P RENTAL HILDABU E by andace Miner B .. W . niv r ity f rthern Briti h lumbia, 2004 THE IS SUBMITTED IN PARTlAL FULLFILLMENT OF THE REQ IREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA August 2015 © an dace Miner , 20 15 .. 11 B TRACT Thi qualitative tudy d crib u pect d par ntal hild abu in north m Briti h into what enabl t n nc th f d t cting and r porting hild pr t ti n by i fen1al lrunbia within ch 1 Di trict 57. Th r t ach r t det ct child abu wh t ach public chool ar h generat din ight why and wh nth y r p 1i, a w 11 a the etnoti nal barri r and concern th y enc unt r during and aft r making a rep rt. The r earch wa in:b rmed b tru tural ial w rk and th analysi f the interview wa undertak n u ing applied thetnatic analy i . Th main impli ation for practice include: mbracing trategi cial work for effi ctiv relation hip building with teacher and within chool · communicating with teacher to the greate t extent po ible, the outcome of reports made; and working with the univer itie and school district to conduct formal training on indicators of child abu e as well a when and how to report. 111 CKNOWLED ME T Fir t I would lik t a knowl dge and thank th t ach r wh partici at d in thi re arch. Without th g n r u not have be n p baring f your tim and e peri en ibl . I w uld al lik to thank 1n thi re earch w uld lunidt and ela Zimm r for their guidance and the in ightful r coffiln ndati n 1nade t 1ne during th pr c f w1iting this the i . To Dawn H mingway thank you v ry mu h [! r y ur upp 1i and encourage1nent thr ugh ut thi ntir j urn y. I am truly thankful fi r all th h ur you put in to help m along th way even inteiTUpting h liday and ther life events to work with 1ne on my the i . Word cannot de cribe the dedication to tudent well-being I have experienced while working with you during my re earch, a well a the encouragement support experti e and invaluable[! edback you have provid d during the proce developing thi the i . of 1 T BLE OF 0 T .. b tra t ............... ..... ............ ... .. ............. ....... ............... ..... ... ... ............. .. .... .. ........ ............ ... 11 k.I1 wl dg m nt ..... .......... .. .......... ... ...... ..... .................... ...... ... ..... .. .............. ............. ... .. 111 Tabl ont nt .... .... .. .. ............. ... ....... .. ... ........... ...... ..................... ............. .... ..... .......... .. 1v : Intr ducti n ............................ ................................................................ 1 H PT R R ar h u ti nand bje ti f th tud ................................................................ 4 Rati nal :fl r th tud ......... ................................. ..... ... ........ ... .............. .. ....... .. ...... ..... ..... 4 P r onal Fram rk .... ............................................. ... ............. ............ ... ....... .... ........... ... S Theor tical Frmn w rk .................................................................................................... 7 fKey T rm ............... .................... ... ... .... ... ................ .. ................... ........ .. 10 D finiti n rganization f th Th i .................................. ... ........................................................ 10 hapter u1n.rnary ......... ... ............................................................................................... 11 HAPTER TWO: Literature R vi w .... .. ..... ............ .. .. ...... ...... ....... .. .......... .. .. ....... .... ..... .. 13 Barrier to Detecting and R porting .. .... ................... .... ... .... ................ ...... ........... ... ...... 14 Impact of Training on Detecting and Reporting ................................................. ... ........ 16 Additional Barriers ................. ....... ..... ... ....... .................................................... .. ....... .. ...20 Rates of Repo1iing .............. ..... ..... .......... ... ... .................. ............ .. ...... ...... .. ... ................. 24 Overview of Laws & Legi lation That Protect Inten1ational Federal: hild Right .. .. ..................... .. ................ ... ..... .......... ................................. 26 ri1ninal Provincial: B hildr n ... ......... ........... .... ..... .............. 26 ode of anada .... .. ... ... ............ ..... .. ... ....... ....................... ................. 26 hild Protection Legislation F A .................................. ... ............... 27 Reporting Child Abu e and Neglect in B ............. .............................. ....... ........ ........ .. 2 Per on obligated to report ............................ .. .................. ....... ............................. 2 onfid ntiality and anction :fl r n t reporting ... .................................................. 2 What i r portable ................................................................... ..... ......... ................. 29 B Handb k :fl r Acti n n cho 1 i tri t 57: hild Prot hild Abu and gl ct.. ........ ......... .... ......... .... ...... .... ... 0 ti n Policy .......... ..... ..... ...................... .................... ..... ~ v HAPTER THRE -.: R earch M th d l gy ......................... .. .......................... ............. . Quali tati e R arcl1 .. ................................................................................................... . ppli d Th matic Analy i ................ ....... ....... .................................... .... ......... ............. 4 Ethical n id rati n ............ .... .. ..... ........... ... ....... .. .... ..... .. .... .... ..... ..... ... ............ ......... 35 Recruihnent of Participant .... ........ ... ......... ....... .. ......... ............... ... .. ......... ............ .... ..... 5 Data ollection.. .... .... ... ...... .... . ... . ...... ... ... ..... .... .. . . .... . .. ... ... .. . ....... .......... .. . .. . ... ..... . ........ .. 6 Th etting ...... .. ................ .. .... ..... ............. .. ...... .. ................................ ... ........... ..... . 37 Data Analy i ......... ..... .. .......... .... .. ... .. ...... ....... ..... ............. .................... ...... ... ................ 3 Meth dological Int grity ............................................................................................. .41 redibility and tran paren y ..... .................................................. ........................ .......... .41 Int rcod r agr ement ............................................................................................. 42 Member checking .................................................................................................. 43 Audit trail .................. ............................................................................................. 43 U ing quote .... .. ....... ... .. ...... ..... ..... ............................. ... ....... ..... .............. .. ........ ..... 44 Reflexivity ................................. .... .......................... ...... ...... ................ .. ................ 45 CHAPTER FOUR: Results ......................... ... .. ................... ........ ............. ......... ...... ........... 46 Participant Description ............................ ....... ........ ... .................................................... .46 Knowledge ..................................... .............. ....... ... .. ..................... .. ............................... 47 Knowledge when applying to university .............................................................. .47 Knowledge when entering the cla sroom ..................... .... ............... ........... .. ......... 48 Current knowledge on child abuse ........................... ............. ..... ... .......... ............... 50 Current knowledge on MCFD standards of child abu e ......... ....... ....... ................. 50 Current knowledge on rep01iing to MCFD ............................................................ 51 Current knowledge on SD 57 reporting protoco1. .................................................. 52 Knowledge ofBC's child abuse reporting law .................................................... 52 Sum1nary ...... .. ... ...... .... ........ .... .. .. .. ... ..... ,................................................................ 53 Trai11ing ... ..... ........ .... .. .... ....... ............. ..... .. ...... .. .............. ............................................... 53 Training on child abuse and reporting during university ....................................... 53 Training by D57 on child abuse and reporting .................................................... 54 Su1n1nary .. ......... ...... .. ....... .. .... ......................................................................... ....... 57 Vl Reporti11g ...... .................................................................................................................. 57 Why and wh n teach r r p rt ............................................................................... 57 Em tion c nn ct d with 1naking a rep rt ............................................................ 5 K11oW11 utcome of R p Ii ......................................................................................... 2 linpact of known p iti utcom D r t ach r child ....................................... 63 Impact of known n gati e utc In t a h r ............................................. 63 Impact of known negati e utcom n th child ................................................. 65 No action taken by M FD ..................................................................................... 66 nknown ut o1ne ofReport ..................................................................................... 68 Impact ofunknown outc m n the t acher ........................................................ 68 Coping ..................... ............................................................................................... 70 Follow-up ..... .................................................................................................................. 71 Lack of feedback on report .... ... .... ............ ............ ... .... ................ .................. ...... .71 Relation hip with MCFD ....................................................................................... 74 Chapter Summary ........................ ........... ............ ..................... ...... ....... ... ......... .............. 75 CHAPTER FIVE: Discus ion ............................................................................................ 76 Concerns Expressed Regarding Reporting ............................... .. ............................. ....... 77 Kl1owledge on Child Abuse .............................................. .......... ..................... .............. 77 Kl1owledge on Repotiing Child Abuse .......................................................... ... ......... .... 78 Training on Child Abuse and Reporting ........................................................................ 79 Negative Outcotnes .................. .................................................... .. ................................ 80 Lack of Follow-up.. ........... ......... .. ......... ... ............. ........ ................................................. 1 Limitations .............................................. ..... ............... ................................................... 82 Implications for Policy and Practice .............................................................................. 84 Structural Social Work ................................................................................................... 86 011clusion .......... .... ....................................................................................................... 87 Refere11ces .......................................................................................................................... 9 .. Vll pp ndix A: Parti ipant R ruit1n nt pp ndix B: Dem graphi ppendi tt r ....... ..................................... ........ ......... ....... . f arti ipant hara t ri ti : Que ti nna1r ......... .............. ...................................................................... 100 pp ndi D: Parti ipant lnfmm ti n Appendi E: Pmii ipant tt r .................................................................... ! 04 n nt F nn ........................................................................... 107 Appendix F: Tran crib r D claration f nfid ntiality ............................... ................ 10 Appendix G: Local un ling heet ............................................................................. 11 0 Appendix H: UNB Re earch Ethics Board pproval ................................................... 111 1 HAPT RO E Introduction hild abu and n glect in ocial and healthcare pr fe i nal anada ontinu t b a maJ r c n m arnong t wh ar awar that th impact and n quence that child maltreatm nt can have n a hild ar deva tating a well a p t ntially lifi long. A John Brier (2002 point out in chapt r n f the Am ri an Profi Abu e of hildren Handbook re abu e f children can lead t In ntal health related di order ng mg r u ha d re ion anxi ty and p ional oci ty on the t-traumatic tr di ord r, which if left untreated can impact th m a adult . It i kn wn that children who grow up in an abu ive or neglectful envir run nt ar m re lik ly t engage in activities in later life that put them at ri k uch as moking, and ub tance abu Hernandez, & Kendall-Tackett 2009 p.175). ( achs- ricsson, romer, hildren who have been, or are experiencing ongoing abuse can find it difficult to form attachment with other and can be more aggressive and even violent with peers (Meadows Tunstill, George, Dhudwar, & Kurtz, 2011, pp.10-11). Abuse and neglect in childhood can lead to life-long physical, psychological, and behavioural consequences for the child (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2013, pp.4-6) and could negatively affect the development of their brain (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2015). Research shows that the frequency of the abuse, the duration, as well as the degree of physical force employed during the abuse has been linked to greater trauma-related symptoms in the child and in adult urvivor ( lemm n , Walsh, Di illo, & Mess1nan-Moore, 2007, pp. 172-180). Overall, tudie have uncovered that physical punishment often affect academic achievement" is linked to higher le el of aggression; ar1ti-social behavi r slow r cognitive d velop1nent; and can ven affect the physical1nake-up ofthe brain (Durr nt & n om, 2012, pp . 1 7 - 1 74) . 2 ccording to th r p rt Makin th Links in Famil Viol n 1naltr atment cannot nly ha al or ult in d ath. In 2011 homi ide 22% fth n u 1 ng-t rm n gati 2.6% fall ictim w r In 2010, tati tic 1 d h 1nicid hildr n ( 1m act 1n anada wer fatnily a1i1n nt f Ju tic cti n n the in id nee f p li violence in olving childr n and outh. hild n childr n· it can anada anada r lea d th r p rt Family Viol n e in Stati ti al Profile which in luded a (201 ) a cc rding to th r p rt betw .2). anada : A -report d family n th y ar 2000- 2010,47% ofabu e icti1n in th 3-11 y ar ld cat g ry uffi r d abu eat the hand of a fatnily member 65% f th perp trat r w r parent r parental figure (p .58). The majority of the e children in B would be attending pre- chool or el mentary ch ol (411 year age range) under the watchful eye of an educator (Public Health Agency, 2010, p.25). As a social worker I have worked, over the years, with a variety of children and youth within School District (SD) 57 . The 1najority of the children and youth I work with have been abused in the past by parents or parental figures in their lives, within their own home. Many of the youth c01ne from homes where abuse was an everyday occurrence. A a result of this abuse by adult figures in their lives, the children and youth are oftentin1e fearful, and untrusting of adults. W11en they discuss their feelings with 1ne concerning the abuse they suffered they also, at ti1nes, express anger that no ne came to their aid. These youth speak of physical beatings that left welt , broken bone , mas ive bruising and swellings on their bodies. They peak of neglect that left them without acce s to food, of adult caregiver who would di appear from their live for days on end, and of the sense f despair as well a feeling of depre sion they often e perienced. Th e youth w re not lock d away in a ro m her n Although very p r on diffi r nt and ry n unique t th m I hav found a c mm nalit b tw E ery youth I ha e p k n with r all att nding attendance wa th m · th y w r in plain ight. n c uld e p n n e with abu e ar f abu h I hav heard . 1 alth ugh fi r many th 1r poradic at b t. Thi ha n1ad m w nder if thi c min n thr ad in th ir f child abu live could beth key to nding th c (B ). From thi thought I began t w nd r what th report parental child abu to authoriti and n gl ct in riti h olumbia perien e wa like fi r at acher t . Deciding to 1nake a rep rt to hild protective rv1ce wh none u pect a ca e of child maltreatment appear to b cut and dried. People who haven ver been faced with such a deci ion 1nay feel they w uld have no he itation in i1nmediately reporting any suspicions to the authorities. However, the reality of encountering such a situation can lead one to understand the complexities involved in making a report to authoritie . As the literature review included in this study points out, there are many potential barriers and concerns that teachers as well as other profe sionals may encounter when detecting or reporting suspected parental child abuse situations. Research in Canada as well as research in other countries on the subject of detecting and reporting child abuse and neglect, uncovered a myriad of barriers and concerns expressed by teacher . Some barriers and concerns noted by these researchers included: safety is ues for the child and for the reporter (Becket al., 1994; h et al., 20 13 ; King, 20 11 ; Stnith, 2005; Tite, 1998; Walsh et al., 2005); lack of action on behalf of the organization handling the report(Beck et al., 1994; hoo et al., 2013 ; Smith, 2005; Tite, 1998); having ad1ninistrators advise them to not report ( 1nith, 2005)· feeling they do not have enough 4 infon11ation t mak a r p rt ( 1nith 2005· Tit wanting t 1nak an erron ou r p rt ( Thi tudy xplored th their nc n1 in r gard t r xpen n f 199 · Wal h tal., 2005) or n t k tal. 19 4·King 2 11) t narn but a few. gr u f t a h r in n Iih n1 rting hild bu Re earch Ques tion and Obj ec tive of th The main re earch qu ti n f thi and n gl and r p rt n t. tudy tudy i : What i the p rience of reporting u pect d parental child abu e for t a h r who work within 57 . Thi tudy exarnin d from the p r p cti e fa gr up oft a h r in Prince orge B the experience of reporting u p ct d parental hild abu r n gl tin n rth n1 B . The goal of my re eru·ch wa to gain an in-depth und r tanding of the participants experiences of reporting parental child abu e. Rationale for the Study There is currently a gap in the child abu e reporting literature when it come to teachers in northern British Colu1nbia. The last study I wa able to locate with regard to teachers in BC was a study by Beck and colleagues in 1994, 21 years ago, which involved teachers in the lower 1nainland. Past research in Canada, as well a re earch in other countries, indicates there are potential barriers and concen1s that teacher frmn other geographical locations have encountered when deciding to 1nake a report (Beck et al., 1994; hoo et al. , 2013; Smith, 2005; Tite, 1998; Walsh et al., 2005). The barriers and concen1s were identified as requi1ing consideration prior to 1naking a report to child welfare authorities. Smne teachers within P1ince George n1ay, or may not, encounter the arne baniers or concerns that have been found in pa t studie , in regard to r porting. ~ 5 uch exploring th xpen n e f r p 1iing :fl r thi gr up f t ach r wa u ful in di cov ring what typ f ban:i r and under tanding what type f u p rt nc m th y ha r ducation ncount r d r the y ar , and uld aid th m r th r t a her t det ct abu e and mak rep rt . Removing an barrier education a r quir d i uffering abu e a health. tudie r c n rn and upplying t acher with upp rt r itally i1nportant :fl r childr n. Th ne d to identify hildr n arly a po ible i crucial t b th their phy ical and 1 ng-tenn m ntal uch a thi bring attenti n t the i u f child abu e in g neral and erve to highlight the concern and barrier that teacher face in th fi ld . Kn wing h w to be t support teacher in the detecting and r porting proc reporting proce could potentially expedite the resulting in children being identified earlier. If we would like teachers to take on the duty of reporting it is important to have an understanding of what upports and tools they require in order to perfonn thi duty. Personal Framework As a past Ministry of Children and Fmnily Development (MCFD) Guardian hip social worker who worked with teachers in a variety of school settings, I am aware th at teachers may become involved in child protection investigations. At tin1es, a child protection investigation is a result of a repmi made by the teacher to M FD, expre mg concern that a child may be experiencing abu e or neglect at the hands of a parent or guardian. ften ti1nes, the child ha not disclo ed an abuse ituation dir ctly to th e teacher. Rather, the teacher ha made the repmi ba ed on a u pi ion aft r noting indicators that may or may not be verifiable. Be:fl re 1naking uch a report, it i e enti al 6 for teach r to fe 1 they ha e r a on to mak th r p rt a w 11 a a b li fthat the child or y uth require m nc th t a h r ha d t t d that n t int rven n th ir b half. in th liD th tea h r 1nu t mak ad mething 1nay b arm th y detect 1nay b abu i tud nt n that what and i rep rtabl . A an M FD guardian hip w rk r I ha e m e tigat d r p rt that were generated by teach r phy ician and a ari ty f ther cmnmunity 1nernber . me leaving th Mini try I ha e had a vari ty of pr fe i nal and laypeople, contact 1ne in regards to how to know wh n t make a rep rt a well a fl r advic on h w t deal with a vari ty of i ue that urfac d after ha ing made a report. A a form r M D worker, I have a firm gra p of what an in e tigation ntail . However I wa often focu d on finding information to upport or di prove th allegation of child abu e, not on what the reporter was feeling or experiencing a a result of having to 1nake the rep011. This is an area that I believe may be neglected when an investigation is in progress. So how does a teacher detect, come to a decision to report suspicions to child protective services, and what is the aftermath of a report? What prmnpts teachers to take such a step and what concerns, barriers, and personal hurdles must they overcome in order to make such a report? During the process of exploring this area I have discovered that the report and the reporter are both cn1cial parts of the process of di covering, and preventing i tuation of child abuse and neglect. Finding the answer to the que tion of how someone detect and why omeone reports, regardless of the impact the re1 ort 1nay make on their p r anal or professional life, is essential to under tanding why repm1s may not have be n made in the 7 pa t a well a providing an pp rtunity t addre 1 u that may curr ntly itnpact teach r ' r porting practic . Theoretical Framework Thi r ear h wa c nduct d with and infonn d by tru ctural tructural o ial w rk i compri ed f £ atur and anti-raci t approa he (Mullal of a critical th or a fr m cial w rk. ial dem cratic fi n1ini t 2007 pp. 243-244 and me t th thr e r quir m nt utlined by B b Mullal 2007 in that it: • locate the ource of d minati n in actual ocial practic , • pre ent an alternative vi ion ( rat lea tan outline fa 1i e free from uch domination • tran late the eta k in a form that i intelligible to those who are oppres ed in society. (p . 215) Using the framework of Mamice Moreau 's past work, Ben Camiol (1992), discussed how the structural approach recognizes that all forms of oppression, whether based on class, gender, race, age, ability/disability or sexuality, are equally important (not hierarchal) and that many people are subjected to oppression fron1 everal of these areas in tande1n (p.4). Structural ocial work identifies that oppressi n ccur on three levels- per onal, cultural, as well as institutional or structural. The fon11s of oppression experienc d by individuals can be ov rt or covert and the three level of oppre ion work to perpetuate social inequality in favour of the d01ninant group. tru ctural oppre i n can and do affi ct major ar a fan indi idual h u ing and healthcar lifl u h a tnpl J'ITI nt pp rtuniti du ati nand a...,...,._,,_,0 t p opp rtunitie and h w n i tr at db th t PI rtuni ti , fin an i al t- ritnin 1ju tic ac stein (Mullaly 20 7, p.p. 269-270). Mullaly (2 07) the tenn plain that: tru tural in tru tur 1 It i d criptiv in th en a b ing th way ur ciety i becau ial that the maj r rk i b th d ur e f riptive and pr criptive. cial pr blem i identifi d tructur d. It i pre riptive in the en e that o ial pr blem are ro ted in our cial tructure , th n the tructure tnu t be changed n t the individual the family, r the ubculture adver ely affected by ocial problem (p. 245). This means that tructural ocial work move away from the traditional approach which focused on the individual as the problem, and looks instead to ocietal structure a the root of social problems. As such, structural social work acknowledges and challenges the oppressive nature of societal tructures that alienate and exploit marginalized groups and seeks to expose, and change the structures in society that oppress people according to their class, race, gender, ability, and sexuality (Mullaly, 2007, p .245) . In the words of Maurice Moreau (1979); "Structural social work is concerned with the way in which the rich and powerful in society define and constrain the poor and the less powerful" (p .7 ). Structural social workers also work for change by working with (not doing for or working on) individuals to alter the structure in fan1ilie , cmrununitie , and ociety that cun-ently result in inequality and oppression. The structural social worker use antioppressive social work to "help clients handle the oppr sion they have expe1i need" 9 nal and tru tural i u (Heinon n & p annan 20 10 p. 00) and hall ng p r create and maintain oppr In A o-op rati i n within ur ci ty Mullal 2 07). Inquiry into tru tural ocial Work tud nt 'Ethi al Deci ion-Making in Fi ld Ed B 11 D uill and de cripti n f tructural that Illll1 a 2 0 ) ial w rk by Mullaly. It d crib utlin an tructural pand d ial w rk a follow . .. Fir t the tenn ' tru tural' i d cripti th y are an inherent part four pr de cripti e a it indicat nt day f th natur f cial r bl IllS in that ial order. econdly th t nll i that the fi u fi r chang i mainly on the tructure of ociety and n ton the p r onal characteri tic of individual victimized by ocial problem . Thirdly, tructural ocial work i an inclu ive ocial work approach because it doe not attempt to establish hierarchie of oppres ion but rather is concerned with all form of oppressive dominant-subordinate relation . Fourthly, it has a dialectical analysis, which means that it does not get trapped into fal e dichotomies, such as whether one should work at the personal or the politicalboth are nece sary simultaneously. Fifthly, it is a critical theory, which by definition Illeans that it has a political and practical intent. Finally, most of the development of structural social work has occurred in Canada, where it continues to assmne increasing impmiance as a Illajor social work per pective, theory and practice (p.ixx). This description of structural social work is the framework :fro1n which I conducted IllY research. 1 Defmitions of Key Term CAN: i an acr nym fi r th t 1m' hild abu and n gl ct . lumbia 1 than 1 y ar Child: m an a p r n in youth. riti h fag and in lud a Child Family and ommunity erv1ce ct ( F ): th legi lativ auth rity fi r th m nt hild Pr t ti n rvi e in riti h Mini try of hildr n and Family olmnbia. M CFD Child Protection Intake ocial W rk r: a ial w rk r who r c iv rep rt 11 made t e th r frmn the public regarding child prote ti n ca h w rker a determine if the r pmi r quire an in tigati n. Maltreatment: includ both 'abu and 'negl ct and c vers tho e act or mn1s 1 n of act endangering the hild a:D ty or well being. Mandatory reporting: refi r to the legal obligation of a p r on to report child maltreatment. Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD): the Child Protection Agency that operates within Briti h olumbia. Parent: includes a person to whom guardianship or custody of a child has been granted by a court of competent jurisdiction or by an agreement, and/or a person with whom a child resides and who stands in place of the child's parent or guardian. Child Protection Social Worker: under the CFCSA, the Minister designates the Director of Child Protection, who in tum delegates the provision of child protection services across the province of BC to child protection social workers. Reporters: people who make repm1s to MCFD concerning any suspected child abuse situations. Organization of the Thesis This the is is organized into five chapters. Chapter one outlines there earch question, the objective of the tudy, the rationale for the tudy and an verview of the effects of child abu e. The chapter also peaks to related concept that are u d 11 throu ghout the the i . hapt r two pr vid ar w f the r 1 vant lit ratur relat d t there ar h t pic. Th lit ratur revi w run1n th t IC f b rri r t d tecting and r porting in1pact f training on d t cting and r p rting and the rat abu e r porting in anada ru1d abr ad. It al includ an utlin 1 gi lation that are u d t pr teet hildr n fr m hild abu olumbia. hapter thre pr id an utlin f child f the law and and neglect in riti h f applied thematic analy i a th m thodology u ed in thi re earch and di cu the re arch pr within th th me and multiple ub the1ne that tudy. hapter four id ntifie th emerged from th analy i edure e1npl yed f the ix int rvi w c nducted for this tudy. Th chapter provide a detail d account of each theme and ub th m . hapter fiv the final chapter provide a di cu i n of there earch topic and id ntifies area of intere t for possible future tudy. Chapter Summary Tllis chapter provided an overview of the effects of child abuse, explaining why detecting and reporting all fonns of abuse at the earliest stages possible is crucial to the physical and In ental health of BC children. The chapter also outlined the research question, the objective and rationale for the study, as well as my personal and theoretical perspectives. This chapter included a section explaining the organization of he five chapters included in this thesis and provided definitions of key ten11 used throughout the thesis. The next chapter contains a review of the relevant literature I uncovered whi h related to tudies on school teach r ' level of knowledge and training in the area of child 12 abu e and r porting. Th re iew al prot ct childr n in B . in lud a ti non law and 1 gi lation u ed t 1 H PT R TW Literatur R evi w I c n u t d thi lit rature r mpl 1 u i id ntifi d b pa t re t ga1n n und r t nding f r h r th t t a h r m fa m f th pti r t making a r p 1i t auth ritie . Ir knowl dg i w d pa t and pr f child abu ar h t gain an und r tanding n th 1 nt r 1 that t a h r p and r p rting thi le el fknowl dg ha nat a h r ummarized th finding fr m an u abilit t d t tudi including e 1 f and th impact t and r p rt child abu . I then ncem that teacher expre d which creat d barri r to their ability t mak a r p rt f u p ct d child abu e t authoritie . I included the finding of pa t tudie that r port d the kn wn number of u pected child abu e ca e that have gon unr port d by th ir participant and th training that teach r have recei ed in detecting and reporting child abu e. Thi chapter also include an overview of the law and legi lation that protect children in anada and BC. After conducting this review I found there ult of everal tudie indicated that smne teachers were confused a to what constituted abu e and the reporting proce . Thi knowledge enabled me to fonnulate sharper and 1nore in ightful interview qu ti n 1n rder to explore, from the per pective of teacher uspected child abu e or neglect. th lived e perience of repmiing nducting thi literature review enabled me t the xperience of rep rting u pected parental child maltreatlnent frmn th p r p teacher ut ide of n rthern B . plor ti f 14 Barriers to Detecting and Reporting cc rding t pa t r arch in th ar a f t a h r ca e of u p ct d hild abu th r appear t b m abili t t d t nfu i n arn ng t t acher a to what indi at r th ar p t d t act n· when enough indi ator and/ r the ct qu n findi at r IT m actly, th y have n whi h t ba r port· and h w r to wh m the report i t be made. In 1994 B ck orbi hley, r lea ed th fmding t and r p rt a fi rmal gl ff, and f r ear h th y had c nducted which fi cu d on the detecting and r porting habit of 21 t a h r fr In th Low r Mainland f , anada. The quantitative tudy utilized a urv y that includ d five ecti n : 1) a ection on participant demographic 2) a ection that a e ed knowledg reporting laws, 3) a ection on their reporting experience fB child abu e 4) a et of 4 vignettes, each of which outlined a po ible case of child abu e and 5) the final ection, measured the pariicipants ' attitude toward child abu e reporting. Prior to embarking on the project, the researchers conducted a literature review to determine what was already known regarding the level of knowledge teachers had in the area of child abuse detecting and reporting and any gaps in their know ledge. By searching through the literature available at the time, they discovered , that according to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advance1nent of Teaching (1988), an American Nationwide teachers regulatory board, "89% of (their) teacher were eeing abu ed and neglected children in their classrooms" (Becket al. 1994, p .l6) , yet re arch conducted within the smne ti1ne period, indicates that few teacher were aware of their state law 111 regards to reporting the abuse they were seeing. Other report from thi tim petiod confinned that only 33°/o of teach r in Illinoi (M Intyre, 19 7 p. 134), and only 2 o/0 of 15 teacher in Kan a (Baxter B r 19 0 .7 fth ir r p rt in (1 ) wh c nclud d that 40o/o f teach r wh r p nd d t their tud kn w f there 1i law but "di n t know the prop r r p rting pr c dure ' k t al. 1 4 p.1 ). rtunat ly the al. udi teach r in 19 4 w re ery awar tate law. Beck et al. (1994) p k fan arli r tud b tudy c n lud d that unlike the arli r of the duty t r port law (94%). ut th ir finding did h th re pondent w re te ted n the pr p r r p rting pr c dur participant d th r porting pro dur . Th arli r tudi r xampl ck t wb n 40% of their participant believ d that the correct procedur wa to c nsultfirst with other , fore ample tb cho 1 principal, as opposed to reporting u pected child abu e i1nm diat ly to a child pr tection w rk r as was the law in B ince the proclamation of the Family and hild ervice Act in 1981 (Becket al. , 1994. p.25). According to the Inter-Ministry hild Abuse Handbook (1985) which outlined the legi lation governing child protection in BC: The Act state very clearly the obligation and respon ibility of a person who ha reasonable grounds to believe a child may be in need of protection to report to the superintendent or a person delegated by the superintendent ( ocial worker 1n district offices or social workers receiving reports through the helpline for children) (p.3 ). In 2005, anadian researcher, Carrie 1nith had very si1nilar finding . be concluded that although aln1ost all of her study participants (96.7%) in Ontario were aware of the obligation to repmi su pected child abuse (p.41) the majority wer unaware of the proper protocol to make a repoti. 1nith found that 70o/o of participant who bad 1nade a report did not 1nake the report to child protections rvic ( P ) but to a p1incipal 1 (p.74) nth ugh inc 2001 ch In 2011 an th r 1 di tri t p lici anadian tud n t ach r like the participant in th B k and mith tudi 111 f th pr c n luded tl at 1nan t a h r w r nfu d a t the tud y nl y % f th dure fi r r p rting u pected hild abu rneaning that 2% till were n t awar Beck finding f 40% twenty year tat that r p rt ar r p rting habit al proper r porting pr cedure. K_j ng 2 011) rep rted that in hi pmiicipant were awar ntari fth pr c dur t r port which i cl arli r (p. 1 . Thu P t e t the n could c nclud that there i till a gap in n uring that all teacher ar aware of rep rting pr c dur . Impact of Training on Detecting and Reporting Teachers ' overall level ofknowledge in the area of what con titutes child maltreatment, and their ability to detect with confidence po ible child abuse by parent or guardians, is an important component of the reporting process. Included in the Becket al. (1994) literature review was reference to research that noted possible gaps in teacher training in the area of detecting child abuse. For example, in 1992, the National Cormnittee for Prevention of Child Abuse (NCPCA), an American organization found that two-thirds of teachers, who participated in their nation-wide survey, "viewed the child abuse education provided to them by their school insufficient" (Abrahams, Ca ey, & Daro, 1992, p .232) to detect or report child abuse. This is not urpri ing a nine year earlier a Wisconsin study had reported that 56% of their respondents had never receiv d any training regarding child abuse or neglect (Bavolek, 198 , p.36) . In 1987, another Alnerican study concluded that the va t rnajority of teacher (81 %) had received no 17 training r garding hild abu during th ir tin1e in ffi r d the rtunit t btain th r qmr (Mclntyr 1 7 p.l 4 . hi tud al f h ibl in m ti nal abu exual abu r n tr inin n t d that 7 % f th ir r nd nt 2 1%h dkn led ge i al abu re n t lZ n n1mg th lgD m t In dt h · and (Mcintyre 1 nd that 1% ha n inti nnati n during in- rv1 fn gl knowl dg able th p 11 g f f 7 p.l ppar ntl la k f training in d t Abraham t al. n t d thi in 1 two-third f th ir arti ipant fi lt that th detect and report child abu e. A 2. ting rna till b fact r alm t2 ear after 2011 tudy fi und that lik the earli r tudy aim w r n t re rding t the finding t iving th training r quircd t f thi tudy nly 36.5% f the teacher in the tudy ' felt pr par d or very pr par d fr m their overall training in the area of child abu e to be able to d teet and r p rt u p cted maltreatm nt' (King, 20 11 p.80). Re ults of the Beck tudy, relea ed in 1994 al o tninored the e other tudie regarding the lack of training in det cting and reporting child abu e. The lack of confidence in the ability to detect po ible abu e and the lack of knowledge ofwh n to 1nake a report can impede reporting. The tudy revealed that more than 20% of the teacher who indicated they had failed to report a ca e wher they u pected child abu e also indicated that they had not reported ba ed n their uncetiainty about the definition of abuse. The tu y al o concluded from the r ult of the vignette , that "teach r with 1noderate and ubstantiallevel of information about child abu e i ue wer ignificantl m re likely to report' (Becket al., 1994, p. 2 ) phy i al and motional abu e wh n pre en ted with vign tte that depicted ituati n fp ibl hild abu . 1 In 2001 a tudy b Haw kin and M in child abu th c nt nti n that training and r p rting an mak a diffi r nc . Th r ef£ t of the mandat d training pr grarn ( rv1c all urn upp rt 1997 that wa b ing d li r dt p rtm nt £ r amil and onununity u tralian t a her d participant ' f bu confid nee in th ir ability tore ogniz th indi reporting r pon ibilitie and their kn f what their awar n n titut fth ir rea nab I gr und £ r reporting (p.l60 ). A tudy conducted b arne mith in 2005 which in lud d a training e ion n detecting and reporting u pected child abu e £ r the participant concluded that her participant experi need an increa e in their verall confidence in child protection ervice and that 50% indicated they would like to receiv additi nal training on the . subject in the future (pp.66-67). There earcher noted that "there ults indicate that the training offered as part of this study did have a ignificant impact on the choo1 personnel 's knowledge regarding reporting requirements, attitudes toward their duty to report, and their intended reporting behaviors" (p. 78). However, there are some researchers who question whether training has proven to be as effective in increasing a teacher's ability to detect and/or report child abuse as mne seem to believe. Findings from Critical factors in teachers detecting and reporting child abuse and neglect, a study on Australian teacher that occurred four year after th Hawkins and McCallum study, indicated that, although 1nandatory training had been taking place in Australia for 5 years at this point, 1 Th appar nt in ignificance f hild pr t cti n training n r p 1iing practice i cau fi r c nc n1. Th UIT nt r und f child pr te ti n training d e n t app ar to ha e i1npact d ignificantly up n t a h r u pected hild abu r neglect Wal h pr p n ity t dete t r r p rt arr 11 hw itz r, Bridg t k, 2005, p. 59). A fi w y ar later ebbl i h 1 n, Wal hand e Vri (200 ) point d out that their revi w f pa t r ear h had un o er d contradict ry finding that incr a d training in child protecti n led t increa d 1 v 1 of c nfid nee in d tecting r r porting. They concluded that orne tudie bowed an increa e in r p rting a lev 1 fknowl dge in child abu e and reporting increa ed although other tudie indicated there wa little or no difference in reporting 1 vel . They di covered that training in child protection could, . in some instances actually negatively impact a teacher' confidence to make a report. The findings from their research did show that teacher with higher levels of education (3-6 years and Masters Degree) were significantly 1nore likely to be consistent reporter of suspected child abuse, so that fonnal education was seen to be a positive factor for increased detection and reporting. But the findings from their study agreed with the Walsh et al. (2005) study, in that they also concluded the number of hour of child protection training made no significant difference in either an increase in the detection of child abuse, or in the reporting habits of individual teachers (pp.942-949). It is difficult to establish conclusively, at this point, that training in the area of detecting and repmiing child abuse would nece sarily tran late into increa ed detecting and/or reporting as the majority of training offered to teacher in u tralia i lin1it d (usually 3 hours) , and not nece arily focu ed n the detecting a pect (Wal h tal., 200 , 2 p.1 ). Thi th pr n t man h ur 1 fd t In pit f training tin and r p rting hild bu n fmi tiing fr In t a h r r h n n d mpl xi tie 1n . h th r r n t tr ining in d t rall th r ar ar h that ugge t ala k f training i n t th t a h r n id r the i i n when it come t making a r me ting an r p rting ar indicat r fr m pa t nly i u th t rna b im a ting rt t auth riti . Additional Barrier Re arch r fr m th 1 0 r p rt d that la k f training in d t cting lack f knowl dge of th 1 gal bligati n t r p rt and lack f c nfid n e in rep rting pr t c 1 although important re not all that a r quir d t influenc teacher to r port whenever th y u p cted child abu e or neglect. B ck and hi c lleagu uncovered a myriad of factor (1994) both within their lit rature r view and from the finding of their own tudy which appear to play a crucial role in teacher deci ion making proce . According to Becket al. Levin (19 3) found that mne teacher may n t repmi because they believe that the child' puni hment i within the bounds of proper par ntal di cipline (Becket al. 1994, p.17) and that according to a tudy by Bavolek (19 3) the mo t frequent rea on teacher failed to report child abu e wa th fear of getting involv d (40%) or the feeling that tnaking a report w uld n t make a differenc (20 %) (p . 5) . Included in the review, Baxter and B r "reported that many tea her pmiicipant w r appreh nsive about reporting£ r fear f parental retaliation' (p. 79) and brahan1 , a ey, and Doro (1992) ' c nclud d that 52o/o of re p nding t ach r were con en1 d ab ut p t ntial damag t the parent-t a her nd tea h r-child relati n hip " (p .2 4) . 21 B k tal. (1 (25% f tud .. u p1 1 n f arti i ant ibl m ln hild bu rt th ught h di n tr hild and family in d hild pr t cti n pr p.2 they a r lu tan n lud d that th r 4 nd alm t r ti n . h ar h t 2 % f th . Wh n m ITI uth riti th ir rtt ir urn tan r p rt w ul ha n b half f n lud d that n gati t a her la uring th attitud n d t qu n t a h r r 4 o/o f fl r th nfid nc in th ard th r p rting law n lud d that: lth ugh t a h r r gniz d that th u pect d child abu man indi ated th would n t rep rt u p m re harm than g h ul b r q uired t r uld c n iv rt all ca e fa ca f wh n they t d hild abu e parti ularly when rep rting c uld cau e d for the hild .24) . tudie conduct d m re recently continue t per onal i ue may be at play in the teacher p ak to the fact that at time mor deci ion making pr ce e that may cau e them to not report every in tance where they may u pect a child i b ing abu ed . Kenny (2001) indicated that over 38o/o ofre pondent did not report at on1e point in th ir career, for fear of making an inaccurate report, 12.9%>failed to report a child' elf-report as there was no vi ible phy ical injury; and over 16o/o who did not report felt that P wa not helpful to children. Other reason cited for not making a report were: not wanting to appear fo li h, a belief that reporting lead to negative con equence for the fatnily and child, a belief that they may be mi interpreting cultural wa of di ciplining childr n feeling it i not a part of their job and not wanting t d al with any legal i ue that rna ari e as are ult f the rep rt (p. 7). 22 W al h et al. 2005) al fi und that t a h r er r lu tant t r p rt du t cone n1 that w r n t i1npa t d b their la k f kn re earcher id ntifi d 19 fa t r a ide fr m la k f training th t h d influ n th ir participant ' d ci i n in th pa t t n t r p 1i u p t d hild abu . f th nin teen id nc to tnak a r p rt fi ar t th li ted· th lack of po ibl n equ n t the1n lve if th y wer id ntifi d a th report r; lack f upp rt within th mak the report· and the fact that th famil w alr ady hild r chool t wn to child protectiv ervice w re rat d high t a a r a n t n t mak a report p.40). mith (2005) conclud d that her participant r a on for n t rep rting included: a principal supervi or or oth r admini trator ad i d them n t to (8.2 o/o); the teacher did not feel they had enough information to make a report (8.2%); and 3.3% ofth tudy participants expres ed concern with the child protection y tern. Additional rea on expressed by participants within thi study included that the child may be lying; fear of repercussions to the child; and a fear of repercussions to them elves from the parents (pp. 50-54). King (2011) noted in his study that his participants also expressed they encountered baniers to repmiing aside from lack of training in the area of child abuse. They spoke of not reporting due to concern such as: worrying that things would b come worse for the child (81 °/o); wondering how making a repoti would impact their interaction with the child and/or fatnily (65.5o/o); the fear ofbeing wrong (65.4%)· and 57 .9% did not report due to their fear of rehibution from the parent or fmnily if th y did repmi (p . 2). 2 In 201 an w r p rt nth t pi rel a ed. There arch c nducted b Teach r R p rting ttitud h The r earch r expr Wal h r 1iing f hild abu wa hiru1a and T y 201 ) u d th ) tom a ur ale (T th ir attitud toward r p rting hild abu tool are v ry similar to th ft a h r e :fl und b r t auth riti . Th r ult fr m th u f thi ar h r u mg ther m th d over the y ar . on lud d that although th ir participant w r willing t r p rt an d a d ire t fulfill th ir pro:fl i nal dut to r p rt, th partici ant al expre s d orne one 111 in r gard to rep rting. The e c ncern included : fear of family or community retaliation· what th par nt may d t th child aft r a r port wa mad and the lack of confidence teacher xpre ed that th auth ritie would be able to re pond effectively or for that 1natter that the authoritie would r pond at all (p .243). Of particular note is are earcher who performed a nmnber of tudie with participants fron1 Ontario and Newfoundland during the 1990s, which dealt with this subject area. Rosonna Tite focused on "the relation hip between teachers' work and the school's response to victims of child abuse". She felt that the school's role in responding to child abuse was to require "teachers to report disclosures or su picions of abuse to their local Child Protection Service" (Tite, 1998, p. 1). Tite has outlined issues he found within her research that speak to the topic of reporting suspected child 1naltreatment. Over the years Tite found everal possible barriers identified by teachers within her study findings that rnay contribute to a teacher's decision to 1nake, or not 1nake a repmi to authorities. These barriers include: 24 th lack of training ffi r d to t a h r in th ar a f d t hild ting and r rting· th credibility (parti ularl with ' r bl m children )· th r p rt r' fru trati n with outc m prot ti n of pa t r port · on rv1 111 r w rker and th ir p r garding the hug i a 1 ad f chil din bilit t c pe with th r p 1i· r mark t the feeling the r p rt will b di 1ni d if th r ar n wi tn cmT b rat the teach r one m that r p rting will only mak thing war r p rt th for the child· and th ri k that the par nt may e k re eng formakingther p rt(Tit 199 The e fmding are imilar to have uncovered over the year nth t a her pp. 2-5. hat th r re earch r within thi literature review that th r are a number of i ue that teacher mu t consider every time they detect possible child abu e. Rates of R eporting Having explored within this literature review the myriad of concerns and barriers, identified by teachers in past research that created barriers to reporting suspicions of possible child abuse to authorities, I will now examine how these concerns may i1npact rates of reporting. For over 20 years, researchers have been tracking the reporting habits of teachers world-wide. The results of these studies show teacher do not report all case of suspected child abuse to child protective services. For exmnple, in 1994, Beck's tudy concluded that a quarter (25°/o) of his participants were reluctant, in orne circun1 tance to report to authorities their suspicions of possible child abuse ituation (Becket al. , 1994, p. 26). In 2001, findings from a study conducted by Kenny indicated that o er of respondents did not report at mne point in their career (Kem1y, 200 1, p. 7). Wal h % 25 and colleagu r d that 74.5% ft a h r in th ir tudy 1 a (2005 di c child n1altr atm nt at lTI tag in th ir car r but that 10°/o f th ir articipant had mad th d ci ion n t t r p rt plu a furth r 4% f th th ir principal n t child pr t ti Cani u rv1 (p.5 ). h did report r p rt d t in 2005 anadian re archer mith r p rt d that 4.1 °/o fh r arti ipant had n t made a r p rt f u p ct d child abu (p.50) a p r ntag that wa Au u-alian re archer bbl imilar t nn ich 1 n, Wal h and 2001 finding , and in 200 e n c ncluded that 14.5o/o of their parti ipant had n t r p rted a c e f u p ct d hild abu e t authorib two-third of th tea her had fail d to report more than ne ca and (p. 94 7). A late as 2011 Canadian re earcher w re finding that a quart r (25%) of teacher in ntario wh had participated in a tudy on r pmiing habit had n t reported in tance where they had suspected child maltreatment (King 2011 p.92) . In summary Walsh et al. (2005) concluded their repmi by stating that "there are complex issues that influence teachers' detecting and repmiing practices. These i sues should be the subject of further research" (p. 65) . My review of literature on this subject, to date, has not revealed, aside frmn the Beck et al. (1994) study any recent studies conducted specifically with British Columbia teachers to explore issues or concerns they may have when reporting child abuse by parents or guardians. Although there have been studies conducted to measure a teacher's ability to detect abuse and their cmnpliancy rate to report child 1naltreat1nent in other provinces (King, 2011; S1nith, 2005; Tite, 1998), and other countries ( hoo et al., 2013; Goebbel et al., 2008; Mcintyre, 1987; Wal h et al., 2005), the majmity of studies have utilized quantitative surveys and vignette of possible child abuse scenarios to collect data with the data being analyz d u ing a variet 2 of quantitati m thod . nfl 1tunat ly in quantitati r ar h th indi idual v ice participant are gen rally n t fully h ard a th data 11 ti n n1 th d t nd t u clo d que ti n with a limit d ari ty f have raised t ntial r p n m inter ting qu ti n that n better under tand and gi e t a tea h r d t be p r nal . Th quanti tativ f tudi amin d furth r in an ffl 1i t n n f r p rting u pect d par ntal hild abu e. Overview of Law and Legi lation that Protect hildren International Child Right The worldwide recognition that childr n ha e th right to be pr tected fr m violence and maltreatment i ntrenched in both international and national law . The e rights include the right to go to chool; to live with their familie in a afe and nurturing environment to have a ay in decisions concerning them · to tay connected with relatives and to participate in their parents culture (UN Convention on the Rights of the hild, 1990). In December 1991 Canada, as a ratifying me1nber of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, recognized that all children and youth are entitled to the full range of human rights, including the right to be cared for and protected fron1 all form s of violence by parents and other caregivers (Noel, 201 3). Federal: Criminal Code of Canada The Criminal Code of Canada has several sections that can b e u ed to charge people who hatm children ( rin1inal ode, 1985); although it appears that a charge und er 27 th riminal u uall nl in d h nth hann infli t d r d ral harg d und r th riminal 279) h mi id chil ren and harg the fi d r 1 la ut par nt d fi r an f ffi n m f th ault 21 an r lat d t th und r th riminal 2 5-2 fi rcibl nfin n1ent ( itie failur t pr vid n e ti n 2 1 -22 1 riminal n gli g n d fi r u 1 ffi nc 27 1-27 u al a ault th r again t flife lth ugh pr vin ial and ti n 1 gi lati n i gen rall u ed wh n children hav had th ir iolated r ar in need f pr t cti n figure . Within ul b n are in pla t rrit 1ial child pr t right hild. 5 and 170- 172 151 -15 215) aband ning child th f in lud 22 -2 1 and 2 uth re lh a ult in th d mi tr atm nt f th ir hi1d r hil ren . whi h par nt c ul b h n ar nt tr m anada a h pro inc and t rritory ha it policy and practice pro edur within their juri diction p cially in ca e of abu ba d on the Federal oel 2013 . In Briti h by par ntal wn provinci allegi lation, ri1ninal de, t protect children olumbia the provincial child protection legi lation that is u ed to protect children i the Child. Family and Community Service Act ( FCSA). Provincial: BC Child Pro tection Legislation CFCS The legislation that protects children within B Community Service Act ( F is the A) which i utilized by the B hild, Family and child prot ctive ervice, known as the Mini try of hildren and Fmnily Develop1ne11t (M FD). nder th F SA, parent are held re 1 on ible for protecting th ir childr 11 from 11 gl ct· ern tional, phy ical and exual a u e· or from th dome tic vi lence by r again t m ti nal han11 ofwitn meone tb y liv e with. h £ cu of the mg F t 2 fth en ure that all deci i n ar mad in th b F hild. e ti n 4 (1) fthe A tate : Wh r th r i a r fl rene in thi factor mu t b c n id r d in d t nnining th e ampl : th child' afety th devel pm nt; the in1p rtan fa hild all r 1 vant ct t th b hild' ph hild' b i al and In ti nal n ed nd lev 1 of of c ntinuity in th child' car · the quality of th r lation hip th child ha with a parent r th r p r on and th ffl ct f maintaining that relati n hip· the child' cultural ra ial lingui tic and religiou heritage; th child' vi w · a w 11 a th effect on the hild if there i delay in making a deci ion ( F hapt r 46 1996). Working within thi principle of be t interests of the child M FD protection ' social worker investigate report of su pected abu e and neglect and in instances of substantiated reports develop and implement plan of care to protect the child or children involved. These are the frontline staff to whom teachers make their reports. Reporting Child Abuse and Neglect in BC Persons obligated to report. There is a legal obligation for teachers and other professionals to report suspected child abuse and neglect in BC. Section 14 (1) of the CFCSA outlines a per on' Duty to Report Need for Protection a : "a per on who has reason to believe that a child needs protection under section 13 1nu t prmnptly rep01i the matter to a director or a person designated by a director" (CF S Chapter 46 1996) . Confidentiality and sanctions for non-reporting. Within Briti h duty to report child abuse and neglect ovenid olumbia the a clain1 of confidentiality or p1ivil ge, 2 ti n 14 2) f th exc pt b tw n a lawy r and a eli nt und r tea h rs in B th ethical principle f haver a n t u p t hild abu e r n gl d e n t r p rt und r What i reportable. The outline th circum tan hi m an fl r nfid ntialit d e n t ap ly in a t may ha f th cti n 14 (1 t. F ct (1 under which hild curr d. mmi t an ffl n uch at ach r wh und r hapt r 4 : art : ti n 14 ( ) cti n 1 (1) (2) ould b c n idered in need f prote ti n. A p r on w uld b c n id r d neglig nt if they u pected that a child wa experi ncing any of the • circUin tanc and did n t r p rt. In theca e ofphy ical abu e and n gl ct: child ha been or i in dang r f being phy ically harm d by a parent or ther and the child parent will n tor cannot protect the child; harmed or at ri k of harm due to neglect by the parent' a child lives in a home where there i dome tic violence; the child i abandoned; the parent will not care for the child and does not provide alternate caregivers or; the parent does not provide adequate medical care for the child as required. • In the case of sexual abuse: A child has been, or is likely to be, sexually abused, exploited, encouraged or helped to engage in prostitution by the child's parent or others and the parent is not able or willing to protect the child • In the case of emotional abuse: if a child is e1notionally harmed by the parent's conduct and demonstrates severe anxiety, depression, withdrawal, or selfdestructive or aggressive behavior. Although the above could be considered a very comprehen ive li t of po sible abuse or neglect situations that could lead one to repmi, it lack a de ription of 0 indicat r that 1nay 1 ad on t u p t th curr1ng. a ti iti h indi at r d cription and an expand d d finition f n gl ct and abu e have b n u 1 p1n nt (M Mini try f hildren and Famil B Ffandbookfor A tion on The BC Handbook for hildAbu ction on The B Handbook for tion on f (2007 a) uppli d by the g defmition outlined in the hild F and ) bu e and hild Abu alled Th ithin a handb gl ctfor li d by th ro id r . glect and tfor rvzc Providers fl r u e by t acher and ther , includ A a well a ali t f indicat r th ummarized bel w which the teacher ar dir cted to r ference t determine if a child may be experiencing abuse. 1.) A possible indicator of neglect would be; if th child does not have adequate food, shelter health care, or if adequate supervi ion or protection fr01n physical risks or danger is not provided by a parent or caregiver. 2.) Emotional abuse indicators could include a child being subjected to constant blaming, physical or emotional rejection, verbal attack , threats, insult , humiliation, and name-calling by a parent or other. Often the child 1nay appear to have extreme anxiety, depression, withdrawal, or may di play elfdestructive and aggressive behavior. 3.) Indicators phy ical abu e may be occurring could include instance where the child pre ents with minor bruising, burns, welts, or bite n1arks, enou burns, cuts, or abrasions, broken bones or kull fracture . 1 ual abu e may be 4.) that uning ifth inappr priat ly t u h d th ir b d r th y er 111 k dt t u h ne 1n n to th ir b dy orr qu ting that th child xpo or m one 1 deliberat ly porn graph ( hi r h r b dy fl r s p ing th child t mm nt f anada 2007a). The handbook note that B th 1n el th ual purp es e ual activity r indicat r d n t pr ve that a child ha been abu d r n gl ct d. The can r ult fr mph n mena uch a div rce, eparation the death of a ignificant per on or th ani val fan w ibling" ( overnment of Canada 2007a p.27). The definition and indicat r upplied in the B Handbook for Action on hild Abuse and Neglect for Service Providers (2007a) lack pecificity and appear open to interpretation. As a result this handbook recommended by the school district as a pri1nary source of information on detecting and reporting, seems inadequate in terms of providing teachers with the infonnation they require to detect indicators of child abuse and neglect with confidence. Despite the fact that I agree with the handbook, that "teachers are in an excellent position to observe the behavior of children over a prolonged period of time" (p.12), identifying indicators of child abuse and neglect is u ually challenging. This is not meant to imply that teachers require the smne level of training in detecting and assessing potentially abusive situations as child protection social workers or child abuse experts, but training teachers to the extent they feel confident enough in their suspicions to report to authorities is e ential. 2 In ord r t furth r r teet hildren in B th Pr rofe ional rganization and Mini try ag nci 1fonn th ir m 1nb r and 1npl yee nun nt in truct d 11 to draw u guid line and pr toe 1 to f th ir dut to r p rt u p ted child abu e a ·ell a to upply in tructi n and guidanc ild 1naltreatment ba d n th in i 1 g n h w t detect and r port u p t d ca F chool Di trict 57: Child Protection Policy In compliance with thi dire tive in Mar h 2012 ch 1 Di trict 57 ( 57) !Vi ed their hild Protecti n Po lie #5145 .4 to include the tat 1nent: " very person ho ha reason to belie e that a child need protection und r ection 13 of the hild amily and Community ervice ct ( F ) mu t report this belief promptly" (Board [ Education, 2012 p.1). The revi ed policy speaks to ection 14 of the F A that nakes it a legal duty of every person who has reason to believe that a child needs ~otection to report that belief to a child welfare worker'. The chool district policy rects employees to apply the de criptions of physical, emotional, and sexual abu e as 1tlined in the BC Handbook for Action on Child Abuse and Neglect for Service roviders (Govermnent ofBC, 2007a), and in the booklet, Re ponding to Child Welfare oncerns, (Govermnent ofBC, 2007b), to detennine if a child is possibly being abused, ,. neglected, by a parent or guardian (Board of Education, 2012, p.4). The policy further ates that district employees will be provided with annual training in recognizing sign f child abuse as well as direction on re p nding to child abu e to aid them to detect and !port accurately (Board of ducation, 20 12, p.7). f HAPTER THREE Re earch Meth dolo Thi chapter outlin qualitati r th re arch d ign and r view th fl 11 wing li t f t arch appli d th 1nati anal call ction, data anal i r ruitln nt f participant data 1n th d 1 gical int grit and thical c n id rati n . Qualitative Research Th:i re arch tudy u expen nee of participant a qualitati m th d f inquiry t e pl re th ho hav d t ted and r p rted u p ct d parental child abu e in northern B . Qualitati ere earch i a form of re earch in which there earcher collects and interprets data. U ually th data i in the fonn of in-depth interviews, focu groups, or field observation . Qualitative research utilizes an open and flexible de ign. As defined by Creswell (2014): Qualitative research is an approach for exploring and understanding the meaning individuals or groups ascribe to a social or hu1nan problem. The process of research involves emerging questions and procedures, data typically collected in the participant's setting, data analysis inductively building fr01n particulars to general themes, and the researcher making interpretations of the meaning of the data. Those who engage in this form of inquiry upport a way of looking at research that honors an inductive style, a focus on individual1neaning and the i1nportance of rendering the con1plexity of a ituation (p. 4). 4 The 1nain ta k of qualitativ r parti ular tting "under tand ac plain th way p appr priate to conduct qualit ti r ccording to .7). ar h wh n a r r etting in which participant in a Applied Thematic 1n gr up or unt fl r tak a ti n, and th rwi & Hub rman 1994 t day ituati n ' (Mil context arch i to c rding t manag th ir day r w 11 2007) it i arch r want t "und r tand the d addr apr bl 1n r i u ' (p. 40). naly i u t Mac u nand arne 2012) in th ir b k Applied Thematic Analy i The applied thematic analy i ( T ) approach i a ng rou yet inductive, et f procedure designed to identify and examine theme from textual data in a way that is transparent and credible. The method draws from a broad range of several theoretical and methodological perspectives, but in the end, its primary concen1 is with presenting the stories and experiences voiced by study participants a accurately and cmnprehensively as possible (p.15). I used Applied Thematic Analysis as a guide, utilizing the sugge tions included within to create a cmnprehensive approach to rny applied thematic analysis process. Applied thematic analysis (ATA) as defined by Guest et al., "i comprised of a bit of everything; grounded theory, positivism interpretivisrn, and phenomenology synthesized into one 1nethodological frarnework" (2012, p.15). Braun and Clar·ke (2006) suggested that thematic analysis does not require the detailed th oretical and technological knowledge of appr ache such a grounded theory or di cour e analysi (p.82). However, reswell (2007) cautioned that the data must be pro e d prop rly ' o 5 that the r arch r in th und r tanding e nd can forge a ntial t the proc mtn n und r tanding ' . 2). h 01mnon fth alth ugh a h p r n phen In n n will be th ir own i inh r nt in th data. Wh n u ing applied th matic anal ne tnu t c n ider wheth r t u an inductive or deducti e appr a h to analy i . I h e t u e an indu tive appr ach allowing the th In to ' merge fr rn th data a pp d t u ing ad ductive approach where there earch r u e apr - tabli h d frame ork f th m in which t fit th data (Patton, 2002 p. 453). Ethical Considerations Prior to conducting there earch I submitted an ethics prop al to the B Research Ethic Board ( ee Appendix H) for approval. No interviews were conducted prior to receipt of the Board approval. During the interview process I ensured that I explained to the participants the purpose of there earch as well as the risks and benefits of participating. I outlined how their confidentiality would be maintained; explained their right to stop the interview at anytime and/or have their information excluded from the final analysis. I ensured that all pariicipants were capable of under tanding the irnplications of participating in this research; and that each participant signed a consent form prior to starting the interview. Recruitment of Participants For this tudy the recruit1nent ofparticipar1t wa undertaken u ing criterion a well as chain ampling. "The logic of criterion sampling i to review and study ases that meet s01ne pre 1etennined criterion of importance" (Patton, 2002 , p.2 ). I u ed criteri n 3 arnpling to n ur that all participar1t w r t a h r wh had taught within ch Di trict 57 and had xp ri n d in th one ca e f u p ct d par ntal hild abu pan fth ir ar r d t ting and r p rting a 1 a t t auth riti . I u d hain ( m ti1n a ' nowball' ) arnpling to lo at additi nal 'inti nnati n-ri h k y infonnant ca e (Patt n, 2002 p.2 7) by a king tea h r regarding the ubject. "id ntifying ca infonnation-rich 1 kn wn r critical h they w uld r c 1nm nd I p ak with re w 11 (20 7) d cribe th pr c of inter t fr 1n peopl who kn w p f chain ampling a pl wh know what ca e are .127 . I b gan t locat participant by contacting tea h r that I know pro iding them with a c py f th participant recruitment 1 tter (Appendix ) outlining the purpo e of the tudy. I e panded the ample by a king both potential and agreed upon participant to rec01nm nd oth r forint rviewing. Data Collection My data collection consi ted of ix emi- tructured interview that I personally conducted and transcribed. Although this is a very mall sample of teachers, purposeful sampling ensured that all interviews were infonnation-1ich cas s. Keeping the number of interviews within these boundaries enabled me to collect in-depth information from each participant. Due to the small sample size, this study is not intended to be representative of the entire population of teachers in BC. Using a qualitative 1nethod generated insight into what enables teachers to detect child abuse and report, as well as informed me of the physical as well as the emotional concerns the participant had encountered both during and after the detecting and repo1iing proces . 7 T 11 ti n ag btain th r quir d dat I n truct an int rvi w in t t d d m graphi and ba kgr u11d har t ri ti u ha mpl and grade( ) taught b the parti ipant, and numb r f pp 11di id ntify and d 111 an ub fparti i nt d in th t a hing n ti n fl nn nabl ). Thi g n ral parti ipant d rib th int 1 i w ampl ti 11 . h fir t m t qu 11t public ti n f tudy finding . Th ti n 1 a mi- tru tur d intervi ee intervi w i a qualitati em th d f inquiry that utilize a pre-d termin d qu ti n . Thi pro id d an pp rtunit fl r m t further hi type f pp ndi t r rep 11 pl r particular th m et th que ti n did not limit my parti ipant t a uch a a quantitati e que ti nna1r doe . An additional r a f p 11 t fpr -determin dan w r n fi r u ing thi type of it:terview i that all my parti ipant an wer d the am que ti n which en ured that data i complete for each per on on all the topic that were addre ed in th interview . hi made it easier to cmnpare re pon acros the ix int rview during the analy i proce I included probes and follow-up que tio11 within the interview outline. A uggested by Patton (2002) I u ed these probe to give clues to the participant about the type of response that I was looking for, or to encourage participant to deepen their re pon e . The etting. I contacted the patiicipants I had elected and once they had agr ed to be interviewed for the tudy I et up an appointment to meet. The participant cho e a variety of place to meet. ne interview took place in an office; two participant were interviewed at home; two ch e to be int rview d in coffi e h p and one at Initially I intended to conduct interview with ix to eight participant . How r tam·ant. er I b li that aturati n occurred within i and that c nducting n1ore int rvi w wa unlik 1 t have yi lded n w data. aturati n 1 h n 'gath ring fr h data n 1 ng r park n w in ight or rev al n w r perti Data naly i Within thi tudy I pl r db th the indi idual p r pti n f a h t acher a w 11 a th co1nm nalitie of the gr up exp ri nc ata analyzed f ix tran ribed, one-on-one intervi w with tea her wh ha dir tly e p ri nc d re rting parental child abu e in the pa t. I per onall tran crib d th interview which all wed me t become familiar with th data. Ba ed on the applied the1natic analy i (AT A) approach, I did n t create the1nes based solely on the finding ofpreviou re earch identified within the literature review. I read and reread the data for patterns that related to my participant ' experience of repmiing child abuse. As suggested by ue t et al. , (2012) I then used the interview questions as a starting point and developed a set of preliminary codes ba ed on the questions. This ensured that the intent of the data collection process and the outcome of that process matched. I then extracted text that was applicable to the codes from each interview and placed it under each of the codes. At this point I colour coded the text segments so I knew which participant had said each text segrnent. This enabled me to perform an analysis of each interview separately as well a allowed me to cmnpare responses to each code across interviews later. I then clu tered all the text segrnents from all six interviews under the applicable codes. As suggested by Guest et al. (2012) I count d the nmnber of participants who e comments were placed under a particular code in ord r to smm11ruize and de cribe the patt 1ning in th data (p. 1 2). od that app ar d 1nultiple ti1ne in the data and that wer p k n t by all i parti ipant b cam th In ti1n by 1nor than thr frequency ofth th m and c d poken to num r u parii ipant an1 ub-th me . In thi marm r I mea ured the a11d ub-them and d termined wheth r th c de had en ugh infonnati n fr In nough participant t b in lud d in th final anal wer det 1min d t b r bu t w r u ed in the final analy i . Th r wa thi frequency count. In theca e of th participar1t ub-th m p iti i . The c de that n xc pti n t kn wn utc m , nly two poke of having a p itive utcome t a r p rt regarding abu e. I felt docmnenting the out m r lated t the e r p rts wa important to the overall int nt of the analy is, even though a po itive outcmne wa exp nenc d by only tw participants. As uch the d cision wa made to include the ub-th me in the final write-up. The overall analysis objective at thi tage wa to compare data acros the six interviews looking for similarities and differences in the participants' experiences of detecting and reporting suspected CAN situations. By using the techniques of repetition and constant comparison to analyze the code cluster I was able to identify thematic cues (Guest et. al. , 2012, p.66). I looked for significant phrases and patterns in the participant ' responses across interviews to use for the development of themes. After thi process wa complete I was able to identify three 1nain theine that were relevant to the research objectives. Each of the identified theme had been discussed by all the participant although each had their own experience of the theine. As pointed out by Guest et al. , (2012),"a single theme can engender 1nultiple code "(p. 52).Thi wa theca e within my analysis and I identified several ub-thetnes which etnerged within each of the three broad themes as I read and reread the t t segn1ent under each broad then1e. I then 40 plac d a applicabl the ub-th m th text egrn nt I had un riginally c d d t th br ad th In und r ne of er d. er a thr -m nth p ri d I ch k d for coding di r pan i r reading th t xt and r coded th t had de lop d. I did thi rc1 t grn nt und r th cod tlu- e tim r th by r ading and u ing th c d b pace f thr m nth a kI ugg ted by Gue t tal. (2012) ' in ord r t n gate an t mp rary di t rting fD ct iinmer i n in the data can cau ' . 2). In thi mann r I ha e ught t n ure that the text are coded accurately. I al o did the arne pr cedure with th code grnent checking t ensure that the code were placed und ran applicable theme. The fir t check r v al d that orne of my text segment verlapped int multiple code o I revi ed my codebook, expanding it to include additional code under which orne of these overlapping t xt segments could be coded. Thi solved the i ue of the overlap of text egrnents within the codes as well as the addition of the new codes that created additional themes, which I incorporated into the codebook as they emerged. At the end of this process I added an additional three themes bringing the final total to six. These theines are: Knowledge; Training; Reporting; Known Outcomes ofReports; Unknown Outcomes of Report ; and Follow-up. Once I could clearly define what alliny theilles and ub-themes were and could describe their scope and content I moved to the next phase, producing the report. I outlined the story of IllY data in a way that shows the merit of the tudy a well as the validity of IllY analysi . Data extracts are used in the final w1ite-up to how the reader evidence of the themes and sub-theilles within the data. 41 Methodolo ical Int rding t r at rity u t tal. (2 12 th r ar man in th fi ld f qualit ti inquiry t r la whi h ar th ught t be b 111 f th qu ntitati h which i the n I ha inquir :fl r th in quali tati ithin thi nt u the t 1m alidit tr diti n' (p . d i the m uantit ti e t nn alidit . nfid nc in th truth f th findin g cont xt (p. lt mat t nn that ha e b n n r lia ility . Th t nn r dibility t mm nl y u d t rm redibility r [! r t "the in luding an a urat und r tanding f th ). In place of th term reliabilit the comn1only mpl a term u din quantitative inquiry I will b u rng d qualitativ term d pendability. Th term d p ndability "refer to whether th re earch project i c n i t nt and carri d ut with careful attenti n t the rule and con ention of qualitati All re earch proce meth d logy" (Gue t, 2012 p . 3 . need to be tran parent. "Tran parency of proce to making a convincing ca e for the validity of one' finding and interpretation critical (Mile & Huberman, 1994, p.278). I have included procedure that cr ate tran parency r garding my data proce ses. Credibility and transparency. A ugge ted by ue t et al., (20 12) t impro e the quality of output and to a ses the credibility of myth matic ana]y i procedure as et out by I followed th hannaz (2006 , p .99), li ted b low. • Ha y ur re earch a hieved intimate fan1iliarity with th • Are the data ufficient t merit y ur lairn . ( on id er th rang and d pth f b rvati n ntain d in the d ta.) tting r t pic . nmnb r 42 • mpan n b tw Hav you mad b tw n cat gori • D th at g rie • Are th re tr ng l gi al link r a wid rang n b ervati n and f em irical b rvati n ? n th gath r d data and y ur argum nt and your analy i . • Ha your r arch pr vid d en ugh r ad r to fi rm an independ nt a By u ing the id nc fi r y ur clai1n to all w th m nt - and agr e with y ur claim ? pr c dure I managed t "d cr a e the likelih od of making critical mi take and unfound d 1 ap of logic', a w 11 a to "increa e the degree f transparency" within my tud ( ue t et al., 2012 p. 5 . Intercoder agreement. According to Gue t et al. (2012) "an individual can serve as both the primary and secondary c derby reviewing some, or all, of her own coding after smne time ha passed ince the first round of coding" (p.92). As I was the only coder for this research project I checked for coding discrepancies by reading and rereading the text and recoded the text segments under the codes using the codebook I had developed. I did this exercise three ti1nes over the space of three 1nonths as sugge ted by Guest et al. (20 12), "in order to negate any temporary distorting effect i1runersion in the data can cause" (p.92). In this 1nanner I have ought to ensure that the text eg1nent are coded correctly. I also did the same procedure with the codes, checking to en ure that the codes were placed under an applicable the1ne. The fir t check revealed that orne of my text seg1nents overlapp d into n1ultiple codes, o I revi ed my codebook. I e pand d the codebook to include additional codes under which mne of the overlapping t xt segments c uld be coded. This solved th i ue of the overlap of te t egment within the 4 code a w 11 a th additi n f the new c d r at d addi ti nal th 111 that I th n inc rporated into th c deb ok a th y m rg d. Member checking. I al me rp rat d int my analy i n1 111b r h eking t further n ure the redibility of my finding . 111b r h eking " ntail participant th m 1ve or memb r of th participant ' c n1111unity reviewing the ummariz d data t ee ifthey a curat ly reflect th ir intent and m aning ( ue t tal. 20 12, p .93). uch, I contact d my participant and di cu d n1y finding with them. Alth ugh, orne re earcher D el that 1nemb r ch king a tually di tract from the credibility fa tudy " ince individual re pon e ar not a ily vi ible within the aggregated ummary" ( ue t et al. 2012 p.9 ), I, like ue t di agre with this tat 111 nt a 1ny participants recognized within the summary the theme and the content that they had spoken to. Audit trail. I also created an audit trail to enhance the credibility of tny study. An audit trail is a transparent description of there earch teps taken fron1 the start of a research project to the development and reporting of findings (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). Using this technique throughout the process establishe dependability, showing that the findings are consistent (replicable) and could be repeated by another researcher. "Audit trails involve keeping track of and docmnenting the entire data analysis process' (Guest et al. 2012, p . 93). I monitored and reported my analytical procedure and proces e as completely and truthfully as possible. To accmnpli h this I kept a journal where I recorded all my procedures and processes. My audit trail , a sugge ted by Gue t et al., (201 2) includes analytic activities such as : who tran cribed and coded the transcript ; a record of all data included in the analysis and what was xcluded as well a my rea oning for doing so; the 1nethod I u ed to apply code and find th me ; 1ny odebo k and any 44 change I 1nade to th my coding h od b k a I m ved thr ugh th pr c k and any hang I mad t th c ding pr c · a w 11 a there ult (pp.9 - 4). f part f 1ny audit trail I al o cr at d a c d b ok. T tabli h d p ndability and r liability I r pmi d 1ny m th d and d i ions for coding a w 11 a my r a oning £ r d analy i in a codebo k. Th 1 ping theme that w r uncover d during the od b ok n ur d that I u d c n i t nt labelling and interpretation for cod d velopment which will enabl other t th arne cod and theme within the tran cript by u ing them thod outlined in th cod bo k (Boyatzis, 1998 pp. 144-14 7). The audit trail al o include my taped interview and tran cript , and interview protocol. My audit trail a ue t et al. (2012) so clearly tated, will "let those who are interested in [1ny] re earch know how [I] got frmn A to B to " (p .94). I believe that by utilizing my audit trail and codebook other researchers would have very si1nilar results. Using quotes. I incorporated quotes from my participants throughout the write-up to give voice to the participants and tell their tory. The quotes from my participants will also supply readers with enough information to fairly judge the research findings. "Quotes lay bare the e1nergent themes for all to see" (Guest et al., 2012, p.95) . As suggested by Guest et al., (2012) , for some of the quotes I have "mnitted the 'mns' and other non-es ential speech elements as well as any uperfluou text (which wa replaced by the standard" ... ")" (p.96) when quoting pmiicipant , but overall I attempted to u quotes that could be included in the write-up verbati1n. 45 Reflexivity. "R analy i r ub quent int rpr tati n 1 a c 1mnonly ugg ted trat gy fi r nhancing validity in qualitative r prop th y al gnizing and r p rting p tential bia e that 1night af:fi ct th e th n pt that all r n te that g code and cod ar h ( u t et al. 2012 p. 7). lth ugh ue t and colleagu ar h i bia d including quantitati e inquiry (pp. 7- ), d c nt nt c ding and ub qu nt anal y i and int rpr tati n of the onfigurati n ar alway ti d t th raw data, what the participant actually aid (p.97) . re well 2014) ugg t that a r archer n ed t r fleet on "h w th ir r le in the tudy and their per nal background culture and xp rience hold p tential for shaping their interpretation , uch a the theme th y advance and the meaning th y ascribe to the data (p .l 6). To addre this i ue and to increase my awarenes of any biased deci ions I may be making I began a reflective journal. Within the journal I wrote why I had chosen a theme, and why I had made 1ny decisions on which text segments to extract from the data set. I did thi in order to ensure I did not lean toward creating certain themes or actively look for text segments to support a certain position (my belief or value) or theme. I kept in mind my experience of being an investigator of teacher ' reports in the past and sought to ensure that I did not influence the data to reflect my view of the issue. I used my journal to reflect on what the participants had aid and how they had said it and I included any insights I had and the reason for my methodological decisions. 46 CHAPTER FOUR Re ult Thi hapt r pr nt th re ult f thi r xp ri n e of det cting and r p rting a f u ar h tudy which amined the t d par ntal hild abu e £ r ix tea h r in north m B . Parti ipant ' qu tati n u d within thi purpo e and ea of reading. W rd uch hapter wer edited £ r c nfidentiality yah and 'urn' nd repeat d w rd were re1noved and replaced with llip e . Participant ar n t identifi d by pseudonym and any mention of ch 1 name or id ntifier were omitt d to increase an nymity and maintain confidentiality for both th participant and their tudent . Tllis chapter identifie the ix the1n : Knowledge, Training, Repmiing, Known Outcomes, Unknown Outcome , and Follow-up and explores the multiple sub themes that emerged from the analysis of the six interviews conducted for this study. Thi is the participants' story. Participant Description The participants for this study were all females who had taught within School District 57 for a 1nini1num often years. They have, during their careers, all detected , multiple times, what they considered to be indicators of possible ituation of parental child abuse or neglect. As a result, all of the participants have 1nade repmi to the Ministry of hildren and Fmnily Develop1nent (M FD) during their career , multiple ti1nes, with varying results. All pmiicipants possess a n1inimun1 of a Bachelor of ducation Degree, with two having a Ma ter' Degr a well. They vmied in th ir 47 nun1ber of year r f teaching fron1 10 year in th field t 1n. Two fthe re p nd nt ar v r 40 urr ntly in truct r ar 111 f e p rien e in ch i tri t 57 high n partici ant ha taught within the di trict at b th th el In ntary and high ch olle 1 while thr e pariicipant ar t acher in lem ntary ch participant m t the c1it ria t ut fl r th 1 in th di trict. 11 tudy and had pre iou ly rep rt d u p1c10n of par·ental child abu e of childr ninth ir la r m t M fl r furth r inve tigati n. Knowledge The fir t th me Knowledge, ha even ub -th me : Knowledge Wl1 n Applying to University Knowledge When Entering the m , urrent Knowledge on hild Abu e Current Knowledge on M FD tandard of hild Abu e urrent Knowledge on Repmiing to MCFD , Current Knowledge on D 57 Reporting Protocol, and Knowledge of BC' Child Abu e Reporting Law . Knowledge when applying to university. When deciding to enter the teaching profession five of the six participants had very limited awarenes of child abuse and neglect issues. They did not consider they would be expected to play a major role in detecting and reporting parental child abuse ituations within their classroon1s. One participant had heard of child abuse but had grown up in a family where abuse was not a factor enabling her to "not give it n1uch thought" during her univer ity days . In this study only one participant entered the teaching field with awarenes that detecting and reporting child abuse and neglect (CAN) "wa likely going to be a part of my career, a part of smnething I would have to do". 4 Knowledge when entering the cia room. they nt r d th cl what wa r om (al11n r than 10 ar ag ft r graduati nth participant felt with ut en ugh infi rmati n fi r pe t d f th In and with limit d kn wledg t p rfi nn th ir duty in thi area. The parti ipant did not fe 1 that th ir univer ity program had furth r d th ir knowl dge ba"e in ith r dete ting r rep rting hild bu net acher hared her thought ago) had nhanced h r know I dge nth t th n h w uru t n t th y w ul d r uir . r ity (alb it m re than 10 year ubj ct and had omewhat pr pared her fi r entering the cla r om but felt that the training c uld ha e b en expand d to include additional inti rmation that would ha e be n u ful t her. I don ' t think it wa enough looking back. ... I truly believe we need to learn more in the education program cau e what con titute abu e right? Like, I mean people tend to think abuse i phy ical it doesn 't nece arily have to be. And another felt that she also lacked enough knowledge on child abu e indicators when he entered the classroom more than 20 years ago. She tated her knowledge on detecting and reporting was: Not enough, not enough, not enough, not even nearly enough. If you've never had any experience yourself I don't think .. .it's a lot harder. If you 've c01ne fr01n a good fan1ily and you've never been neglected or emotionally abused or phy ically abused you don ' t always recognize it. You just think sometimes "oh that kid ju t being a brat", you don ' t r cognize the acting out a such and I find that there needs to be a lot more n that. 4 Th pa1iicipant e pre d that th ir knowl dge n h w and wh n t r p rt u pect d a u e wa al o la king when th time th y w r hir d to work fl r the ch articipant tart d t teach in the fi ld. 1 di hi t the participant w re infonn d that they would n edt r p rt any u pici n th y had that a child may b form of abu . An outlin f the proc t th m 1 din making a r p rt wa 1n p n nc1ng upplied in writt n form t half f th pmiicipant at th time they w r hired and pri r to th m making a r p rt. The ther half of the participant in thi report if they u pect d a child wa tudy w retold th y n d d to xperi ncing abu e but had n t received instruction on what paperwork wa required to be filled ut until after they had made a report. s one participant tated : it' glo ed over. It' just like oh and if you ever have t make a report this is what you do with that' "... There i n't a structured seminar that I know of and I have been teaching for 10 year . Another participant found reporting to be quite a scary experience due to her lack of training on how to report: Well, when I first started, it's scary, it's scary because they don ' t really provide you at first ummm your not provided with this infom1ation upfront, it's in the book, you know policy whatever but the first ti1ne you do it you have to basically go seek out okay how am I suppo ed to do thi ? In all cases the information on how to 1nake a repmi had been upplied to the participants by their principal or by school ad1ninistration taff. 50 Current knowledge on child abu e. acquir d additi nal kn wl dg ourc n child abu beyond what wa 1 arned fr In th ir 11 th participant r nd d that th y ar fi- m a vari ty f indicat r . d. pr grain r 57 pr granuning. n parti ipant xplain d that if h had n t b d u p rt f th r in h r p r nallifl that had training in th cial ubtl r indicat r of abu rk field h w uld ha and kn wing be n "1 t wh nit came t d t cting the hen t r p rt. Tw participant rep rt d th y had r tum d t uni cour e whi h dealt with th indi at r of child abu r ity and tak n additional th r popular urces of information on the ubject identifi d by the participant includ d; attending eminars (4), reading literature on the topic (3), ngaging in di cu sion with colleague (6), and their year of profe sional experience (6). Due to the information garnered from the e additional ources of information over the years one respondent felt they currently have a moderate level of knowledge, while five felt they have acquired a substantial level of knowledge on indicators of child abuse and neglect. Current knowledge on MCFD standards of child abuse. All the participant responded that they have acquired information on M FD standards of what constitute child abuse and neglect over the years from a variety of other ource as well. These additional sources of infonnation on the subject identified by the participant included · engaging in discussions with colleague (4) , taking additional university cour e (3), and reading literature on the topic (2). Due to the information garnered frmn the e additional sources of infonnation over the year , three re pond nts felt th y currently have a 51 1n d rate 1 v 1 fknowl dg fM FD tandard on what con titu te neg! ct whil the r maining r p nd nt (thr e) fe 1 th y ha level of kn wledg in thi ar a. 'it w uld ha hild abu e and a quir d a ub tantial n parti ipant n t d that in the b giru1ing f h r car r b en good to ha e 1ne n wh fl nnally at down and aid the e are the indi ator that y u 1 k fl r ... becau e I kn w that I mi ed thing y u kn w that thing ju t w nt over my h ad.' Other participant ch d thi ntim nt tating they t would rec mmend that orne type of fmmal training occur fort acher e p cially new teachers, in the area of detecting and reporting. d that had they received formal training mne teach r expre on the indicator of child abu e th y may have det cted and rep rted earlier in th ir career . Current knowledge on reporting to MCFD. All the study participants at the time this study was conducted had made reports to MCFD during their careers and noted that their years of professional experience making reports had contributed to their knowledge on the subject. They did acknowledge that the systen1 had changed over their 10+ years in the field from reporting to the principal to now, reporting directly to MCFD workers by phone and then info1ming the principal and ad1ninistration of the call. They also acknowledged that they were unsure what changes, if any had occurred within the university curriculum across Canada that 1night now have improved on the level of training teachers receive on indicators and reporting within th B.Ed. progr·arn. participant noted : on 52 I n t a hing fi r a 1 ng time t liD ft a h rtrainingbuti b n ju t h re it. .. whi hi I n t kn w hat th uldh p thatitw ul b r all th r ught g a pamph1 t n hat hild abu i and f hild bu urrent kno wledue on D 57 r portin protocol. d t dat pit of thi fi an £ rmal training n th r p rting r c n thi topi fr m rt . ne f th pa1ii ipant hav fr m the ch f th parti ipant fi It that their curr nt kn wledge f th Di tri t 57 r p rting p li knowl dg u mu t r h t I g t (ov r 20 y ar a o . I w uld think that a 1 t f ntiall work h uld b d n r cei ffi ial tan e i 1n a 1 di tri t. In cho I ub tantial. Parti ipant r p rt d th y had acquired their ral ur that included; di cu i n with colleague (5) profe ional e ' perien e (4 r ading literatur con med with the t pic (3) and attending em1nar ( ). One participant felt that their level wa only 1noderate although they had attended em1nar and di cu ed the t pic with colleague . Thi participant felt that although they currently had only a moderate level of under tanding on the topic, administration was very helpful in directing them through the proce when required . Knowledge of BC's child abuse reporting laws. All the teacher in thi tudy acknowledged repeatedly that they were required by legi lation and chool di trict policy to report to M FD any su pi cion they may have of a child being abu d and/or neglected. They all acknowledge that reporting t M FD regarding any u pi ion mandatory- a uch they d not feel they g t to make a choice. They al o pr ed that they felt morally, ethically, and em tionally obligated to eek a i tan e for the child inv lved. 5 ummary. In th b giill1Ing fth ir kn wl g abl th parti ipant and tilt th ting indi at nd t ft r 10+ ar hdm d rate t parti ipant agr d that th ir f ft arti 1 ant did n t fl 1 re r th r r p rting itu ti n hing ar n ub tantial kn ry hil a u 11 f ibl urr ntl war fth r p rtin Jaw n n titut hat ar f w rking in th fi Jd ha and h n ar abu h increa ed their kn wl dge 11 i r qUire Training The ec nd th m Reporting During ni Training ha tw ub-them r ity and Training by D57 on : Training n hild Abu e and hild bu and R porting. Training on child abus e and reporting durin g uni ver ity. All of the participant in thi tudy had obtained their B. d. degree over 10 year ago. t that time they did not feel they were made aware by the teaching program of their rol in keeping children afe or working with protective ervice to break cycles of abu e. ne of the participants had been required to enroll in a cour e in any of the vari d univ r itie they attended that was specific to recognizing A indicator or reporting prot c 1 while pursuing their Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.). A one participant noted: Not a a tudent teacher I think th y may get m re now but I c tiainl y wa n 't trained there was n c ur e that I took n how to id ntify you know, emoti nal abu e, 1 hy ical abu e in childr n and when to make the all. You know. It ' a ju t if y u u pect it i y ur duty t call, err n the ide f auti n that wa a i ally what we h t d . 54 1n parti ipant :D It they w r ill prepar d due to the la k funiv r ity cour availabl e t th m within B. d. pr gram · p ifi ally they id ntified a lack f c ur e cont nt whi h :D cu d n how t d t t and r p rt ituati n with confid n one teach r, who ha b n in th fi ld :D r o er 20 year tat d· . In cho 1 th y didn t d al with child abu eat all and then when I got t the high chool and tart d 1n ting the kid and kn wing th kid I didn t ... there weren't any w rk hop r ally any ... kind of in:D rmation pre ent d ... to talk about child abu e .. .it wa ju t ort fund rlying y u know. One participant did not recall exa tly what typ of training he had received but felt "there mu t have b en di cu ion but it mu t hav been brief and it wa , thi is the protocol and you don t have to worry, just do thi and that's all you have to do. " One participant noted that 20+ years ago when she acquired her B.Ed., the university she attended in Eastern Canada, did nothing to prepare teaching students etnotionally for the eventuality of actually encountering a student that was being abused. This participant described what it was like to see an abu ed child: It's an experience to see it in front of you. To see smneone show you their anns where they' d been whipped and bruised and broken open and say there 's even a younger child at hmne in a crib that's been hit too. And it's different to ee it in person than it is to read it in a book. And you can read it all you want, when you see that little face in front of you that tiny, tiny person and it ' different. Training by SD 57 on child abu e and reporting. None of the pm1icipant were formally trained by the chool district n child abu e and negl ct indi ator when th y 55 w r hir d. Th y all agre that th y w ret ld when th y di tri t that th w re mandat d t r port if th y u p ct d that a child wa being abu d. I e b n t a hing fl r a 1 ng ti1n t rm of teach r training but I g be r hir d within the ch ol nd ju t h r it ... which i I d n t know what th fficial tance i In uld h p that it w uld be really th r ugh and t a prunphl t n what child abu e i and y u 1nu t rep 1i ntially what I g t. I w uld think that a 1 t f work should be done on th indicator of child abu The participant in thi . tudy ha all detected and r ported u pected parental child abuse multiple time in their ar er . They felt that the training ffered by the school district on det cting child abu e wa inadequate for what they would encounter. One participant felt that the information they received "was ju t ort of skimmed over and at no point were social workers brought in to like a seminar or anything ... we weren't given any kind offonnal information". Participants felt like they were hired to teach in a classroom setting without the tools required to carry out their mandated duties in this area and as one participant stated, "it is on the job training". Five of the six participants have still not received any formal training frmn any school district on how to detect indicators of child abuse and neglect tlu·oughout their careers. One participant did indicate that she had been fonnally trained in the Care Kit early on in her career whi le working within a different chool di tri t. he tat d that "there was the care kit that we were to do that with our young children tarting in elem ntary." This training had "provided a lot f child abu e infon11ation" ...and "it wa 5 alway r d 11 e ry ar. Th arti ipa11t mad n te that the training wa £ r indicat r ob rv din y ung hildr n and a u h wa n t n c childr 11 an ar a h 11 w t ache 1n. h f th b ha ior w uld r cogniz it a uld b g arily tra11 £ rable to high chool tated that ' much m r training with th subtl r d :D r high h 1 tea her b cau e I d n t think th y a il Th oth r t ach r wh taught at the le1nentary 1 vel within ch did not In 11tion the had 1 District 57 r r c iv d thi particular training. on of the participant had been£ rmally train din how to mak a report of su pected child abu e whil w rking for D57 . ne participant outlined her training expenence a : We were given a heet of paper that aid, you know if you have suspected child abu e in your class, this i what you do, these are the steps you follow and so in that sense it was clear, it was concise, it was laid out. Another had a different training experience: I think the counselor and principal trained me how to do it, but it's not a formal training. It's 1nore you go and say this is happening and they say this has to be reported, here's the fonn, this is how you do it, and thi i where you file the form and this is who you phone. And yet another shared her training in reporting child abu e ituation a "I think a booklet came out with procedures " ... " we were supposed to have on the wall in ur classroom and if you go to child abuse it tell you what you 'r uppo ed to do ." 57 The participant indicat d that alth ugh th y have rep rted t M FD in the pa t with ch ol di trict ad1nini trati n guiding th m through th pr c pr ferred to hav o1n formal training n the pr c they w uld hav f r p rting 1 ri r to actually 1naking a r p rt. ummary . Th participant agreed that th y w uld have pr :6 rred t hav had formal ong ing training in b th d tecting and r p rting child abu a 01 po d t learning "on th job . Reporting Theine three i Reporting, which ha two ub-theme : Why and W11en Teachers Report and Emotion onnected With Making a Report. Why and when teachers report. The e topic were spoken to by all the participant within this study. Each of the participants very clearly articulated at smne point throughout the interview why and when, they personally, made deci ions on the need to report. As to why they reported, participants indicated they did so for the following reasons: due to their knowledge of the duty to report laws en luined within the school district policy; due to their moral and ethical boundarie ; to provide aid for the child and · they repo1ied in an attempt to prevent the perpetrator from continuing to abu e the child. As one pa1iicipant explained : " ... " in the end, this is like a year, ix even year old, ight year old th y can ' t defend them elve , they don 't know what to do thi may have b n what th y've 5 lived thr ugh inc bi1ih it' all they kn w they d n t know th re' anoth r li£ ut there. o ..... what I ha e to d I ha e to d . nd y u know what I m ure that 0111 tim it w rk n t t their ben fit ... but I ha e to d what I have to d . It i ..... w 11 it i 1n j b t I m uppo ed t b th ret help protect then1 y u kn w ..... fir t lin of d £ n . Anoth r poke of her rea on for rep rting a : " ... 'I alway tr to iew it a I'm h ret h lp the kid and I am one of their upport tern o if I fe 1 I mean by law all of u have to decide if we've been put into a situation where we uspect anything we need to call. Morally it 's the right thing to do and my elf a a teacher I'm bound by my ethics I have to call so. I try to ju t put 1ny feelings aside because it' about the child o. My thought is my children or the farnily need smne help so it is my job to go to the system and see if they can get smne help. Several participants also noted their legal duty to report as: "it becarne law to have to report, you have to report by law." and" ... " it's very clear the law ays when one ha to report.", as well as "But the rules are pretty specific so youjust follow what it tells you to, there's no I wonder if I should" ar1d finally "If you suspect, you phone, it is your duty. " Participants within this study also spoke of when they reported a being every time: they suspected a child was being abused or neglected; they aw indicator of abu e such as bruises; a child appeared to not have acce to suffici nt food or appropriate clothing; a child disclo ed abu e; a child was ab ent from chool ft n or fore tend d 59 p riod f time r wh n a child di play d flin hing b ing d pre mbinati n f indicat r of abu e uch a d udd nl withdrawing fr In ocial activiti and fri n etc. n participant li ted mne of th c mm n indicat r that t a h r r p rt a : " . . . notic abl brui ing . . . apr 1 ng d illn " ... ' lack f fl d ... ', 1 t of ab nteei In. An th r add d t the li t: "I v ailed n n gle t ituati n wh re a child obviou 1 i n t getting fl d d in th winter and no cl thing ... " Whil e n ' t ha e h anoth r patii ipant tat d: I aw th e brui and I th ught th re n way I'm letting thi go any furth er. It wa cl ar that all the participant in thi tudy w re knowledg abl e as to why they reported and clearl y under tood when th y w re motivated to report. Emotions connected with making a report. When asked what it wa like to make a report one participant re ponded with: Do I ever feel satisfied .... not really. Do I ever feel it' s been succes ful. .. rarely. Have I saved any child by reporting ... .I don ' t think so. I've made their lives more difficult someti1nes " ... " it's been for me personally, yah it's hard, it 's really a hard, hard decision. I usu ally do it in isolati on .. .that' why I gue I don 't talk about it. And another patiicipant stated: Frustration! I don ' t think I retnember a ti1ne where I felt like it wa re olved and the child was 1nade afer by 1ny call . Terrifi~; fru tration and worry be au thought if ocial ervices i n ' t going to deal with thi what hop doe thi kid have !?? I 60 me ar unsure if the rep rt i fir tit a tricky de i ion b fi re u v ary wh n g tting r ady tor port: "Yah at er don it b fi re andy u think what am I doing? A.In I p rung a whole can of w rm on? Whil an th r It m run I right? I ther really mn thing g ing d their cone m a : om time I truggl m time it feel like I m doing th wrong thing cau e I 1n fe ling .. . there' n guarantee ab ut any of thi . There' no guarant e that the per n will be afi and th re no guarante that when you report you're going to be afe i th r. It becarne clear that detecting and reporting child abu e and neglect wa an emotional joun1ey for teacher . The teacher in thi tudy feel a connection with their students that n1akes the journey at time a more difficult one to traverse. One participant explained her relation hip with her tudent as: it's a relationship with children and youth. People think it' just teaching and standing up in front of the class. You know those kids inside and out and it becomes personal and if, if you can grab smnebody and address that piece it s hard on teachers because they know the1n tnore than you would if you were just standing up there being the teacher. You know the kid and so by the end of the year you know them really well. Son1eti1nes you know them better than the parent does because you're a little bit objective ... but I don 't know .. .that' where I really get to know that person as a per on. While another expre sed her relationship with the childr n ru1d famili a : 61 orne of my kid I e kn wn for year right o I hav a c 1m ction with the fami ly and u don t want to metime br ak that tru t with th 1n and that cotm ction that you e made cau e that v ry i1np rtant p cially in inn r city chool and I d n t want t datnage that. All f the participant agreed that making a rep rt of u p cted parental child abuse i an rnoti nal titne for a teach rand th y fear d it could pell the end of the relation hip with th child an or family. They could lo e th ir home th ir relation hip with their family; they beg you not to tell like they'll, it s hard when they're begging you don 't tell. But you ay I have to, and ometi1ne you ri k the relation hip with the youth becau e you have to report. Although the decision to report is not sitnply the teacher's decision to tnake due to mandatory reporting laws a teacher still need to go through a process in order to place the call. The participants expressed that they can feel many different emotions while getting ready to call. One participant stated that when she phones : I don 't feel good about it when I have to phone MCFD but it i n't about me it's about the kids. Sometimes I feel guilty because sometimes when you call you're not always sure but I've had to make that decision that you have to err on the sid of caution. Right? For the little person. Another pariicipant explained the proces of tnaking the repmi a : 62 it difficult and it take m a 1 ng ti1ne .. .I it th rein front of the phon ju t thinking and thinking am I doing th right thing .. .which i h uld ha e t think that way .... but it d h uld .. .it n t r ally happily o crazy that y u n ' t really happ n the way you think it raft r that y ur aving happen that way ... 01n ti1ne it get real c mpl x. Yah... me kid ... .it d n t it' a difficult deci i n to come to . Th y 1netime felt lik a trait r forb traying th child' tru t by repo1iing. When reporting they w rri d a w 11 about p ible utcmne that th child may face as a result of the report. They w re fearful that the hild 1nay facer percussions or that the family would move in order to avoid an M FD inve tigation cau ing the teacher to lose contact with the child. One pmiicipant expre ed concern that a report may result in the .child running away to live on the streets as she had witnessed this outcmne for other children in the past. In one instance "the youth was reported and then they couldn't find her and I found her one day behind a dump ter and it was scary, there were two or three guys with her" ... " couldn't get her back. " The process of reporting can be a cause of stress and concern for any teacher but that is only the start of their journey. The data showed several different outcomes that were possible as a result of a report by a teacher to MCFD. Known Outcomes of Reports Theme four, Known Outcomes of Report ha fl ur ub-them Known Positive utcome for Teacher & : Impact of hild, Impact of Known N gati e Outc n1e 63 fl r th Tea h r Impact f Kn wn N gati utc In for the hild and No ction Taken byM F . Impact of known po itive outcome for teacher and child. cenano of r porting that w r bar d with th int rviewer during th teach r nan p ke f thr ca a po itive impact n th child f the 27 ca ix interview the wh re the teach r p rc iv d making the r p01i had lifl . In ne ca e: W 11 thi y ung girl went into care and he wa at a fo ter hom and he was look d aft r h r parent ... her m th r got help and her young r broth r got taken out of the hom a w 11 until the tep-father left. o what had happened was that it changed the whole dynmnic in the home. In another in tance the teacher explained that "I think it wa positive for the child as well.. .it was positive for me. I think it was po itive for the child ... cause she got into a home where they cared about her and did things with her. " And in the third case the teacher felt that "They [the protection workers] actually did go and do an investigation but it was done very respectfully. " Since the outcome was positive for the child, the teachers who had 1nade the reports felt that they had experienced a positive outcome a well. They were in a relaxed state when relating their experiences to me. Imp act of known negative outco mes for the teacher. There ult patiicipants of the known outcmne of their reports tended to b o bared by the rwhelmingly negative for both the child and the teacher. fthe 27 case cenario of rep tiing that were shared with the intervi wer during th i int rvi w , 24 were p rcei d b the 64 t a h r a ha mg n gati t ach r. In 1 ca ight a utc m the r p 1i n gati th outc m impact d th e l i1npact d th child dir ctly ten time and in a unknown fi r th child. th r ult f making a r angr par nt . . In all 24 ca e then gativ outc m rt n1 of th participant had be n confront d by n partici ant p int d ut: oth r than a fi w altercati n with parent ' ... ". I ju t try to never g t 1ny elf in that ituati n wh reI m g ing t b alon . If I ee a parent cmning down the hallwa and I ve made a call then I make my lf go in an ther direction. According to another participant there i orne risk of phy ica] harm "Definitely you put your elf at ri k mnetime "... There are orne reall y cary people out there with kids in our chool sy tern. " Still another tated: It s a little scary you know I just ay that whoever made the call felt that the call needed to be tnade and if we need to pur ue this then we need to go down to the office and have a conversation with our ptincipal. Parents 1naking threats to harm the reporter was the only negative outcome that physically affected the participants. The retnaining outcmnes of repmiing that were mentioned by the participants as negative were emotional in nature. As one participant stated after recounting her experiences of repotiing and witnessing negative outcon1e for the child " o you g t a bit jaded I gue s but you g t very empathetic and you get so you can pot thing bett r. But it doe tak an n1 ti nal toll. Here I am blubbering away." 65 Many f th participant w retaken aback at the mn unt of emoti n they exp ri nc d whil p aking on utcom frorn on participant wh of pa t incid nee . I hav included an e ample pok in anger wh n di u ing a pa t r port. he tated "b th children that w r in that h rne ar going t be abu ed again and badly and nobody' v r going t atch th In they hould ha e gone t pri on. I d n t know why I m o e1n tional." Th partici ant appeared t b fru trat d and at tim di ouraged and fearful when relating xp ri nee that had negativ outcome for the children involved in the report. I ay well what are y u g ing to do about it and they ay, I don't know they do thi all the ti1ne, thi i what they do they move every time they're caught." The participant appeared to be in an agitated state when relating their 'experiences to rne. They used word like angry frustrated , discouraged, and fearful to describe their emotional reaction to the outcomes of their reports. Impact of known negative outcomes on the child. When an investigation is conducted by MCFD, participant reported that the impact on the child is overwhelmingly negative. The participants shared examples of the known negative outcomes for children they have witnessed during their career . These outcome included; the child "being scooped up" and removed from the family unit by MCFD and placed in foster care; the child being blamed by the non-abusive parent for plitting up the family; the child made to feel the abu e wa their fault a they were being' bad' ; th child being told by M FD social worker and oth r they beli ve th child i lying ab ut the abuse· the child facing po ibJe punislunent from the abu r for telling th tea h r of 66 th abu e· th abu ive parent moving and taking the child 01newhere where they had no fii nd r c nn cti n t aid th 1n · the child b ing tlu· atened by the abu r; th being 1 ft by M FD with th abu rand the abu e or negl th old r childr n being rej hild t continuing unabat d; r for t d by th ir abu iv par nt and nding u on the tr t as a re ult of haring th ir tory with teach r wh 1nake report . The teach r c ntinued to u e word like h lple and fl arful to de crib th ir em tional reacti n to the known negative out me fl r th hildr n involved. orne w r angry and felt that M D had failed to do their duty in providing prot ction to th child. No action taken by MCFD. ne participant u1nn1 d up her thoughts with the statement: "It' been :fru trating and scary because I think the kid ' in imminent danger son1etime and nothing happen . ' All participants have experienced a variety of outcomes after 1naking a report. Participants were aware that sometimes a report to MCFD results in an investigation and sometimes not. As one participant stated "making a repmi doesn t alway mean that smnething is going to happen." This varied response by MCFD often caused the participants a degree of frustration and in some cases anger or fear when the teacher felt that the child invol ed may be in i1nminent danger. "When you're working with the e kid you know how vulnerable they are. What else can you do , you know and you're begging the1n plea e look into this; do mnething." o, although the teacher ha gone thr ugl the proce 1naking a repmi to M FD, they are faced with the very real p be taken to change the child' f ibility that no action will ituation. The participants r p rted that wh n th ir r p 1i 67 are not act d upon by M F th r ult wa continu d negative utc m m time thi cr ated additi nal tre to make 1nultipl r port t M In for the child. for the t a her and r ulted in the teacher having D of further occunenc of u p ct d abu e or n glect lving th child. Th y rep rt d and r p rt d it and rep rt d n thi little girl that he houldn t be in thi h m , we till phon ! h yah! That ' why we had, like 26 call about th on littl girl ... 'm t of 1ny r port wer on the arne kid . Like I 1nay have 1nade 40 r o report but it w uld have been on four kid . The participant poke of eight instance where they had made a report which resulted in no action b ing taken by MCFD . The participant expressed their frustration and discouragement with tatements uch as "nothing happened, the kid was still there, didn't have shoes, didn't have winter clothing." The participants were frustrated and even fearful at times as they recounted the instances where children were left in situations of possible abuse with no investigation done. Smne were confused as to why MCFD did not follow through on the call. mne expressed discourage1nent with the lack of action. When you repmi and you see nothing happening or they never get back to you or you perceive nothing ' s happening you ... what s the point? What is the point? You're getting your elf in trouble; you 're getting your colleagues 1naybe up et with you and fl r what? Nothing . .. you know cause nothing seem to happ n y u know so ... 68 Unknown Outcome of Reports Th m fiv 11known nknown utcom utc 1n n the Teach rand f Report in lud two ub-theme : Impact of pmg. Impact of unknown outcome on the teach er. ll participant felt e1noti nal during th int rvi w wh n di cu ing pa t e p rience of d tecting and r porting child abu . orne were particularly em ti nal when di cu ing report with unknown outcome . n participant smnmed up h r motion on unknown outcome a : I mean it' up tting in itting here reflecting about it they r not highlight in 1ny care r e pecially becau e I don ' t know what happened, I don ' t know what the outcome wa . If I knew that the child wa afe and you know things worked out for that kid then ... yah it was great thing but. ..I don ' t know if it wa a great thing. I did my job, I followed the law, and I'm hoping the abuse or neglect or whatever stopped. But I don' t know. But I do know that families were tom apart. That' not a great feeling. The teachers in the study expressed serious concern for children who just disappeared or were transfened by parents to other schools after the teacher had filed a report with child protective services. There were multiple instances (8) m ntioned by different pariicipants where the child left the clas room and never returned after a report was 1nade to MCFD. As one pmiicipant stated "one day they ju t don ' t come back" .. ." you may never know (where they went) and you have no clue what happ ned to that child." 69 An th r participant wa al o concerned with the di app arance of children after a r port ha b en mad . he tat d: "M t of my w r t ca e of child abu e ju t di app ar d and I never h ar again what v r happen d to th m. Tho ear the one that haunt you £ r a long tim after In the e ca au e I m till haunt d by om f 1nin . n £ 11 w-up informati non the outc me of the report had been 1nade availabl to the teacher. Th e teach rs wer very In tional xpressing adne , and grief at the lo when r calling exampl s of rep rt they had made where the child just di appeared. For 1nany participant the 1nood wa melancholy a they openly wept when recalling incident where they had lo t contact with the child with no follow-up as to the outc01ne of the report. For one participant it was a sad memory, she said "of course like there's two or three kids you worry about the re t of your life, but (crying and long pause) ." Their trong emotional reaction to the incident they were discussing was surprising to them as they had no idea they were still troubled by "something that happened a long time ago". Yah it's hard, it's really a hard, hard decision. I usually do it in isolation ... and then you don ' t even get to know. That's why I guess I don't talk about it, I didn t actually know that I was carrying all this until I felt thi strong reaction, I'1n surprised actually. The participants expre sed c nc 111 for the child who just disappeared and a longing to know what had happened for the child a a result of the report. Unlike when they were di scussing kn wn n gative outcom , whi h vok d anger and fn1 tration at 70 ti1n li ited :D ling th e and fl ar fl r th n op1n th f h lpl a£1 ty and well-b ing f th m parti 1 ant w r m ha n t ne · anx1 ty- an rn t a w 11 a hild . d t t ar wh n di cu ing r p rt wh r r d n th ir wn th Y u kn w the r injur d adn utc m £ r th child. u kn w lik abu d i ti1n andy u d n t get t r r kn w what happ n d r ... .I d n t kn w wh reI wa g ing with that (n rv u laugh ... .it c ld p n t a ... you kn w .... a ju t u hap r pl might think it tak at 11. 1ne of th parti ipant a kn wl dg d that th y try not to think about pa t expen nc a it only cau e the1n tre and m participant felt it cau ed them at ti1ne to que tion their duty to report alth ugh th y were quick t point ut that they have and alway will continue to report any su picion they 1nay have toM FD. One participant who had 1nanaged to have follow-up on all rep 11 she had made due to per onal cmmections within M FD, wa the only participant who did not xpre unre olved feelings of wony or concern for children connected to pa t repmi he discu sed during the interview. The lack of "knowing the outcome" may impede the teacher ' ability to experience closure prol nging the wony fear and anxiety the teach r feels concerning the po ible outcome the child may have e peri nc d a are ult of th report. me participant empl mind o they d n t dwell n 1t. ed the trat gy of pu bing thew rr to th ba ~k f th ir ne parti ipanL tat d: "Y u ha t lea it al n . .. 71 you have to l ave it after that. You can t worry veryday about every kid when they go h tne otherwi e you go in ane. ' th r t th negativ k a tr ng tanc and ju tifi d their repmiing to them elve 1n pite of utcom they ob rved. ne participant aid: You ju t t 11 your lf that you r doing the right thing o you ju t get up and do it aga1n you r d ing th right thing and being all weepy and tuff do n 't help anybody do n t help the kid . If I didn t do it who would do it? In many ca e the participant are unable to di cover the outcon1e of their report. Rarely doe th t acher have a ocial w rker call them with an update on the outcome of the report. Follow-up The sixth and fmal theme, Follow-up has two sub-themes: Lack of Feedback on Reports and Relationship with MCFD . Lack of feedback on reports. The negative impact of not receiving follow-up on a teacher's etnotional state was discussed throughout the previous section. Not knowing the outcome for the child appears to prolong the worry, fear and anxiety the teacher feel concen1ing the possible outcome the child may have experienced. None of the participants in this study had ever been contacted by an M FD child protection work r to update thetn on a report they had 1nade. They ex pre d that it was imp rtant to th n1 personally to have some follow-up after making a r pmi. 72 I would like to know .... about follow-up. If I'rn going to betray a child' , it not really betraying becau e your pr t cting th m but. . .if you're going to betray a child tru t and th n n t have any idea of what' going on it' horrendou would like t know what i happ ning to th oI hild. An ther parti ipant al o poke of h r d ire to have fl llow-up a : p rhap a fl llow-up ph ne call it doe n't hav to b anything grand can even leave a ITI age with the ecr tary. Ju t o I feel better that.. .you know, I made the right call. Alway like to know did I make the right call. All of the participant mentioned that there was no information willingly relayed to them concerning the outcomes of their reports to MCFD. One participant who had received information concerning all her reports had ources within M FD who would give her some feedback due to relationships outside of their professional lives. The other five participants were unable to obtain follow-up on their reports although some of them had contacted MCFD in an attetnpt to discover the outcome of their report. One participant spoke ofher negative experience of phoning for follow-up frmn MCFD : the one and only time that I called back to just ask how thing went and is there anything that I need to know to be supportive, or helpful to the child in tny classromn and I was basically told it was none of my busine . While another participant explained the lack of feedback made her feel that : "you don't ever know what happens . Yah .. .I gu ss that haunt you t . You ... y u make th e reports and it's like phoning into an abys and you n v r know what happen , if th even took you eri usly." 73 All th participant under tood the boundari th m lv of confidentiality a they are bound t confid ntiality a well but they felt that o1n infl nnation h uld have b en able to be har d. Ju t a haring of qu ti n on participant pointed out: that I did the right thing and letting me know that po itive change are happening. It ju t eem n thing c01ne out of it. Maybe it's b au ewe d n t ee it becau e we're till ju t teaching in our clas room. And u d n't h ar it. You never know . One participant poke of how having follow-up on report can give teachers a sen e of clo ure. he xplained: I think there hould be some clo ure for the teacher. Like I mean I'm not aymg you have to divulge any confidential details but say it's been taken care of, we're looking into it whatever blah, blah, blah, yah so .. .it would be nice. Participants were concerned about what was happening for the child and whether reporting had 1nade things better or worse for the children and families involved; What happens after I've made the call. And how's the fmnily doing, are they getting the services that they need realizing full well that social workers have huge caseloads umm .. but is that fan1ily being looked after mrun or i the family been completely shattered. Has it been time for the fan1ily to pr pare? Ununm ... it's not just an easy matter of making that call1i ght. It 's ... What' going on? What 's the process the child ' getting cau e oftentime the familie tum again t the child ... and what happens then? 74 Relation hip with M FD. a di tin t i nn meti1n t b tw I :D llik it m nM F and th t ach r . that w can make the b t call. n particip nt fi lt lik th pr te ti n 111 Igu And time plain d: ur in:D rmati n ab ut th child r th fmnily en diffi r nt g al than t a h r . h ne parti i ant u again t th m right I'tn right y ur wr ng and it h uldn t b lik that. We all ha an I fi 1 that f th parti i ant app ar d t fe 1 th t th r cial w rk r w r w rking t ward a tat d: u got th :D ling f me f the me ofth m wer th m m' cial w rk r alm t e med w 11 ocial w rker n t the kid' cial w rk r. th y w re advocating for the mom and we w r advocating for the kid . we w r alm t at...a ... had different goal . Participant expre sed that they would like to work clo er with M FD protection worker in the future and would like to ee more ocial worker on staff in all 1 h throughout the di trict. One participant uggested: There hould be more working a partner tnaybe bringing them in . We 'r two eparate agencies ... maybe that would be intere ting to have a team that pecifically worked with the school o we all know who th y w re and we an learn how they work and then it would not b cary t repmi and you trust that th y' re going to take y u eriou ly and taketh report level. uld riou 1 at me 75 11 the pmii ipant in thi tudy agr ed that foll w-up, however btief was an important cmn on nt that hould b included in every r p01iing instance. hapter ummary Thi chapt r ha pr vided ad tailed ace unt of each theme and ub theme that etnerged from the data during the re earch proce . ach theme focu on the experience of the ix participant wh have throughout their teaching car ers, detected and repmied u pected child abu e toM FD. The ix th me : Knowledge Training, Reporting, Known Outcmne of Reporting nknown utcome of Reporting, and Follow-up create a picture of the ometime emotional, journey of teachers as they deal with helping children e cape abu e. Thi chapter ha brought togeth r the voice of the ix teacher who shared both their experiences and the myriad of en1otions they encountered a a result of trying to ensure that the children in their classrooms received the type of care every child deserves. 76 CHAPTER FIVE Di cu The purp of my r arch wa t expl re the r porting u pected parental child abu public h lOll p 1ience of det cting and t child protection by i fetnal es who teach 1 inn rth m Btiti h olumbia within ch ol Di trict 57. Thi res arch gen rat d in ight int what nable t ach r to d t ct child abu why and when they rep rt a w 11 a the motion and con m they encounter during and after making a report. The ix theme that etnerged fr m the data upport mne area of the exi ting literature but also uncover some different concept which are potentially areas for future research. There earch points out implicati on for both the fi eld of ocial work and education. The six themes discu sed in the results section are: Knowledge; Training; Reporting· Known Outcomes ofReports· Unknown Outcomes ofRepmis; and Followup. This concluding chapter will review the limitations of the research, conclusions and recommendations . This study was conducted to gain an und erstanding of some of th e compl ex is ue identified by past researchers that teachers may face prior to a well as after 1naking a report to authorities. I believe the findings reflect that I have achi eved thi goal within the boundaries of my ethics and concern for the well-being of 1ny participant . The main conclusions are: 1.) teachers want to be trained in detecting and reporting child abu e prior to entering the classroom, 2. ) detecting and rep rting child abu i an emoti nal journey for the repmier, 3.) teacher require upport and d bri fing, e pecially in a where the utcome of the r port is unknown, 4.) th rei a ne d fort a h r and M FD 77 ocial worker to communicat and work together to en ure that the report i handled in the b t int re t of the child and that 4.) M FD and the Mini try of Education need to c llaborate and creat opportuniti for teach r to receive in- ervice training on child abu e indicator and r porting pr tocol annually. Concern Expre sed Regarding Reporting The literature review c nclud d that me of th banier to reporting identified in multiple tudies were a result of: teach r ' concern about potential damage to the parentteacher and teacher-child relation hip (Becket al., 1994; King, 2011 ); teachers lacked confidence in the child protection proce (Becket al.,1994; hoo et al., 2013; S1nith, 2005; Tite 199 )· a teacher' fear of making an inaccurate report (Beck et al., 1994;King, 2011 )· fear of po ible con equences to the child or to then1selves if they were identified as the reporter (Becket al., 1994; Choo et al., 2013· King, 2011 ; Smith, 2005 ; Tite, 1998; Walsh et al. , 2005); and the child 1nay be lying (Smith, 2005 ; Tite, 1998). The e 'barriers' to reporting were all referred to as concerns by participants within my study. But the participants, as reporters of abuse, perceived the 'barriers ' differently than nonreporters from previous studies, viewing the1n as concerns to be pushed past or even ignored in order to n1ake the report as opposed to reasons for not reporting. More research in this area 1nay reveal why participants in 1ny research were able to overcmne these concerns and report. Knowledge on Child Abuse Pariicipa11t felt there wa a decided lack of awarene i sues of child abu by new tea her about and 11 glect when they fir t tmi d te hing. The 11 t d that the 78 chool di trict did not en ur that they had the level ofknowl dge requir d to detect child abu when they were hir d by the ch ol di tlict to teach in their cla rooms. Since all participant in myth i re ear h had been t aching in the fi ld for over ten year , they had 1 an1 d fr In ev ral ource ov r time about the indicator of child abu e and n glect. They now perceiv them lve a having a 1noderate or ub tantial level of knowl dg in d tecting child abu e due to acquiring additional knowledge on child abuse from ource a ide frmn univer ity or from D57 . The participant acknowledged that their knowledge in thi ar a wa woefully inadequat at the beginning of th ir careers and that they may hav mi sed me of the indicator children di played due to lack of knowledge. Knowledge on Reporting Child Abuse The respondents of thi tudy indicated they were very aware of their legal, moral, and ethical duty to i1nrnediately report any suspicions of child abuse to MCFD . Some participants did indicate that there had been change to school district policy and reporting protocols throughout their careers concerning to whom they should report. In 2007 they had been told by ad1ninistration, by way of text, and literature distributed by the school district, to make all reports directly to MCFD per mmel as per the new SD57 policy. But studies by Smith in 2005, and King in 2011, both conducted in Ontario where the school di strict policy was changed in 2002, till found that 70% of Smith's participants continued to report to others, and 32% of King' participant indicated they were not aware to whom they hould report. Thi app ar t how that a change in protoc 1 can take ome tin1e £ r full implementation. Thi could m an that there are till teacher in D57 who n1ay n t know who t r p rt to or wh still repmi to 79 other . All participant in my tudy were exp rienc din r porting and had many years of xp ri nee in the fi ld. Wheth r t acher who ha e never made a report rare new in the education field w uld have the arne knowl dg freporting could be a ubject for further xploration. Training on Child bu e and Reporting A noted in th literature review pa t tudie found that th va t majority of teacher in the pa t r ceived little or no training regarding child abuse during their ti1ne in the education progrmn and that many had never been offer d the opportunity to obtain the required infonnation dming in-service training once employed a teachers . The pmiicipant in thi tudy noted there were no univer ity cour es, within the various B.Ed. programs they had attended aero s Canada, that they felt had been specifically designed to teach them what constituted abuse, the indicator of abuse, or the specific province's reporting protocols . Five of the ix participants in the pre ent tudy rep01ied that they had received no formal training from the school district on how to detect indicators of child abuse and neglect throughout their careers. Some participants in my study also indicated that at times they question their ability to accurately detect when a child is experiencing abuse. In the literature review, according to King (2011), this is not unusual. He found that only 36.5% of the tea her in his study "felt prepared or very prepared frmn their overall training in the area of child abuse to be able to detect an d rep 1i su pected maltreahn nt' (p. 0). Ha ing know! dge on how to detect and report child abu e and neglect enabl tea h rs to feel n1ore certainty and rep rt with 1nore confid nee. In the 199_., tudy b Beck on tea h r ' 0 r p rting habit h c n lud d that 'D gr e f ertainty that abu ub tantial am unt f th wa occumng ac unt d fi r p r nal pini n ab ut th r p rting law and y t m mad am d t c ntributi n in pr di ting r p rting b h m det tudi i r (p.iii). in the lit ratur r ting an b in1pr ariance in rep rting intenti n wh rea i w ugg t that thi lack f c nfid nee 111 d by pr viding training to teacher although ther tudie ugg t that training at a h r d e n t alway quate t incr a d det cting r reporting. rn participant n t d that training in th area abu c uld ha b n gr atly impro d if all f det cting and rep rting child anadian univ r iti had, at the time, offi red our e within the B.Ed. program which focu ed p cifically on the topic and by the ho 1 di tri t ho ting annual eminars on indicator of child abu e and reporting conducted by provincial child protection per onnel. They felt thi w uld have rai ed awarene s on the i ue of child abu e e pecially for new teachers and would have trained all new and current teacher on po sible indicators of child abuse. Negative Outcomes Negative utcmnes impacted the reporters emotionally. Th e en1otion and language used by the participant when di cu ing report with unknown outcome c uld indicate that these teacher suffer from yrnboli c lo . Kath rine Wal h (20 12), peak f the cycle of grief and 1 s a not only being conn ected with a death . Th cycle can al be triggered by other ignificant event in a person ' li fe, u h a the 1 When the lo 1 of a relati n hip. n t connected t a death it i c n id ercd t b a ymboli lo . Th per n wh expenence the lo s ft n c peri en c D lin g of ang r, . adne~ , ani guilt 81 1nuch a lo 1n one grieving a death doe . Often ymbolic lo by other are not acknowledged as o the per on who i grieving i not given the same kind or the arne arnount of uppmi that i offi r d to individual wh have experienced a death. ven the xperienced the I individual who ha lo i not alway identifi d a a lo not realiz they n may not r cognize the ev nt a uch. " yn1bolic p r e, o those who xperienc a yrnbolic lo s may d t take ti1n to gri ve and deal with the feeling engend red by it' (Wal h 2012 p.lO) . If ymbolic lo xp 1i need by teachers a th result of unknown outcome , then follow-up information on rep rts i crucial. Infonnation on the inve tigation ne d to be upplied to reporter o they can experience closure in regards to their reports . Although the fact that orne patiicipants may be experiencing symbolic loss catmot be proven in thi tudy, it may be useful to note the possibility for future study. Lack of Follow-up Some teachers indicated that protection social workers have a role to play in the school syste1n when it cmnes to dealing with child abuse issues. Smne of the participant expressed that having a social worker they had a relationship with to discu areas that concern them in regards to a child's behavior would 1nake reporting 'easier'. To have support :fi.·om a social worker would alleviate teacher having to make their deci ion t repmi in isolation; they then would have 'an expert' to confi1m that the ituati n wa reportable. Participm1ts expressed that when making reports they often felt that it would be helpful to make reports to a ocial worker who wa conn cted to the chool, understood the dynatnic of the chool, and c uld liaise with th M FD pr t ction teatn. 82 Frmn my p r pective I b lieve a cial w rker in the chool could do infonnation ion with teacher and for tudent on abu i ue · build relation hip with teacher and tudent · provide guidance for teach r who u p ct d child abu e ituations; provid confid ntial debri fing and coun eling for tea her as required; b involved in organizing afl ty plan forb th th taff and tudent a r quired and · could liai on with M FD worker and provide t acher with follow-up on th ir report a applicable and appropriate. Limitations This tudy ha a number oflirnitation . The mall sample ize and qualitative 1nethod mean that the findings cannot be generalized to the larger population of teachers. The data collected wa only from one northern chool district and teachers may face different barriers in other northern school districts. For example, teachers in a very small community from a different district rnay indicate that family ties or knowing the farnily could create barriers to reporting, which is something that may be less likely to occur in a larger community like Prince George. The sarnple may or rnay not be representative of School District 57 teachers overall as I did not go through the school district or union to recruit which would have given rne access to a larger and possibly a 1nore diverse population of teacher . Thi may also have given 1ne acce s to rnales who have reported abu e as all the pariicipants in thi study are fe1nale. Having males in the study 1nay have resulted in different peL p cti being brought forward on some subjects. 83 Thi tudy i al o li1nited in it ability t t ach r wh ha e att nd d anadian uni in thi peak to the more r cent experience of r itie in the la t decade. 11 the patiicipant tudy had c mpl t d th ir Bachelor of du ation at I a t ten years before parti ipating in thi r arch pr j ct with n t acher having obtained their degree over 5 y ar prior t participating in th int rvi w . As uch the participant ' experiences in univer iti aero anada may not beth e peri nc of m re r cent graduate of anadim1 univ r itie . Mor re earch into what univer ities in anada are currently teaching tudent t ach r in th area of child abuse indicator and reporting protocols hould be carri d ut in order to compare my participant ' past expe1ience with more recent graduate ' experience . Of a different nature were the limitations placed on this research due to ethical and legal concern . As this study utilized interviewing as the data collection method, this meant that I was up close and personal with my participants and knew the identity of all the respondents. As such, during the data collection stage, I could not interview nonreporters or ask questions about any instances where teachers had not reported as I then would have been obligated by law and by 1ny code of ethics to report the1n and the incident which they had discussed with me. Due to this li1nitation, the ubj ect "rates of reporting" and "barri ers to reporting" explored within my literature review could not be fully explored within this study. Although 1ny pati icipants did e pres many of the ame concerns in regards to reporting as respondents did in the tudi e within the lit rature review, they still reported. I believe a quantitative tudy, wh re the participant wer totally anonymous to th e researcher would need to be us d t e plor th e two area further. 84 Implications for Policy and Practice Th main i1nplication for mbra ing trategi M cial work practice and policy include: M FD for f:fl ctive relati n hip building with teach rs and within chool D i1npro ing c mmuni ation b tw n pr tection worker and teacher by upplying to th gr ate t e t nt po ibl the outcom of repmi ; and M D and protection social worker working with th univer itie and chool di trict to conduct formal training on indicator of child abu e a well a when and how to report. The main i1nplication for educator and educati n policy include: supplying teacher with training opportunities annually; recognizing that teachers within the classroom need to be supported with training so they feel1nore confident in detecting indicators and making report · enabling teacher to be suppmied on ite by social workers trained in child protection issues who can provide follow-up and help with the process of 1naking the report if required by the teacher; ensure that teachers are given onsite access to qualified staff with whom they can di cuss, confidentially, their concern and suspicions prior to making a decision to report; that teachers have acce s to debriefing and on-site counseling by a qualified staff me1nber every ti1ne they n1ake a report and after as requested by the teacher. Training could increase knowledge in detecting and repmiing which could 1 ad to an increase in reports on children early in the abu e and neglect cycle. Providing uppmi and tools to teachers to enable the1n to detect and report is crucial to identifying abu and neglect as early in a child ' life a po ible. Thi tudy bring to light ar a wh re th 85 Mini try f ducation and M FD could work collaboratively to provide support to teach r during the proc of th ir id ntifying and rep rting abu ed children. In the area of training there n ed t b rec gnition by both Minist1ie that fonnal training i r quir d in rd r to en ure that all t a her in all B of indi at r of abu and r porting pr to col . Thi cho 1 , hav knowledge hould entail the two 1ninistrie working in collaboration to creat opportunitie for teach rs to receive adequate training upplied by M FD p r nn 1 annually. Thi would be an important component of increa ing afety for children, mnething which i a pri1nary conce111 for both ministries involved. By working together, the tninistrie could also ensure that teachers have access to a social worker on ite, in every chool enabling teachers and children to be supported before, during, and after a report has been made. The on-site social worker would provide support to the teacher during the decision-making process prior to a report, provide the teacher with support to 1nake the report if required, ensure the child is afe when a repmi is being 1nade, provide the teacher with de-btiefing if required, and liaise with protection workers to develop and in1ple1nent plans which involve the teacher or school. They would also provide on-going support to the child and/or fatnily as required serving a a link between the school, protection worker , and community services. The current direction in the field of child protection is to provide upp01i to children and fatnilies to change cycl s of abuse and n glect a pp d t re1noval and fo ter place1nents as th only s lution. A part of thi directi n hould in lude M FD e1nbracing strategies for effective relationship building with tea h r and cmnmunit 6 rv1 pro id r a a way to pr T a hi thi goal th rei an ide upp rt t childr n and frunibes to br ak cycle . d t increa e c mmunication and relation hip between cial w rk r and tea h r a w 11 a an c mmunity at large f what a familie . h in th publi ial w rk r d wh n working with children and 1 and t ach r can be an important p rc pti n f th publi t d to impr v the cunent image within the mp n nt of the hift that i required ial w rker a ' cary ' and can in t ad 1 ad childr n and cial w rk r a are urc and upportive. ocial work r ba din a chool an build tru t and c mmuni ati n with children and their family m mber by providing th m with information on r The e worker c uld al o act a urce to prevent or alleviate ctisi ituation . int rpreter ' for childr n teachers , and familie during di cu ion with child protection worker . Thi would require ocial worker wh , although train d in child protection, do not work within the field of child protection. Having ocial worker within the chool , interacting on a daily ba i with school per onnel and tudent could lead to proactive work with famili e and potentially break cycles of abuse and neglect early in a child ' life. Structural Social Work This research was infonned by a structural ocial work p r p ctive. My finding , conclusion ' and recmnmendation for future re earch were influenced by and refl ect a structural social work stance. Structural social work r ow th eed per onal and societal levels. From a tructural standpoint my findin g cunent ystem of reporting ha f change at b th ugg t that th ignifi cant hortcoming in t nn of upp riing t ach r to detect and rep01i abu e and require change 87 h ol funding ontinu abl t hir in-h u pro id to b 1 than adequate. For example, few ch ol are cial w rk r wh c uld liai e with child pr tection taff and upp rt t t ach r and tud nt b fl r imilarl , ac rding t parti i ant in thi during and after r port are 1nade. tudy in-h u e training :fl r t ach r i n t regularly a ailable. r th famili ear c mmunity erv1ce program which erved children and their and w re ey and ear for child pr tection w rker , have al o become more li1nited in ope. Thew rk that the ag nc1 and ervice carried out that facilitated better detection f children who were at ri k of abu e or neglect appear to have been download d to the public ch ol y t m. Inad quate funding of the e community service has now put teacher on the front line of child protection work and the task of detecting children who are abu ed and neglected is falling more and more on the houlder of teacher and school administration in the province. As uch, scho 1 and teachers have become the crucial link between children and the child protection system. This mean that teachers need the support and tools required to carry out theta k that ha been handed to the1n. Further, school di tricts require the neces ary targeted funding that will allow needed training to be available to teacher along with on- ite upport and a i tance for their employees who detect and rep rt child abuse. Conclusion This study wa succes ful at exploring why tea her d r p 11. I b lie study i unique in that it i , a far a I kn w, the fir t tudy t concern teach rs in n rth m B that thi ' Pl re the emotion and ch ols mu t v rc me in rd r to report u pect d 8 parental child abu ituati n t child pr t ction ervice . Thi r in ight int : what nabl ar m tivated t r w 11 th t a h r t d t ct and rep rt hild abu e· why and when th y ort· the c nc n1 th y nc unt r during and aft r making a r p rt a m ti nal i1npa t r porting can have n teach r . I b li quantitativ qualitati arch g nerated th c ntent and£ nn fthi qualitative r tudi r earch c mpl ment the mainly that hav b end ne to date on why t acher do not repmi. More ar hi requir d in thi area to xpand the number of v ice of reporter . Thi w uld enable re earch r to explore more fully any commonalitie or diffi r nces in experience that report r enc unter. I believe a large tudy, utilizing a mixed method approach hould be u d to further explore the subject of teacher ' reporting and non- reporting habit a well a the emotions expe1ienced by the teacher before, during and after making a report. Thi would allow us to paint a fully developed picture of what support and tool teacher 1nay require in order to detect and report child abu e. By knowing and supplying the support and tools required to detect and report perhap all teachers in the future could potentially become reporters. 89 brahan1 a Y K., Dar D . (19 2) . Teach r 'kn wl dge, attitude , and b liefs a out child abu e and it pr venti n. Ba . (19 ). Why ar n t cho 1 p r om1 1 r p rting child abu T, a h r Education and Sp ecial Edu ation, 6, 33- Baxt r eglect, 16, 22 - 23 . hild Abu e and in Wi c n in? . . & B er J. (1990 . ducati nal n ed of chool per onnel regarding child abu e and/or n gl ct. P ycholog ical R eport , 67, 75- 80. Beck, K. A . (199 ). hild abuse reporting in British p ycholog i t and teacher . (The i olumbia: An investig ation of imon Fra er niversity, Vancouver, anada). Retrieved from http ://summiU fu .ca/collections/3 7?page=506.b 15206452 Beck, K. A. , Ogloff J. R . P. & Corbi hley, A . (1994) . Knowledg , cmnpliance and attitudes of teachers toward mandatory child abu e repmiing in Briti h olumbia. Canadian Journal ofEducation, 19(1), 15- 29. Bellefeuille, G ., & Hemingway, D. (2006). A co-operative inquiry into tructural ocial work students' ethical decision-m aking in fi eld education. Journa l of o ia l VVork Valu es and E thics, 3(2). Rettieved fro m http ://www.socialworker. c tnljswve/content/vi w/2/25/ Braun, V ., & larke, V. (2006). sing thematic analyj in p R es arch in Psy hology, 3(2) , 77- 10 1 Retrie cd from cholog . Qualitative 90 http://dx.doi. rg/10.11911147 0 B ard of ducati n ch 1 Di trict 706gp063oa o.57. (2012). Section 5: Policy 5145.4. R trieved frmn httr :// www.sd57 .bc.ca/index.php?id=629 Boyatzi R.E. (199 ). Transforming qualitative infonnation: Th ematic analy i and code d v lopment. Th u and Brier ak Lond n & New Delhi: AGE Publications. J. (2002) . Treating adult survivor of evere childhood abu e and neglect: Further de elopm nt of an integrative model. In Myers J. E. B . Berliner, L., Briere J. Hendrix .T ., Reid T ., & Jenny, C. (Eds.).The APSAC handbook on child maltreatment (2nd ed.) (pp. 1-26). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publication . Retrieved from http ://johnbriere.com/stm.htin Carniol, B. (1992) . Structural social work: Maurice Moreau ' s challenge to social work practice. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 3(1 ), 1-20. Channaz, K. (2006) . Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Thousand Oaks, London, & New Delhi : AGE Publications. Child, Family and Connnunity Service Act (CFCSA), RSBC 1996, c 46. (2014) . Retrieved from http ://www.canlii .org/en/bc/laws/statlrsbc-1996-c-46/late t/ Child Welfare Information ateway. (20 13). Long-term con eq uence of child abu e and neglect. Washington, D :U.S. Departm nt ofH alth and Human hildren 's Bureau . rv1 e , 91 at way. (20 15). Under tanding the effect of maltreatment hild W lfar Infl nnati n on brain d velopm nt. Wa hingt n D : U .. D partment ofH alth and Hu1nan rv1 h hildr n' Bur au. W. Y. Wal h K. hi1ma, K. & T y . P. (201 ). Teach r r porting attitud nfirmat ry and e ploratory fact r analy i with a Malay ian cal (TRA ): ampl . Journal of Interp r anal Violence 2 (2), 231-253. 1 Inmon , J. . Wal h K. DiLill D. K., & Me man-Moore, T. L. (2007). Unique and comb in d contribution of multiple child abu e type and abu e severity to adult trauma ymptomatology. Faculty Publications, Departm nt of Psychology. Paper 266. Retrieved from http ://digitalcommon .unl.edu/psychfacpub/266 reswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among the five approaches (2nd ed.). Thou and Oak , CA : Sage Publications. Creswell, J.W. (2014). Research design : Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, Cri1ninal ode, RS A: age Publication . 1985, c C-46 . Retri eved from http ://canlii.ca/t/5266 . Department for Family and ommunity ervices. (1997) . R porting child abuse and neglect. Mandated notification manual ( rd cd .). hild Pr tection DepartJnent of Ju tice d laide: outh u tralian un il. anada (20 I ). Makm g the link in famil v1olcnc ca ,. 92 llab rati n among the fmni ly child pr tection and criminal ju tice sy tern . R port of the F d ral-Provincial-Territorial (FPT) Ad Hoc Working Group on Fwnily Viol n e: Exe utive ummary urrant J. anada. n m R . (2012) . Phy ical puni lunent of children: Le on frmn 20 year f re ar h. 'MAJ 1 4 (12). Retri v d from http ://www.cmaj . o v rrunent f mment f B1iti h conten 1 4/ 12/ 1 7 .full.pdf. olumbia. (2007a) . B handbook for action on child abu e and n glect: For ervice provider . Queen Printer: Viet ria B . AI o available at http ://www .mcf.gov .bc.ca/child Government ofBriti h rotectionlpdflhandbook_action_ child _abuse. pdf olumbia. (2007b) . Re ponding to child welfare concern . Queen Printer: Victoria BC. Also available at http: //www.mcf.gov.bc.ca/child _protection/pdf/child_ welfare_ your_role.pdf Goebbels A. F . G., Nicholson, J. M ., Walsh, K., & De Vries H. (2008). Teacher ' reporting of suspected child abuse and neglect: behavior and determinant . Health Education Research, 23(6) , 941 -951. Guest, G ., MacQueen, K.M . & Namey, E.E. (201 2). Applied thematic analy i . Thousand aks, A : age. Hawkins, R ., & Me allum, . (2001). Mandatory notifi cation training for u p t d child abu e and neglect in . outh 25(12), 160 1625. u tralian schoo l . hi!d Abu. e , JVc:g/ect, 93 H inonen T . rd p arman L. (20 10). Social work practic :Problem olving & beyond d.). T r nt anada: 1 on du ation. Int r-Mini try hild abu e handbook: An integrative approach t child abu (19 Kenny M. & King ). ict ria: Pro ince fBriti h . (200 1). . B. (20 11 ). lumbia. hild abu e r p rting: Teach r gl ct, 25 1) and neglect. perc ived det rrents. hild Abu e 1-92. nd r tanding report to child w lfare from the education ystem: hallenge and opportunities for upporting vulnerable children. (Doctoral di ertation). niver ity of Toronto. Retrieved fr01n http :/It pace.library.utoronto .ca/bit tream/1807 /31808/6/K.ing_ Colin_ B _ 201111 _ PhD Thesi .pdf. Lincoln, Y.S ., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, A: Sage Publications. Mcintyre, T. C. (1987). Teachers' awarenes of child abuse and neglect. Child Abu e and Neglect, 11, 133- 135 . Meadows, p ., Tunstill, J., Ge rge A., Dhudwar, ., & Kurtz Z. (20 11 ). The co t and consequence of child maltreatment. National In titute of conomi and o ial Re earch, Lond n. Mile , M .B ., & Huberman, . M . (1994) . . 1n expanded sourcebook: Qua/itath·e data 94 analy i . Th u and M r au M. 1979). ak age Publication . tructural appr ach t ocial work practice. anadian Journal of o iaL Work Education, 5(1 , 7 - 4. Mullaly B . (2007). Then w tructuraL ociaL work (3rd ed.). D n Mi ll ni ntario: Oxford r ity Pre . o 1 J. (2013). ervi w-Th conv ntion on the right of the child. Ju tice anada. R tri v d fr m http :// www.ju tice. gc.ca/eng/£1-d£' pou al- poux/topic theme/conv2a.html Patton M . Q . (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation method (3rd ed.). Th u and Oak , CA : age Publications. Public Health Agency of Canada. (2010). anadian incidence study of reported child abuse and neglect - 2008: Major finding . Ottawa, ON. Retrieved fron1 http :// publication .gc.calcollections/collection_ 20 10/aspc-phac/HPS-1 -200 -eng.pd Sachs-Eric on, N ., romer, K., H ernandez, A., & Kendall-Tackett, K. (2009) . Are iew of childhood abu e, health, and pain-related problem : Th role of p chiatric- di order and current life tre . Journa l of Trauma and Di o iation, 1 0(2), 170- 18 . mith, arrie. (2005) .The im1 act of training on ducator ' re1 oriing of child a btL and neglect. Thes and Dissertations ( omprchensi1• ).Wilfr d Laun r niv r it . 95 Paper 1 5. tati tic anada. (201 0) . Family violence in article. [ atalogue no . 5-002]. anada: A tati tical profile, 2010. Juri tat ttawa: Minister of Indu try. Tite R. (199 ). T a her and the coordination of service to children and youth policy re/vi ion in Newfoundland and Labrador. Paper pre en ted at the annual meeting of the Canadian A ociation for the Study of Wom en and Education. Ottawa, Ontario. Convention on the Right of the hild (1990). Retrieved from www. canadiancrc.com/PDFs/UN _Convention_ on_the_Rights_of_the_Child_ en. pdf Wal h, K. (2012). Grief and loss: Th eories and skills for the helping professions (2ndEd.). Upper Saddle River, USA: Pearson Education. Walsh K. , Farrell, A. , Schweitzer, R., & Bridgstock, R. (2005). Critical factors in teachers ' detecting and reporting child abuse and neglect: Implications for practice. Final report prepared for the abused child trust. Retrieved frmn http :l/eprints .qut.edu.au/777 I Walsh, K . M ., Bridgstock, R. S. Farrell, A.M., Ra afiani M. & Schweitzer, R. (200 ). Case teacher and school characteristics influencing t ach r 'detection and ' reporting of child physical abus and neglect: Re ult frmn an hild Abuse and Neglect, 32( 10), 98 - 9 . u tralian urve 6 ppendix A: Participant Recruitment Letter Participant Recruitment Letter My nrun i andac Min r and I am a raduate tud nt fron1 the niv r ity of rth n1 Briti h lun1bia ( ch ol f ocial W rk). I cun ntly h ld a B W and w rk in th fi ld with hildr n and y uth. Thi announcem nt i to 1 t you know about a r earch pr j ct I run nducting a partial fulfillm nt of a Ma t r of cial Work degree._My acad 1nic upervi or i Dawn Hemingway, A ociate Pro-D or in the B chool of ial W rk. I run hoping t xrunine th e p ri nc oft acher who have mad report of u pected, parental hild abu t Mini try of hildren and Family Development (M FD). While it i kn wn that t ach r nc unter in tance of u pect d parental child abu e in their cla ro 111 what I do not know and would like to find out i the thoughts and feelings of teach r in Prince eorge when it c 1ne to 1naking a report to authoritie . I would like to explore what the xperience i like for you and if you experience any concen1 before, during or after n1aking a r pmi. I run looking for teacher , who have detected and reported to M FD, case of uspected parental child abu e. I would like to gain an understanding of your thought , feelings and any concern or barrier you felt you encountered leading up to making the report, during the initial call toM FD, and how you felt after you made the report to an MCFD Intake worker. To participate in an interview you need to be able to provide inform d con ent on your own behalf, have made a report to MCFD conce1ning a su p cted ca of parental child abuse, and be willing to share your experience and thoughts about having made the report. For this project I will not be recruiting participants through any chool Di tri t 57 school or through the B Teacher's Federation union offi ce. No recruitment will be undertaken nor letters or posters about proj ect parti cipation po ted on any choo l Di trict 57 property or in any union office. No interview or recruitment will be conducted during the participant ' hours of work nor will any interview be conduct d on chool Di trict 57 property. Participants in this study wi ll be a ked to confinn th at they are pruiicipating as an individual contributing their personal knowledg and perien to thi topic ar a and that they are not repre enting their p lace of empl oym nt. Participati n in th r carch project will require attending a one-titne, 60 minute intervi w, in a lo ation wh r you are comf01iable, to talk about thee perience with m . Y u are al being a. k d t participate in an approxi1nately thi tiy minute me ting at a lat r date, agr d up n b ' OU, to check the cmnpl eted tran cript of your int rvi w to en ure th tran npt a cur t 1 reflect the interview. a patiicipan t in th1 tud ou ar n t r pr enting 'our pia, of 97 empl yrnent rather you agree that you are participating a an individual contributing your per onal kn wledge and exp ri nee to thi topic area. I hope that th re ult of thi tudy will ultimat ly help bring attention to the i su of child abu e in g n ral and may erv to highlight concern or barriers that teachers face in the fi ld. Dep nding on the outcome of thi tudy, th re may be implication for practice for teacher in the di tri t, for child protection rvices and for s hool di trict ad1nini tration. Additional information from the teachers perspectiv may aid policy maker in the de elopm nt of future reporting protocol and en ure th respon e of child protective rvi e temn are effective in meeting then ed of the teachers. If you would like more infonnation on how to bee me a participant please contact: Candace Min er E1nail:miner c@unbc.ca Telephone: 250-960-5602 Ifyou would like to contact my faculty supervisor about the project: Dawn Hemingway Email: Dawn.Hemingway@unbc. ca Telephone: 25 0-960-5 694 9 Appendix B: Background/Demographic Characteristics of Participant 1. :Mal F 1nal 3. D you ha childr n: th r 2. Ag 4. Total year oft aching xp n nc 4. Hi gh t Le 5. rad ( 10 6. 1 f ducati n obtained: Taught : Kindergart n_ 1_ 2_ 3_ 4_ 5_ 6_ 7_ 11 12 lf-p rc i ed lev 1 ofknowledg about indicator a) Little b) 9 Moderate f child abu e: ubstantial ource of information (plea e check all that apply): emmars Literature course Discus ion with colleague _ Professional experience_ Media_ University Other If "other", plea e describe 7. Self-perceived level of knowledge on Ministry of hildren and Fan1ily Development standard of what constitute child abu e or n glect: a) Little b) Moderate ubstantial ource of infonnation (plea e check all that apply) : M FD em1nar M FD Literature_ cour es Discu ion with co11eagu Pr fe ional ex p ri n c If " th r", plea e de cribc ther M dia Uni r it 99 If-perceived level of knowledge regarding School District 57 parental child abu reporting protocol : a) Little b) Moderate ource of information Literature_ ub tantial 1 a e check all that apply): Seminars_ Di cu ion with colleague _ cour e _ Profe sional experience_ Media_ University ther If "other' plea e de cribe 9. How 1nany times have you reported suspected parental child abuse situations within your cia sroom( ) over the pan of your career? Never _ Once _ Twice More 10. What type of parental child maltreatment do you think is most prevalent in school aged children? Physical_ Emotional_ Neglect_ Sexual_ Other- - - - - - - - - - If "other", please describe 100 A ppendix : Que tionnaire Time of Interview: Date : Plac e : Interview er: ------------------- In terviewee: -----------------------Thank you fi r agre ing to participate in thi interview. I realize that the information you will be haring with m t day i of a very per onal nature. I al o under tand that it i har d with th expectation that y ur id ntity will be kept confidential. A such, I atn a king that any inti nnation you use to answer the qu stions today, cmne frmn past ex periences that have already been re olved a oppo ed to discu ing any pre ent ongoing ituation , in which you may currently be involved. I al o a k that you do not use anyone's name when di cu sing pa t experience , in order to ensure their anonyrnity as well. If you do inadvertently say a name, I will omit it from written document . Do you have any questions about the consent form that you have signed? Are you ready to tart the interview? 1. To begin, when you decided to become a teacher, did you con ider that you may h ave to deal with situations involving child abuse? • Probe: What were your views on reporting child abu a a -. tud nt teacher? 2. W h at are your thought about the amoun t of trainin g that i offered to teacher on how to d teet ituation of child abu e? 101 Pr b • Do you fi 1 it i uffici nt t enable t acher to detect child abu e ituation with c nfidence? If not why not? • W uld y u p r nally like t have mor training available to you? If what type? 3. What do you think about the amount of information that wa made available to you regarding how to make a report? For example, do you feel , when you were hired to teach within the di trict, you were given clear in tructions on when a report hould be mad e, who you should report to and the proce s for reporting? Probes: • Do you feel it is ufficient to enable teachers to report child abu e situations with confidence? • Would you personally like to have more training available to you? • What is your current understanding of your duty to report child abu e and neglect? • What, if any, frmn your under tanding, could be the repercu wn to you for making an erroneou or unsubstantiated report? • What, if any frmn your understanding, ould be the reper u ~ ~ ion to for not reporting your u picions? u 102 4. What wa it like for you to actually come to a deci ion to make a report? Pr b • What wa it like t u p ct that n of your tudent 1nay be in a bad ituati n. • What wa it ab ut th ituation that pr mpt d you t con ider making the r p rt. • What kind f thing did you take into c n ideration prior t making th r p rt? • What ncem (if any) did you have about making the report? 5. Wha t happ en ed a a result of the report? • In what way did making the report impact you per onally or impact the child? • How did you feel about the outcome for the child and the outcome for your elf? • Did you feel the is ue had been re olved for the child? • How did adn1ini tration and your colleague react to your reporting? • What impact, if any, did th experience have on y u a a tea her? • What suppmis were offered within the chool to aid y u in the d i i n- n1aking proce s and after having made the report, uch a d bri fin g, coun eling etc.? 6. I am going to a k you to envi ion a ituation that could occur where omeone might su pect a child may be experiencing some typ of abu c but they would 103 be he itant to report. Can you peak about what the circumstances might be and why omeone might he itate to report in this instance? 7. I there anything you would like to add or that you feel I have missed that is important for people to know on the topic di cu ed today? Thank you very much for doing thi inte1-vi w with m . 104 Appendix D: Participant Information Letter Re earcher: an dace Min r , Ma t r of ocial Work tudent c/ Dawn Hemingway ocial Work Profe or B cho 1 of ocial Work niver ity Way Prince eorge, B V2N 4Z9 Phon : 250-960-96 5 -mail: 1niner c@unbc.ca Supervi or: Dawn Hemingway ciate Profes or B chool of ocial Work 3 3 Univer ity Way Prince eorge, B Phon : 250-960-5694 -1nail: Dawn.Hemingway@unbc.ca Title of Thesis: Teacher in Briti h Abu e V2N 4Z9 olmnbia: Examining the xperience of Reporting uspected Child Purpose of Research: The purpo e of this qualitative re earch project is to examine teachers' expe1iences of reporting su pected, parental child abuse to Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) protection workers. The goal of the research is to explore from the per pective of teachers the experience of reporting uspected parental child abuse to child protective ervices. The intent i to gain an in-depth understanding of the participants' experiences of reporting parental child abuse. How Respondents Were Chosen: For this project I will not be recruiting participant through any School District 57 school or through the BC Teacher's Federation union office. No recruitment will be unde1iaken nor letters or po ters about project participation posted on any School District 57 prope1iy or in any union office. No interview or recruitlnent will be conducted during the participants' hour of work nor will any interviews be conducted on School District 57 property. Patiicipant in this tudy will b asked to confirm that they are participating as an individual contributing their per onal knowledge and experience to this topic area and that they are not repre enting their pla e of e1nployment. I have located potential participants for thi study by initially contacting teachers that I know frmn n1y work in the field, providing them with a copy of th pmiicipant recruitment letter (Appendix A) which outlined the purpo e f the tud and the criterion that potential participants were required to m et. I then requ t d that th give a copy of the recruitn1ent letter to ther teachers the knew wh the felt might fit the crite1ia a outlined in th recn1itment letter and would hav a potential int r t in participating in this re earch project. All participant cbo n fl r thi , 'tud have had at least one experi nee wh re they reported to M FD that a child a b ing abus d b a 105 parent r guardian. Participant areal o teacher who have had experience teaching within ch 1 Di trict 57 and ar willing to pat1icipate in an approximately one hour int rvi w . Y u w re h n fl r till project ba ed on your willingne s to hare your e p ri n f making a r p rt f u p ct d par ntal child abus t M FD and meeting th crit ri n a d crib d in the participa11t recruitm nt lett r you rec ived previou ly. Role of Participant : Y ur r 1 a a r arch participant i t complete a one-on-on , 1ni- tru tur d int rvi w with th re archer during whi ch you will be a ked to an wer a t f qu ti n ba ed n our wn exp ri ence and per nal b lief: a well a orne ba ic d m graphic and backgr und inti nnati n. The int rview will take approxi1nately ixty 1ninute f y ur tim . Y u ar al being a k d t participate in an approximately thirty minute me ting at a lat r dat agr d upon by you, to ch ck the completed tran cript fyour int rview to n ure th tran cript accurately refl ect the interview. A a participa11t in thi tudy you are n t repre enting your place of employment, rather you agree that you are parti ipating a an individual contributing your per onal knowledge and experience to thi topic area. Voluntary Participation: Your participation in thi s stud y is compl etely voluntary. You are free to exit the interview at any tim e top the recording of the interview, and have your conunents deleted from the study at any time even thou gh you had originally consented . You do not need to answer any que tion(s) that make you uncmnfortable nor do you have to give any reason for your decision to not answer. If you choose to withdraw from the study, all your information will be withdrawn a well. Potential Benefits: There are no direct benefit to participants oth r than helping the researcher understand the challenges facing teachers who report ituation of child 1naltreatment. tudies such as this bring attention to the is ue of child abu e in g n ral and 1nay serve to highlight concern or barrier that teachers face in the field . It i hop d that your patiicipation in thi stud y wi ll al o uncover what additional uppmi , if any, could be impletnented to aid teach ers to continue to help children in their cla room,. Potential Risks: The ri k to pmi icipant is minimal. Di u ing pa t p n nee ma rai e mne negative em otion n1aking it difficult for ome to continu . The re ar h r will have conta ct information fo r locally available coun cling ervtce 111 ca th n d an es. Anonymity and onfidentiality: igned con ent fonns wtl l be kept , parat fr m ther data c ll ect d and parti cipant de cription fonn . will not mclude an 1d ntif ring inform ati n that c uld be link d back to individual pmi1cipant . Tran, 'n pts wtll n t 106 ontain the nam f individual participant nor will participants nmne be attached to any r p riing f qu te or c nn11 nt made during th int rview. o infonnation will be publi h d that c uld id ntify indi idual but anonyrnity calU1ot be guarant ed due to the mall arnpl f thi re earch proj ct. Tran cript and audio recording will be ac e ibl nly t anda e Miner ( tudent r archer) and Dawn Hetningway (UNB faculty up rvi r). tora e of Information: Th data coll cted frmn you will be kept in a 1 eked filing ni r ity of orth rn B , to which only the re earcher cabinet in a 1 eked ffic at th a11d th up rvi r will hav acce . I will b using a tran criber to trm1 cribe th int rvi w and th tran criber ha ign d a confidentiality agre ment that will r rnain in effect indefinit ly. Tran c1ipt will be inputt d int a pa word protected computer file. ign d c n ent fl nn will be kept eparate from other data collected. All audio r cording will be ra d 1 ctr nic data deleted and any paper/hardcopie hredded no longer than fiv ar aft r th c mpl tion of the tudy. Sharing of Re earch Re ult : pon completion of the tudy, a copy of there ult will be made available to ach participant. The re earch will be used for the completion of a Ma ter ' degre th i and a copy will be available at the B library. Re earch re ult will al o be made available through pre entation at conference and other etting a well as via publication in relevant journals new letter , etc. For More Information : If you have any que tions regarding this re earch tudy, plea e contact andace Miner at 250-960-9685 ( tudent re earcher) or e-mail: minersc@unbc.ca or Dawn Herningway at 250-960-5694 (UNBC faculty supervisor) or e-mail: Dawn.Hemingway@unbc.ca Please direct any cmnplaints about this project to the UNBC Research Ethic Board : Office ofResearch: Room 1051-3333 University Way, Prince George B V2N 4Z9 . Email: reb @unbc.ca or 250-960-6735 107 ppendix E : Participant Con ent Form In~ nn d n nt I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , agr t parii ipate in thi tudy a de cribed in the in~ rmati n I tt r and und r tand that th main obj ctiv i to explore h w teachers xp n n making a r p rt f u p t d child abu e t Mini try f hildren and Family ti n w rk r . I ha e recer ed and carefully read th in~ nnati n letter and under tand that I am being a k d t parti ipate in a on h ur int rvi w t provide my thought opinion and experi nee on thi t pi to th d gr e that I am c mfortabl in doing o. I under tand that I am al o b ing a k d t giv my c n ent to the interview b ing audio recorded and I haver ad how thi and any oth r n t tak n during th intervi w will be handled in a a participant in thi tudy I am not repre enting confidential and an nym u mcumer. my place of employment, rath r I agree that I am participating a an individual contributing 1ny per onal knowledge and experience to thi topic area. I understand that I can refuse to answer any que tion without providing any rea on for my deci ion. I under tand that I can withdraw from participating at any time in the study (and that my infonnation will be withdrawn a well) and that I can ask that the audio recording be topped at any time even though I con ented to it earlier. The ri ks and di comfort associated with this tudy have been explained to m and a li t of counseling service has been provided to me a well. I have a ked all the questions I had regarding this ubject and I am atisfi ed with the an wer giv n to me. 0 I agree to participate in the interview 0 I agree to the audio recording of the interview Name of Participant : _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Participant Sign ature: - - - - - - -- - Witness: - - - - - - - - - - - - Witness Signature: - - - - - - - - -- Date (D/M/Yea r) :_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Date (D/M/Year) : - - - - - - - - - - 108 Appendix F: Transcribers Declaration of Confidentiality Agreement Thi tudy Teach r in Briti h Columbia: Examining the Experience of Reporting Parental hild Abu i b ing unde1iak n by andace Miner Ma t rs of ocial Work tud nt at the niver ity ofNorthern B1iti h olumbia. The tudy ha one obj ctive: f rep rting u pected parental child abuse to Mini try To e mnine teach r exp ri nc of hildren and FaiTiily D velopment (M FD) protection worker . Data fr m thi tudy will be u ed to expl re from the p r pective of teacher , the experience of reporting u pect d parental child abuse to child protective ervice . The intent i to gain an in-d pth und r tanding of the participants' experiences of reporting parental child abuse. I (nmne of tran criber) agree to: 1. Keep all the research information hared with me confidential by not discus ing or hruing the research infonnation in any fmm or format (e.g. disks , tapes, transcripts) with ru1yone other than the student re earcher ( andace Miner ) and her faculty supervisor (Dawn Hemingway) ; 2. Keep all research information in any fonn or format secure while it is in my possesswn; 3. Return all research infonnation in any fonn or fonnat to the tudent researcher and/or her faculty supervisor when I have completed the research ta k · 4. After consulting with the student researcher and/or her faculty upervisor, erase or destroy all research information in any form or format regarding thi research project that is not returnable to the tudent researcher and/or her faculty supervisor (e.g. information stored on computer hard drive). Transcriber: (Print name) MSW tudent Re earcher: (Signature) (Date) 109 (Print narne) ( ignature) (Date) If you have any que tion or concern about thi study, pleas contact: Profe or Dawn H mingway University of orthern B School of Social Work 3333 Univer ity Way, Prince eorge, BC V2N 4Z9 Phone: 250-960-5694 e-mail: Dawn.Hemingway@unbc.ca This propo ed tudy ha been reviewed by the Research thics Board at the University of Northern Briti h olumbia. For que tion regarding participant rights and ethical conduct of re arch, contact the Office of Research by email at reb unbc.ca or telephone at (250) 960-6735. 110 Appendix G: Local Counseling Services Sheet Walmsley and Associates: Ph ne: 250-564-1000 Location: 1512 Queen way treet Prince George, B Community Care Centre: Phone: 250-960-6457 Location: 1310 3rd Ave. , Prince eorge B Crisis Line Phone: 250-563-1214 Location: 1600 3rd Ave. , Prince George, BC Women ' s Counseling Program Phone: 250-563-1113 Location: 1575 5th Ave. , Prince George BC Native Healing Centre Phone: 250-564-4324 Location: 1600 3rd Ave., Prince George, BC Northern John Howard Society Phone: 250-561-7343 Location: 154 Quebec Street, Prince George, BC GDM England and Associates Phone: 2 50-961 -2715 Location: 193 Quebec Street, Prince George, BC 111 Appendix H: UNBC Research Ethics Board Approval UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA RESEARCH ETHICS BOARD MEMORANDUM To: CC: Candace Miners Dawn Hemingway From : Michael Murphy, Chair Research Eth ics Board Date : September 4, 2014 Re: E2014.0708 .051 .00 Teachers in British Columbia: Re ortin Parental Child Abuse Examining the Experience of Thank you for subm itting revisions to the Research Ethics Board (REB) regarding the above-noted proposal. Your revisions have been approved . We are pleased to issue approval for the above named study for a period of 12 months from the date of this letter. Continuation beyond that date will require further review and renewal of REB approval. Any changes or amendments to the protocol or consent form must be approved by the REB . If you have any questions on the above or require further clarification please feel free to contact Rheanna Robinson in the Office of Re search (reb @unbc.ca or 250-960-6735). Good luck with your research. Sincerely, Dr. Michael Murphy Chair, Research Ethics Board