close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

2316360

код для вставки
Child Abuse Review Vol. 3: 272-284 (1994)
Freda Briggs*
Russell M. F.
Hawkins
De Lissa Institute of Early Childhood
and Family Studies
University of South Australia
Choosing Between
Child Protection
Programmes
In 1985, Victorian police (Melbourne, Australia) adopted
‘Protective Behaviours’and promoted it nationwideas a
school-based child protection programme. New Zealand police
examined and rejected this ‘empowerment’ model and, with the
cooperationof the Ministry of Education,created their own
stage-by-stage school curriculum for children of 5 years
upwards. Three hundred and seventy-eight Australian and New
Zealand children were interviewed before and after using the
programmes, with a 12-month interval to assess retention rates.
The New Zealand method was more effective in increasing
children’s safety knowledge. In both countries, success related
to the factors of social class, level of teacher commitment and
parent participation in the programme. Descriptions of the two
types of programmes are presented to help informed choice
regarding child protection programmes.
KEYWORDS:Child protection,Prevention, School programmes.
olice and education authorities have become increasingly aware of the importance of child protection programmes since the mid-1980s and a number of different
models are now used in English-speaking countries. A lack of
evaluation studies for these programmes (Finkelhor and
Strapko, 1987; Krivacska, 1990) has made it difficult to
choose between models. However, recent .experience allows
the present description of the attributes of two quite
Merent approaches. This report offers information for individuals or authorities who might be interested in the design
or adoption of child protection programmes. The paper does
not provide data on actual child abuse rates and therefore
cannot claim that a particular approach is superior in preventing abuse. The focus instead is on qualitative differences
between programmes and inferences are drawn about probable consequent implications for child protection.
Finkelhor and Strapko (1987) drew attention to the startling fact that most school protection programmes had been
accepted on trust with no built-in system of evaluation.
P
‘A lack of
evaluation studies
has made it
d z w l t to choose
between models’
Address for correspondence: Professor F. Briggs, De Lissa Institute of Early
Childhood and Family Studies,University of South Australia, Lome Avenue, Magill, South Australia 5072. Tel: (08) 302 4583. Fax: (08) 302 4723.
CCC 0952-91 36/941040272-13
0 1994 by John Wiley &Sons, Ltd.
Accepted 16 May 1994
Child Protection Programmes
Krivacska (1990) pointed to the difficulties of conducting
meaningful evaluations when the aim of all programmes is to
reduce child sexual abuse, which, because of secrecy, is not
measurable. At best, researchers could compare reports of
abuse before and after the introduction of school programmes but the interpretation of results would be inconclusive. If the number of reports increased, the increase could
be interpreted as the programme’s failure to reduce child
sexual abuse. Alternatively, it could mean that more children
had found the competence to report as a result of the programme. Similarly, a decline in reports could be viewed as
the programme’s success in reducing the number of offences
or the programme’s failure to create an environment in which
children could ‘tell’. We can, with greater accuracy, measure
the acquisition of safety knowledge. Critics argue that safety
knowledge does not necessarily result in safe behavioural responses in real life situations, but it can also be argued that
behavioural change is unlikely to occur without knowledge.
And as Finkelhor (1984) and Budin and Johnson (1989)
point out, offenders select ignorant victims who do not
understand what is happening.
The questions which have troubled educators throughout
the past decade have been ‘What should be taught? When
should it be taught? and How should it be taught?’ These
were the questions facing Australian and New Zealand police
and education authorities when they were under pressure to
replace the traditional ‘Stranger Danger’ programmes in
1985. Lacking evaluations for guidance, they selected markedly different solutions to resolve the problem.
‘Protective Behaviours’: Australia
Police for the State of Victoria were pressured to produce a
new safety programme for schools when in 1984, their own
statistics showed that in 94% of reported cases of child
sexual abuse, offenders were known and trusted by their victims. A multi-professional committee made the decision to
select from existing North American programmes, rather
than ‘re-invent the wheel’. A few weeks later, Victoria police
engaged in a national promotion of ‘Protective Behaviours’,
a relatively unknown Wisconsin (USA) ‘empowerment’programme designed by a school social worker. This programme
has since been adapted by police in some parts of the UK.
The programme had the appeal of requiring no books or
expensive kits, it claimed to be generic and did not refer
to human sexuality (a supposed advantage when promoting
the programme to parents and teachers). The programme
273
‘Behauioural
change is unlikely
to occur without
knowledge’
274
‘Protective
Behaviours
assumes that
sexual abuse will
cause “unsafe”
feelings which can
identajkd’
Brzggs and Hawkins
revolves around two themes, ‘We all have the right to feel
safe all of the time’ and ‘Nothing is so awful that we can’t
talk about it to someone’. Seven or eight sessions aimed to
teach children to idenufL ‘early warning signs’ (unsafe feelings), confide in a member of their previously identified support ‘network‘, and persist in ‘telling’ until safety is restored.
The programme also discourages the use of ’victim’ language
(such as ‘he made me do it’) and encourages participants to
take responsibility for their feelings and actions. Empowerment, in this context, means helping children to identify and
use available resources.
‘Protective Behaviours’ assumes that sexual abuse will
cause ‘unsafe’ feelings which can be identified. It takes no
account of the context of child sexual abuse, which may well
occur in an affectionate relationship. Nor does it acknowledge the fact that sexual touching may feel exciting and
pleasurable rather than ‘unsafe’. It does help children to
identify and stop touching when it changes from feeling good
to feeling bad. No special teaching materials were available
for the implementation of the programme.
‘Keeping Ourselves Safe’: New Zealand
In 1984, New Zealand police were also concerned about
the increasing number of reports of child sexual abuse.
Curriculum experts examined the American programmes
including ‘Protective Behaviours’. They rejected the ‘empowerment’ model per se on the grounds that there was no
empirical support for its effectiveness with children, it lacked
an appreciation of the principles of learning theory in child
development and involved misconceptions of the dynamics
of child sexual abuse. New Zealand police dismissed ‘Protective Behaviours’ as too ‘American’ and jargonistic. The concepts involved were deemed to be too complex and
simultaneously too simplistic and too vague for young
children. They argued that children could not make competent decisions about sexual abuse or talk about sexual
matters when the programme explicitly avoided me5tioning
sexual misbehaviour. It was also thought that the promotion
of children’s rights and empowerment was not ,compatible
with social mores about child rearing. New Zealand
educators argued that children are only empowered if adults
permit it. They concluded that parent involvement, teacher
training and teacher support must be incorporated in the
school curriculum as a matter of priority. Without parent
education, attempts to empower children could place them
at risk of physical punishment for disobedience or for
Child Protection Programmes
engaging in behaviour which violated existing parenting
norms and power structures.
New Zealand curriculum experts also argued that with
empowerment comes responsibility for one’s own behaviour.
Young children are unlikely to recognize that the right to say
‘No’ only relates to personal safety and does not extend to
bed-time, bath-time or resisting unwanted tasks. Using the
empowerment model, children are unlikely to know when it
is appropriate to assert their right and when parent’s rights
supersede. All of these concerns relating to the empowerment model, expressed in 1985, were later confirmed in the
research literature (Wurtele, 1987; Tharinger, Krivacska,
Laye-McDonough, Jamison, Vincent and Hedlund, 1988;
Krivacska, 1990; Zins, Conyine and Ponti, 1988; Finkelhor
and Strapko, 1987; Conte, 1986a, b).
In the meantime, the New Zealand police and Ministry of
Education took the expensive step of creating a national,
culturally appropriate, step-by-step curriculum using teams
of teachers and curriculum designers at every stage of programme and materials development. The first modules were
trialled in 1986, then revised and launched nationwide in
1987. The New Zealand kit was designed as a basis for a
safety curriculum. Initially, it was timetabled for 1!hours per
week, during one term, on alternate years. This has subsequently been increased. Teachers were expected to provide
additional resources, incorporate safety strategies into their
day-to-day teaching and concurrently use a curriculum designed to enhance self-concept, confidence and competence,
thereby helping to reduce children’s reliance on adult
approval and their vulnerability to inappropriate attention.
The designers aimed for an ‘open and honest’ approach,
accepting that some children encounter sexual misbehaviour.
The kit combines instruction, videos, stories, games and problem-solving exercises. Parent evaluation was built into the
programme so that the concepts could be reinforced at home.
Study 1
The first evaluative study involved interviews with 378 South
Australian and New Zealand children (5-8 years old).
Schools were selected to represent the diverse cultural and
ethnic mix in both societies. A questionnaire was used to
discover whether children could suggest safe strategies for
handling a wide variety of potentially unsafe situations (such
as when separated &om parents in an unfamiliar or crowded
place and a stranger offers to take them home; a baby-sitter
wants to play an undressing game and insists that it should be
275
‘The New Zealand
police and Ministry
of Education took
the expensive step
of creatinga
national, culturally
appropriate,
step- by-step
curnkulum’
276
‘Although all of the
Australian children
had been exposed
to ‘‘Protective
Behaviours” there
was little
improvement in
the quality of the
responses’
Briggs and Hawkins
kept secret; a female stranger meets a child outside school
and asks the child to accompany her after providing a plausible rationale; or an adult kisses, hugs or touches them in a
way that feels ’yucky‘).
Data were collected before the introduction of the programme and the children were reinterviewed after a 1-year
interval. Although all of the Australian children had been
exposed to ‘Protective Behaviours’ between the two interviews, there was little improvement in the quality of the
children’s responses. Only 30% of children provided ‘safe’
answers to the collection of questions. The remainder
asserted that:
0
0
0
Children cannot stop bigger people from touching them,
even if the behaviour is ‘rude’ (70%)
Children have to keep all adults’ secrets because they get
into ‘big trouble’ if they tell (75%)
Adults who look kind and sound kind are trustworthy and
can be accompanied, especially if they are women
(70%)
0
‘The New Zealand
children showed
substantial gains
after their
programme’
Children cannot report ‘rude’ behaviour because they will
get into trouble and be punished (80%)
Some teachers, disappointed with the results, admitted
that they had taught the programme selectively and
spasmodically, selected the general safety issues that appertain to the classroom and playground and avoided aspects
involving adult misbehaviour and issues to do with sexuality.
The reasons given by teachers for their negligence were (a) a
shortage of time-too many other demands on the timetable,
(b) ‘the children are not ready for it’, and (c) insuf€icient
confidence to handle sensitive issues without specific teaching
materials (Briggs, 1990). These admissions raise the possiibility that the observed inefficacy of the programme might
have been due in part to poor implementation as much as to
the inappropriateness of the concepts for young children.
The only significant knowledge gains were exhibited by the
oldest group of children (8-9 years) from a middle class
school, with a highly committed teacher who had published a
book on ‘Protective Behaviours’, integrated the concepts into
all areas of the school curriculum, utilized problem-solving
methods throughout her teaching and involved parents in the
programme.
In marked contrast to the Australian findings, the New
Zealand children showed substantial gains after their programme. Three-quarters of the children had learned that
secrets must never be kept if they involve ‘rude’ behaviour.
More than two-thirds of children gained the ability to offer
Child Protection Programmes
277
several safe strategies ,in the event of becoming lost in
crowded places. More than half now realized that some
people might use mcks to persuade them to do things that
they would not otherwise do. More than half also gained
knowledge about their right to reject inappropriate touching,
and were confident that they could report and stop ‘rude’
behaviour without getting into trouble. Least development
occurred in their ability to recognize feelings associated with
being safe and unsafe (47% gain). These concepts were
clearly difficult for the 5-8-year age group although the
success of the alternative ‘Protective Behaviours’ programme
depends on them.
Study 2
Due to substantial differences between the Australian and
New Zealand findings, a follow-up study was conducted to
assess the longer-term effects of ‘Keeping Ourselves Safe’.
One hundred and seventeen of the original New Zealand
subjects were available for reinterview. Data were thus available for the following time samples: before the introduction
of the programme, at the end of the year in which the programme was first taught, a further 12 months after the programme was first taught, and at the end of the year in which
the programme was taught for the second time.
Independent variables included gender, age, race, level of
academic achievement, degree of teacher commitment, level
of parent support and socioeconomic status. A spread of
academic achievement levels was obtained by having
teachers select children from ‘average’, ‘above average’ and
‘below average’ levels. Teacher commitment was assessed by
school principals jointly with coordinators. Those who used
the programme conscientiously, made and used additional
teaching materials, involved parents in the programme and
integrated personal safety concepts in other aspects of the
curriculum were deemed to be ‘highly committed’. Average
commitment involved the use of the kit with no marked enthusiasm and low commitment was perceived as the
spasmodic or selective use of the programme, usually accompanied by negative comments about its usefulness in that
school or area. Socioeconomic status was judged by the income levels of parents. At one extreme were schools predominantly used by professional families. At the other were
schools with 75% of children living in homes dependent on
government benefits.
For at least some identifiable groups of children, the programme was a marked success. The two variables which
‘ h e to substantial
dzxerences
between the
Australian and
New Zealand
findings, a
f o l l o w - ~ study
p
was conducted to
assess the
longer-term
eflects’
278
‘The children who
made least
progress were
thosef i o m
low-income
families in schools
in socially
disadvantaged
environments’
Briggs and Hawkins
significantly affected children’s initial gains were teacher
commitment and socioeconomic class. Between 93% and
100% of children taught by highly committed teachers
achieved gains in five out of the eight areas measured. The
children who made least progress were those from lowincome families in schools in socially disadvantaged environments. They made few gains in matters such as their right to
reject inappropriate touching (14%) and their right to report
‘rude’ behaviour without being punished for other people’s
misbehaviour (2 ~VO).
Few of these children were confident
that they could turn to teachers (35%) or parents (36?40)for
help.
The pre-programme data indicated that children from
low-income families started off with significantly inferior
safety skills and knowledge to their middle class peers.
Children from low-income families were more frequent reporters that:
0
0
0
0
‘They made fewer
changes in their
distrust of parents
as supporters’
Parents cannot be relied upon to stop unwanted touching by
adults
Children are punished for revealing adults’ secrets
Parents will blame and punish them if they report ‘rude’
behaviour
Adults ‘stick together’ and ‘don’t believe kids’
In addition, they were less likely to suggest sound strategies for staying safe if lost in a busy shopping centre, at a
Christmas parade or a sports event, and they were less likely
to suggest that police, parents or teachers might help them.
In addition these children had received less safety education
from their parents (who were also less likely to have been
involved in the school programme).
At follow-up 12 months after the end of the year in which
the programme had been first taught, children continued to
make gains in each of the eight variables used for assessment,
suggesting that teachers and possibly some parents continued
to reinforce safety concepts between using the modules. During that period, the children improved their strategies for
staying safe when lost including recognition of the risk that
some strangers might use tricks. They improved their
capacity to identify unsafe feelings but made fewer changes
in their distrust of parents as supporters who would stop unwanted touching and accept reports of ‘rude’ behaviour
without reacting emotionally and punitively.
As with the previous analyses, there were no significant
differences on the number of gains by gender, achievement
levels or race. The area in which significant differences
Child Protection Programmes
continued to emerge was socioeconomic class. The mean
number of gains was 2.4 for the low group (SD = 1.6) and
4.1 (SD = 1.8) for the middle class group (maximum gains
possible = 8). The difference between groups is statistically
significant (Mann-Whimey U = 105. p = 0.005).
While they may have understood their rights, life experience had taught some children from low income families that
they could not disclose inappropriate behaviour or adults’
secrets and that their parents would punish or reject them if
they attempted to seek help (67%). None had gained a realistic understanding of ‘strangers’ and those who had previously revealed that they trusted adults entirely on their
appearance continued to remain vulnerable.
Socioeconomic status proved to be important in both preprogramme differences and benefits obtained from the programme. Why should the income level of parents make such
a difference to children’s safety skills?
Parent involvement in protective education proved to be a
key mediating variable. Parents of middle class children were
much more likely to have used books about personal safety
and reinforced safety concepts at home (x’ = 21.4,
df = 2, p = 0.00002). Since parents were significantly more
likely to have attempted home teaching where the teacher
was rated as highly committed (x’ = 12.3, df = 1,
p = 0.0005)regardless of socioeconomic class, it seems possible that the limiting effects of low socioeconomic class may
be mitigated by increased parental involvement induced via
high teacher commitment.
Discussion
The results show the superiority of the ‘Keeping Ourselves
Safe’ programme and highlight the importance of parental
involvement, socioeconomic status and teacher commitment
to a successful result. Obvious recommendations from these
studies are that parental involvement and teacher commitment should be maximized. In addition, the two programmes will be compared in order to identlfy further salient
design features.
Comparison of the Programmes
Australian and New Zealand police and education authorities share the same goal of protecting children from the risk
of sexual abuse. They chose very different programmes and
methods.
279
‘Parent
involvement in
protective
education proved
to be a key
mediating
variable’
280
‘Head teachers in
both countries
complained of
di_Bfczcltiesin
attracting parents
to information
sessions’
Briggs and Hawkins
Both counmes offered support networks for teachers using
the programme. The Education Department of South Australia initially employed 16 child protection officers to provide regional training workshops for teachers in state schools
(1986). New Zealand police employ specialist education
officers with responsibility for the introduction of the programme to schools and parents. They work with school coordinators who in turn train and support teachers, timetable
the programme and arrange parent information sessions.
Head teachers in both countries complained of difficulties
in attracting parents to information sessions. In South Australian schools, only a quarter of the children had a parent
representative who attended child protection programme
meetings and 15% of parents surveyed by the researcher
were unaware that the programme was in use. An earlier
survey of parents of 565 South Australian children showed
that families wanted child protection programmes (Briggs,
1988) but a subsequent study revealed that 58% of parents
were content to leave the responsibility for safety education
entirely to teachers (Briggs, 1990). Duerr Berrick (1988)
showed that the problem is not unique to the southern hemisphere: only 34% of parents had attended American school
information sessions.
New Zealand children in disadvantaged areas made
excellent progress in the short term when schools made
strong efforts to attract parents, for example by:
0
0
0
0
The provision of separate information sessions for fathers
The provision of evening sessions for parents with creches
and refreshments
Making direct contact when parents failed to attend information sessions
Involving parents in the evaluation of children’s learning
A number of differences between the two programmes
have been identified and summarized in Table 1. This comparison between programmes highlights the relative advantage of the New Zealand ‘Keeping Ourselves Safe’ approach
in terms of providing children with improved levels of skills
thought to protect them against child abuse. Nevertheless,
since no data on actual abuse patterns are available, no
claims about effectiveness in protection against child abuse
can be made. As a descriptive study of process, this report
falls short of an ideal experimental design, which would use
the incidence of abuse as an outcome measure and compare
two or more programmes in conditions where all other
factors were held constant.
Child Protection fiogrammes
28 1
Table 1. A comparison of the two child protection programmes
‘RozecriveBehaviours’
(Australia)
‘Keeping Ounehes Safe’
(New Zealand)
Created by an American school social worker
Created by a team of New Zealand curriculum designers and
teachers
No kits, books or videos provided
Precise teaching materials are provided free of charge by
educadodpolice authorities
Teachas are left to adapt the concepts to meet the needs of the
age @UP taught
Adopted by individual teachers but not necessarily the whole
Adopted by the whole school and timetabled
school
No built-in continuity of teaching or reinforcement
Continuity and reinforcement guaranteed
Teachers supported by a regional adviser
Teachers supported by the school coordinator with support
from police education officers
Considerable teacher variability in how the programme is
taught
Tightly structured curriculum
Generic approach: the same concepts are presented to all age
groups
Does not refer to sexual misbehaviour
Separate modules are designed with children’s developmental
needs in mind
Concentrates on ‘empowerment’and children taking
responsibility for their own safety and reactions
Combines a variety of approaches: intended to be taught
concurrently with curriculum to develop positive self-concepts
Uses American terminology which is outside children’s
everyday language
Uses language that is within children’s everyday vocabulary
No parent participation is built into the programme
Parent participation is built in through regular feedback, home
reinforcement and the evaluation of children’s learning
Although ‘compulsory’ curriculum in state schools in South
Australia, few teachers are using it. The ‘compulsoty’
component is not enforced
Optional curriculum but the decision is taken by the whole
School rather than by individual teachers
Refers to common forms of sexual misbehaviour in ‘What if
. ..’ problem-solving exercises
Conclusions
Without developmentally appropriate education for child
protection, children are highly vulnerable to sexual abuse
because of their powerlessness, ignorance of behavioural
limits, stereotyped and faulty concepts relating to strangers
and parental teaching about rude behaviour and secrecy.
Children commonly learn that goodness necessitates obedience, even when they know that the adult’s behaviour is
wrong. Children also believe that they must keep ‘rude’
behaviour secret to avoid being blamed and reprimanded.
Furthermore, they believe that they cannot talk to adults
about matters involving genitals, nudity and sex (Briggs,
199 1a).
In both Australia and New Zealand, the acquisition and
retention of safety knowledge depended on social class (as
determined by parents’ income levels), the level of parent
participation in the programme and the willingness of
teachers to adopt safety concepts and integrate them into
their day-to-day teaching strategies.
Our comparison of the two distinctly different programmes
‘Children believe
that they must
keep ‘‘rude”
behaviour secret to
avoid being
blamed’
282
Briggs and Hawkins
suggests that young children make better progress in the acquisition of personal safety knowledge when:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
‘Parent
participation in
programmes is
especially
important in low
socioeconomic
areas’
‘Child sexual
abuse thrives on
children’s
ignorance’
The programme is adopted by the whole school and has a
place in the timetable
There is a strong network of support for teachers using the
programme
Teachers use prescribed materials which are designed with
children’s developmentallevels in mind
Parent participation is built into the programme and parents
reinforce the concepts at home
Teachers use the programme conscientiously and enthusiastically, employing safety concepts in their teaching strategies across the curriculum
Programmes use children’s own language and reflect their
thinking
There is a continuity of teaching and scope for the reinforcement of concepts
Programme designers acknowledge children’s difficulties in
grasping complex concepts and therefore use concrete
examples
The content includes references to the more common
sexual misbehavioursexperienced by children
Curriculum designers acknowledgechildren’s sexuality
Without parent participation in child protection education, children may learn of their rights but the knowledge
remains academic unless they have evidence that their own
parents will be supportive and protective (without blaming
them) if they need help.
It is also clear that parent participation in programmes is
especially important in low socioeconomic areas. While child
sexual abuse occurs across all social, economic, educational,
racial, ethnic and religious groups, there is a higher risk for
children in low-income families (Finkelhor, 1984). Children
from low-income families had less safety knowledge before
programmes were introduced and they made fewer gains
than middle class children when the curriculum was in
place.
An emphasis on the reinforcement of safety skills is
essential for the retention of knowledge in the longer term.
Critics argue that the possession of safety knowledge does
not necessarily result in assertive and safe behaviour. There is
agreement, however, that child sexual abuse thrives on
children’s ignorance (Finkelhor, 1984; Budin and Johnson,
1989). Increased safety knowledge, such as that demonstrated by the New Zealand children, suggests that they
would be better able to recognize, resist and report sexual
misbehaviour.
Child Protection Programmes
References
Briggs, F. (1986). The response of teacher education curriculum to
teachers’ needs relating to child sexual abuse. The Journal of
Teaching Practice, 6(2), 5 15.
Briggs, F. (1988). South Australian parents want child protection programmes to be offered in schools and preschools. Early Child Development and Care, 34,167-1 78.
Briggs, F. (1 990). Second report: Evaluation of the ProtectiveBehaviours
program used in eight Education Department junior primary schoolsStage 2: Checking the retention rates after 9 months. Report to the
Director General for Education. South Australian College of Advanced
Education, Adelaide, South Australia.
Briggs,F. (1 991a). KeepingOurselvesSafe:apersonalsafetycurriculurn
examined. SET (NZCER) 2, Item 7.
Briggs, F. (1991b). Child protectionprogrammes: can they protect young
children? Early Child Development and Care, 67,61-72.
Budin, L.E. and Johnson, C.F. (1989). Sex abuse prevention programs:
offenders’ attitudes about their efficacy. Child Abuse and Neglect, 1 3 ,
77-87.
Child Assault Prevent Project (1983). Strategies for Free Children.
NationalAssault Prevention Centre, Columbus, Ohio.
Conte, J.R. (1986a).A Lookat ChildSexualAbuse. NationalCommittee
for Prevention of Child Sexual Abuse, Chicago.
Conte, J.R. (1986b). Evaluatingprevention education programs. In Nelson, M. and Clark, K. (Eds), The Educator’s Guide to Preventing Child
Sexual Abuse. Network Publications, Santa Cruz.
Conte, J.R., Rosen, C., Saperstein, L. and Shermack, R. (1985). An
evaluation of a program to prevent the sexual victimization of young
children. ChildAbuse and Neglect, 9,319-328.
Duerr Berrick, J. (1988). Parent involvement in child abuse prevention
training. What do they learn? Child Abuse and Neglect, 12,543-553.
Finkelhor, D. (1 984). Child Sexual Abuse: Theory and Research. Free
Press, New York.
Finkelhor,D. and Strapko, N. (1987).Sexual abuse preventioneducation:
a review of evaluation studies. In Willis, D.J., Hoder, E.W. and
Rosenberg, M. (Eds), Child Abuse Prevention. Wiley, New York.
Kraizer, S.K. (1 986) Rethinkingprevention. ChildAbuseandNeglect,10,
254-261.
Krivacska, J.S. (1990). Designing Child Sexual Abuse Prevention Programs: Current Approaches and a Proposal for the Prevention,
Reduction and Identification of Sexual Misuse. Charles C. Thomas,
Springfield, Illinois.
National Centre on Child Abuse (1986). Guidelines for Child Sexual
Abuse Prevention Programs. NCCA, Chicago.
Tharinger, D.J., Krivacska, J.J., Laye-McDonough, M.,Jamison, L., Vincent, G.G. and Hedlund, A.D. (1988).Prevention of child sexual abuse:
an analysis of issues, educational program and research findings.
Social Psychology Review, 17.614-634.
Wurtele, S.K. (1987). Schoolbasedsexualabuse preventionprograms:a
review. Child Abuse and Neglect, 11,483-495.
Zins, J., Conyine, R. and Ponti, C.R. (1988). Primary prevention: expanding the impact of psychological services in the schools. School of
Psychology Review, 17,542-549.
283
Документ
Категория
Без категории
Просмотров
2
Размер файла
791 Кб
Теги
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа