Abstract
This study examines the impact of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs) coordinated by Children’s Advocacy Centers (CACs) on the prosecutorial decision to accept or reject cases of child sexual abuse (CSA). This analysis is part of an examination of the utility of CACs as it relates to prosecutorial decisions. Case specific information was obtained on all cases with both child protective services (CPS) law enforcement involvement processed through one Texas CAC, serving multiple counties, from 2010 to 2013. For the purposes of this study one county is listed as rural and one is listed as urban. The study site also unofficially serves several more rural counties. The urban county accounts for approximately 75% of all cases processed through the CAC. The final analyses included 553 cases of alleged CSA. Logistic regression was used to evaluate the utility of MDTs and case coordination among law enforcement and CPS as they relate to prosecutorial decisions. The number of participants at MDT meetings was correlated with an increase in prosecutorial acceptance rates by approximately 30%. Prosecutor presence at MDT meetings was correlated with an increase in acceptance rates by approximately 80%. Official case coordination between law enforcement and CPS was not statistically significant. Results of this study suggest that the MDT model provides a useful tool for prosecutors when determining whether to accept or reject cases of CSA, while official coordination may be less impactful.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bonach, K., Mabry, J., & Potts-Henry, C. (2010). Child advocacy centers and credentialing: Issues for practitioners. Exploring nonoffending caregiver satisfaction with a children’s advocacy center. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 19(6), 687–708.
Chandler, N. (2000). Best practices for establishing a children’s advocacy center (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: National Children’s Alliance.
Chandler, N. (2006). Children’s Advocacy Centers: Making a difference one child at a time. Hamline Journal of Public Law & Policy, 28(1)), 315–337.
Cross, T., Finkelhor, D., & Ormrod, R. (2005). Police involvement in child protective services investigations: Literature review and secondary data analysis. Child Maltreatment, 10(3), 224–242.
Cross, T., Helton, J., & Chuang, E. (2012). Concurrent criminal and child protective services investigations. Urbana, IL: Children and Family Research Center, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Cross, T., Jones, L., Walsh, W., Simone, M., & Kolbo, D. (2007). Child forensic interviewing in Children’s Advocacy Centers: Empirical data on a practice model. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(10), 1031–1052.
Cross, T., Walsh, W., Simone, M., & Jones, L. (2003). Prosecution of child abuse: A meta-analysis of rates of criminal justice decisions. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 4(4), 323–340.
Cross, T., Whitcomb, D., & De Vos, E. (1995). Criminal justice outcomes of prosecution of child sexual abuse: A case flow analysis. Child Abuse & Neglect, 19(12), 1421–1442.
Faller, K., & Henry, J. (2000). Child sexual abuse: A case study in community collaboration. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(9), 1215–1225.
Faller, K., & Palusci, V. (2007). Children’s advocacy centers: Do they lead to positive case outcomes? Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(10), 1021–1029.
Hagborg, J., Strömwall, L., & Tidefors, I. (2012). Prosecution rate and quality of the investigative interview in child sexual abuse cases. Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling, 9(2), 161–173.
Jensen, J., Jacobson, M., Unrau, Y., & Robinson, R. (1996). Interventions for victims of child sexual abuse: An evaluation of the children’s advocacy model. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 13(2), 139–156.
Jones, L., Cross, T., Walsh, W., & Simone, M. (2005). Criminal investigations of child abuse: The research behind “best practices”. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 6(3), 254–268.
Lalayants, M., & Epstein, I. (2005). Evaluating multidisciplinary child abuse and neglect teams: A research agenda. Child Welfare, 84(4), 433–458.
Newman, B., Dannenfelser, P., & Pendleton, D. (2005). Child abuse investigation: Reasons for using child advocacy centers and suggestions for improvement. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 22(2), 165–181.
Powell, M., Wright, R., & Hughes-Scholes, C. (2011). Contrasting the perceptions of child testimony experts, prosecutors and police officers regarding individual child abuse interviews. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 18(1), 33–43.
Sheppard, D., & Zangrillo, P. (1996). Coordinating investigations of child abuse. Public Welfare, 54(1), 21–31.
Simone, M., Cross, T., Jones, L., & Walsh, W. (2005). Children’s advocacy centers: Understanding the impact of a phenomenon. In K. Kendall-Tackett & S. Giacomoni (Eds.), Victimization of children and youth: Patterns of abuse, response strategies (pp. 22–24). Kingston, NJ: Civic Research Institute, Inc.
Smith, D., Witte, T., & Fricker-Elhai, A. (2006). Service outcomes in physical and sexual abuse cases: A comparison of child advocacy center-based and standard services. Child Maltreatment, 11(4), 354–360.
Stroud, D., Martens, S., & Barker, J. (2000). Criminal investigation of child sexual abuse: A comparison of cases referred to the prosecutor and those not referred. Child Abuse & Neglect, 24(5), 689–700.
Tjaden, J., & Anhalt, J. (1994). The impact of joint law enforcement-child protective services investigations in child maltreatment cases. Denver, CO: Center of Policy Research.
Tjaden, J., & Thoennes, N. (1992). Predictors of legal intervention in child maltreatment cases. Child Abuse and Neglect, 16(6), 807–821.
Walsh, W., Cross, T., Jones, L., & Simone, M. (2007). Which sexual abuse victims receive a forensic medical examination? The impact of children’s advocacy centers. Child Abuse & Neglect, 31(10), 1053–1068.
Walsh, W., Jones, L., Cross, T., & Lippert, T. (2010). Prosecuting child sexual abuse: The importance of evidence type. Crime & Delinquency, 56(3), 3–13.
Walsh, W., Lippert, T., Cross, T., Maurice, D., & Davison, K. (2008). How long to prosecute child sexual abuse for a community using a children’s advocacy center and two comparison communities? Child Maltreatment, 13(1), 3–13.
Wolfteich, P., & Loggins, B. (2007). Evaluation of the children’s advocacy center model: Efficiency, legal and revictimization outcomes. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 24(4), 333–352.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bracewell, T.E. Multidisciplinary Team Involvement and Prosecutorial Decisions in Child Sexual Abuse Cases. Child Adolesc Soc Work J 35, 567–576 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-018-0557-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-018-0557-1