Child Abuse Review Volume: 23 Issue: 2 Dated: March-April 2014 Pages: 116-129
This paper compares and contrasts child death review CDR structures and processes in six countries - Australia, New Zealand, the United States, Canada, England and Wales.
Data were collected through a combination of documentary analysis, interviews and observations. The study found that CDR processes vary according to: where the function is located and whether review is undertaken at state, local or national level; whether review is rooted in legislation; the focus of review; whether dedicated funding is provided; whether families are involved in the process; and whether structures are supported by useful data systems. It was not possible to evaluate the effectiveness of different review systems but the findings suggest that structure makes little difference in terms of determining the extent to which CDR findings inform prevention effort and activity. While factors such as lack of funding, lack of national data, or lack of legislation may hinder the work of CDR teams, CDR findings have informed prevention initiatives despite such barriers. Abstract published by arrangement with John Wiley & Sons.
United States of America