4.5 Article

Children at risk of neglect: Challenges faced by child protection practitioners in Guatemala City

Journal

CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT
Volume 30, Issue 5, Pages 523-536

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2005.11.007

Keywords

child neglect; qualitative methods; Guatemala

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: The objectives were to (1) delineate the definition, common forms, and perceived risk factors contributing to child neglect in Guatemala from the perspective of different stakeholders and (2) identify the challenges faced by child protection practitioners in identifying children at risk of neglect within the context of Guatemala. Methods: A range of qualitative methods were used: semi-structured interviews (SSI) with key stakeholders involved in child neglect (n = 9); semi-structured interviews with professionals working in the child protection services (n = 14): focus group discussions (FGDs) with professionals, voluntary workers and children (n = 60), and the group consensus method with key informants (KI, n = 10). Data analysis was conducted using the framework approach. Results: Participants described child neglect as a complex social phenomenon combining parental omission of care and an indifferent or negative attitude towards the child compounded by governmental neglect. The main factors which were perceived as contributing to neglect were poverty, societal and cultural norms, and importantly, gender roles and relations. These contextual factors complicate the identification of neglect and raise a number of difficult dilemmas for child protection workers that are exacerbated by limited Guatemalan legislation on neglect and restricted alternative care options. Conclusion: Stakeholder perspectives were found to be useful for providing contextual information and highlighting associated challenges related to assessing child neglect in Guatemala. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available