Discussion 1(a)This week’s readings focused on risk factors with various populations and in various settings. How do these align with what you have seen in your field experience? How can you help by applying acceptable and effective strategies? In this Discussion, you focus on risk assessment in your agency and how you can assist. 
Post:

Explain the ways your agency assesses the risks of its clients.

For example, are there formal assessment tools/forms, policies about reporting risk, trainings on risk factors for your population, or other means?

Explain how you can help with risk assessments in your agency.

Be sure to draw specific examples from your reading.
Be specific explaining how your learning will impact your practice at the agency.
Explain how your agency assessment is similar or different from that of your colleagues.
Discussion 1(b)Intervention strategies can take many forms. Sometimes social workers intervene at the micro level, the mezzo level, the macro level, or on multiple levels. In this Discussion, you examine how your agency incorporates and carries out intervention plans.
Explain how your agency intervenes at the micro, mezzo, and macro levels.

Be sure to provide specifics examples.

Provide two additional suggestions for interventions at the micro, mezzo, or macro level.

Consider the local, state, or national level when making your recommendations.
I N T E R NAT I O NA L
J O U R NA L O F
SOCIAL WELFARE
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2397.2007.00526.x
Int J Soc Welfare 2008: 17: 236–242
ISSN 1369-6866
Risk factors for dating violence
among teenage girls under child
protective services
Original
Articles
Manseau
Risk
factors
et
al.
of
datingof
violence
among teenagers
Blackwell
Oxford,
International
IJSW
©
1369-6866
XXX
2007
The
UK
Publishing
Author(s),
Journal
Ltd
Journal
Social Welfare
compilation
© Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
Manseau H, Fernet M, Hébert M, Collin-Vézina D, Blais M.
Risk factors for dating violence among teenage girls under
child protective services
Int J Soc Welfare 2008: 17: 236–242 © 2007 The Author(s),
Journal compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the
International Journal of Social Welfare.
The aim of the present study was to explore potential risk
factors for severe physical victimisation in dating relationships
of adolescent girls in the child protective system (CPS). A
total of 196 adolescent Canadian girls within the care of the
CPS completed questionnaires containing measures relating
to dating and family violence, sexual history and sociodemographic variables. Results showed that the majority of
participants had experienced some types of victimisation in
their dating relationships, with 53.1 per cent reporting at least
one severe physical victimisation experience. Results from
bivariate analyses revealed that a history of child sexual
abuse and school failure or dropout were not associated with
dating victimisation. History of parental physical abuse, living
outside the family environment before placement, age of first
sexual relationship, number of sexual partners and having
been pregnant were related to sustained severe physical dating
victimisation. Logistic regression analysis indicates that all
factors, save for number of partners and living outside
family environment, contributed to the prediction of dating
victimisation in multivariate analysis. Having been pregnant
increased the odds of sustaining severe physical abuse more
than threefold (by 3.60). Implications for intervention and
further research are discussed.
About 20 per cent of teenage girls report sustaining
physical violence in their first romantic relationships
(De Keseredy & Kelly, 1993; Johnson & Patty Bunge,
2001), which highlights the high prevalence of dating
violence (DV) in the lives of many adolescent girls.
Accordingly, considerable interest has been focused on
risk factors for DV in the hope of identifying potential
bases for the design of prevention programmes.
Silverman, Raj, Mucci and Hathaway (2001) pointed
out that DV is typically not an isolated victimisation
event and a number of risk factors may be related to
higher rates of victimisation. Vézina and Hébert (2007)
classify risk factors for DV in four categories: sociodemographic or background factors, individual factors
(personal and interpersonal), environmental factors
(family, peer groups, community) and contextual factors
or factors linked to the relationship. While a number of
empirical reports have analysed some of these risk
factors for DV in community samples or high school
students, few studies have explored potential risk factors
236
Hélène Manseau, Mylène Fernet,
Martine Hébert, Delphine Collin-Vézina,
Martin Blais
Département de Sexologie, Université du Québec à Montréal,
Canada
Key words: risk factors, dating violence, child protective services
Hélène Manseau, Département de Sexologie, Université du
Québec à Montréal, C.P. 8888, Succ. Centre-Ville, Montréal,
Québec H3C 3P8, Canada
E-mail: manseau.helene@uqam.ca
Accepted for publication April 2, 2007
for victimisation in early romantic relationships of
teenagers under the care of child protection services.
Adolescent girls in child protective services (CPS)
might represent a clientele at high risk for DV, especially
given that violence occurring in the family – and
especially when the safety of the child is threatened – is
one of the motives for removing children from their home
environment (Alvarez, Donohue, Kenny, Cavanagh &
Romero, 2005), and that such factors are associated with
victimisation in later relationships. In the present exploratory study, we examined (i) the DV experiences in a
cohort of 196 adolescent girls under CPS care, and (ii) the
risk factors linked to severe physical DV for that specific
and vulnerable population. We have focused on some
personal and environmental factors that may be linked
to dating victimisation. More specifically, we explored
the potential association of parental physical abuse in
childhood, history of sexual abuse, prior out-of-home
placement, school performance and sexual antecedents,
including adolescents’ pregnancy experiences.
© 2007 The Author(s)
Journal compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare.
Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
Risk factors of dating violence among teenagers
Prior studies have highlighted an association between
being a victim of family violence or parental abuse
and DV (Ehrensaft et al., 2003; Magdol, Moffitt, Caspi
& Sylva, 1998). Thus, being a victim is postulated
to contribute to children’s learning to the extent that
violence is tolerable and acceptable and, as such,
violence may come to be perceived as an acceptable
strategy for resolving conflicts. Moreover, a history of
sexual abuse in childhood has been proposed as a
significant risk factor for later revictimisation. Indeed,
the vast majority of recent empirical studies provide
evidence that revictimisation is prevalent and that
childhood sexual abuse increases the risk of further
sexual victimisation in late adolescence and adulthood,
including rape and sexual abuse from an intimate
partner (Daigneault, Hébert & McDuff, in revision).
Recent data also suggest that childhood sexual abuse is
associated with an increased risk of later physical and
psychological violence in the context of romantic
relationships (Banyard, Arnold & Smith, 2000; Coid
et al., 2001; DiLillo, Giuffre, Tremblay & Peterson, 2001;
Whitfield, Anda, Dube & Felitti, 2003). Sexual abuse
may lead to the victim internalising or externalising
problems, to low self-esteem and to a diminished
sense of competence, all of which hinder survivors in
identifying inappropriate behaviours and escaping from
violent relationships.
Physical dating victimisation in romantic relationships is also found to be linked to a family history of
divorce, separation or absence of a parental figure
(Billingham & Notebart, 1993; Makepeace, 1987;
O’Keefe, Brockopp & Chew, 1986), low academic
achievement and dropping out of school (Bergman,
1992) and a sexual history characterised by younger age
at first consensual intercourse (Fernet, Otis & Pilote,
1998; Murphy, 1984; Silverman et al., 2001) as well as
a higher number of sexual partners (Coker et al., 2000;
Shapiro & Schwartz, 1997; Whitfield et al., 2003).
Factors related to sustaining severe physical violence in
romantic relationships include early sexual relations
(under 14 years of age) with a partner aged 18 or older,
multiple partners and teenage pregnancy (Coker et al.,
2000).
Many of these identified risk factors are correlates
of adolescent pregnancy as well (Roberts, Auinger &
Klein, 2005; Silverman et al., 2001), sexual antecedents
(Boyer & Fine, 1992; Butler & Burton, 1990; Coker
et al., 2000; Fernet et al., 1998; Murphy, 1984; Shapiro,
& Schwartz, 1997; Whitfield et al., 2003), childhood
victimisation (Smith, 1996), and low academic achievement and the high school drop out rate (Manlove, 1998).
Given these shared risk factors, it is not surprising
that DV and adolescent pregnancy are associated and
that pregnant teenagers may be a particularly vulnerable
population for dating victimisation (Gazmararian et al.,
2000; Silverman, Raj & Clements, 2004).
Method
Participants
This study was part of an ongoing research project
designed to document the profiles and associated
risk and protective factors for adolescents under CPS
care. For the present study, the sample involved 196
adolescent girls aged between 12.7 and 18.3 years
(mean = 15.83 years, SD = 1.01). They were recruited
over a three-year period while living in a CPS centre
situated in Laval, Quebec, Canada. All the adolescents
had been removed from their home environment,
the majority of them (95 per cent) because their
security and development were compromised by a lack
of adequate parenting (neglect, physical abuse or sexual
abuse) and for a minority of them (less than 5 per cent)
because they had committed criminal offences and
thus needed strict supervision. Time of stay in the
centre varied from a few weeks to long-term placement
until the respondents reached the age of majority (18
years of age).
Variables
Background. Data on age, academic achievement
(repetition of a year at school and school drop out) and
life context before living under the CPS were gathered.
Scores for academic achievement were dichotomised
(0–1), with a score of 1 assigned if repetition of a year
at school/school drop out occurred at least once.
Dating violence. A short version of the Revised
Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS-R; Straus, Hamby, BoneyMcCoy & Sugarman, 1996) was used to evaluate
psychological and physical victimisation, sexual coercion
in dating relationships and sustained physical injuries
following victimisation episodes. The Psychological
Aggression subscale derived from the CTS-R is
comprised of eight items, the Physical Assault subscale
has 12 items, the Sexual Coercion subscale seven items
and the Injury subscale, six items. Respondents were
asked to report on the number of times they had been
subjected to these experiences on a 5-point Likert scale
(from ‘It has never happened to me’ to ‘It has happened
more than 10 times in my life’). Numerous studies have
found acceptable internal consistencies of the subscales,
with alpha coefficients averaging at 0.77 (for a review,
see Straus, 2006). Archer (1999) concluded from a
meta-analysis of the existing correlational evidence
between self-reports and partner’s report that agreement
is greater than expected. In addition, Newton, Connelly
and Landsverk (2001) concluded from new data that the
CTS2 factor structure conforms to the original one.
Internal consistency in the present study was found to
be very satisfactory on all subscales, with Cronbach
© 2007 The Author(s)
Journal compilation © 2008 Blackwell Publishing Ltd and the International Journal of Social Welfare
237
Manseau et al.
alphas ranging from 0.85 to 0.94, values that are
comparable to those of the original English version
(Straus et al., 1996). Scores were dichotomised (0–1)
for each of the four categories of violence, with a
score of 1 assigned if one or more acts in the scale
occurred.
Parental physical abuse. Physical parental abuse was
evaluated with three items from Briere (1992).
Respondents were asked to report on the number of
times they had been subjected to these experiences in
the worst year of their life on a 7-point Likert scale
(from ‘It has never happened to me’ to ‘It has happened
more than 20 times’). Scores were dichotomised (0–1)
with a score of 1 assigned if one or more behaviours
were reported.
Sexual history. Sexual abuse was measured using two
questions (forced exhibitionism and forced sexual
touching with adult or older minor). Respondents were
asked to report on the number of times they had been
subjected to these experiences on a 5-point Likert scale
(from ‘It has never happened to me’ to ‘It has happened
more than 10 times in my life’). Scores were dichotomised
to obtain sexual abuse lifetime prevalence. Questions
were also asked about age at first intercourse in
consensual experiences, number of sexual partners
and/or occurrence of pregnancy. The last two items
were dichotomised (0–1) with a score of 1 indicating
10 sexual partners or more and the occurrence of at
least one pregnancy.
have sex with him’, or ‘my partner forced me to have
sex without a condom’, which could put these teenage
girls at risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases
and/or pregnancy. These percentages are much higher
than those obtained in a general adolescent population
(24 per cent; Lavoie & Vézina, 1999). Our sample of
CPS teenagers also reported much more parental
physical violence and sexual abuse compared with
female adolescents in the general population of the
Province of Quebec [75.5 per cent versus 16 per cent
for physical parental violence, and 71.3 per cent versus
23 per cent for sexual abuse (Paquette, Laporte, Bigras
& Zoccollilo, 2004)].
More than a third of the sample were not living
with at least one biological parent against 0.80 per cent
in the general adolescent population (Institut de la
Statistique du Québec, 2005). Comparisons between
academic achievement in this sample and data from the
general adolescent population in the Province of
Quebec suggest that these teenagers in the care of CPS
are low academic achievers (repetition of a year at
school: 70 per cent versus 12.9 per cent, and dropped
out of school: 70 per cent versus 28 per cent; Ministère
de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport du Québec, 2005).
The present results suggest that sexual antecedents
are different for this clientele compared with the general
adolescent population in the Province of Quebec. For
instance, age at first intercourse was lower (13.3 versus
16.5 years in Canada; Rotermann, 2005). Also, the
number of sexual partners was higher, as 37.2 per cent
of teenagers under CPS care reported having more than
10 partners while only 3.25 per cent of Canadian girls
Procedure
The objectives of the study were first presented to the
potential participants at the CPS by trained graduate
students. If an adolescent volunteered to participate,
written informed consent for the study was obtained
before she completed the self-report questionnaire. The
Human Research Review Committee of the Université
du Québec à Montréal and the Ethics Committee of the
Child Protective Center of Laval approved the study.
Results
The results from the questionnaire (see Table 1)
indicate that teenagers under the care of the CPS report
sustaining various forms of victimisation in their
first romantic or dating relationships. In particular,
psychological aggression is quite prevalent, being
disclosed by about nine girls out of ten. Sexual coercion
by a romantic partner was also common for teenagers
under the care of CPS: about a third of the participants
revealed severe experiences of this dating victimisation,
endorsing such items as ‘my partner used force (like
hitting, holding down or using a weapon) to make me
238
Table 1. Sample characteristics (n = 196).
Academic achievement (per cent)
Repetition of a year at school
Dropped out of school
Age at first sexual relation (mean, s.d.)
Having been pregnant (per cent)
Number of sexual partners (per cent)