A short report of a Scottish audit of disability and child protection medical examinations

Stephanie Govenden*, Julie Taylor, John Devaney, Alex McTier

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterpeer-review

Abstract

A Scottish national child protection audit has shown that practitioners can have differing understanding of the term ‘disability’ and are variable in their own recording of disabilities. It was apparent from the audit that disability was more likely to be recorded for older children than those under five. The audit found that an abuse allegation is less likely to be substantiated for disabled children by a Child Protection Medical Examination. For disabled children in our sample, there was a ‘substantiation of abuse rate’ of 33%, which was less than the 56% rate for non-disabled children. The differences in rates encourage us to consider what is an appropriate response when disabled children may have experienced harm and abuse. The audit highlights the vulnerability of disabled children to abuse and indicates the need to equip practitioners with the skills, competencies and confidence to engage with and support this vulnerable group.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere2906
Pages (from-to)1-6
Number of pages6
JournalChild Abuse Review
Volume33
Issue number6
Early online date6 Nov 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2024

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

  • child protection
  • disability
  • paediatric examination
  • Scotland

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A short report of a Scottish audit of disability and child protection medical examinations'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this