 Do youth with substantiated child maltreatment investigations have distinct patterns of delinquent behaviors?Susan M. Snyder and Rachel E. Smith Children and Youth Services Review, 2015, vol. 58, issue C, 82-89 Abstract: Delinquency studies often use substantiation as a proxy for child maltreatment, but may underestimate maltreatment involved in unsubstantiated reports. This study assesses whether youth with unsubstantiated investigations have distinct subtypes of delinquency as compared to youth with substantiated reports. We conclude that while the subtypes of delinquency are similar, some differences between the two groups underscore the need to study the larger population of unsubstantiated investigations, which comprise 81.5% of investigations. To compare the groups we used two-group latent class analysis, and then regressed covariates onto the resulting subtypes. The sample consisted of 432 11–17year old participants in Wave 1 of the second National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being (NSCAW II) with no prior investigations; 191 youth had unsubstantiated investigations and 241 youth had substantiated investigations. We identified three similar subtypes for both groups: delinquency, petty theft, and normative. We found two differences: First, more unsubstantiated youth were normative subtype members and fewer were in the petty theft and delinquency subtypes. Second, delinquency subtype youth with unsubstantiated investigations were more likely to attack with a weapon, steal or try to steal things worth between $50 and $100, and shoplift. In contrast, substantiated youth were more likely to carry a hidden weapon. When covariates were included we found that being male reduced the likelihood of being in the petty theft subtype. For substantiated cases, being older or male increased the likelihood of being in the delinquency subtype. Our findings of high probabilities of marijuana and inhalant use among delinquency subtype youth for both groups is a target for interventions. Keywords: Delinquency; Latent class analysis; Harm evidence model; Substantiation; Child welfare (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:cysrev:v:58:y:2015:i:c:p:82-89 DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2015.09.008 Access Statistics for this article Children and Youth Services Review is currently edited by Duncan Lindsey More articles in Children and Youth Services Review from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.