Skip to main content
Log in

Clinical Supervision Dilemmas Related to Child Abuse in Wraparound Treatment

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Child and Family Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We conducted two separate, exploratory studies to evaluate the differences between the supervision of wraparound (in-home) and outpatient (office) child treatment interventions. Study one (n = 96) examined the structure and norms of supervision between groups as well as rates of general disclosure to direct supervisors. Study two (n = 116) specifically examined the frequency of child abuse and neglect encountered in each intervention setting, and the level of disclosure in supervision of these mandatory reporting events. Findings from the first study suggest that wraparound clinicians received significantly less individual supervision and colleague consultation than their office-based counterparts. Additionally, wraparound clinicians were significantly more likely to withhold information about client cases from their direct supervisors. In the second study, wraparound clinicians endorsed significant increases for observed child abuse, observed child neglect, and verbally reported child neglect compared to their office-based counterparts. In regards to mandatory reporting issues with children, wraparound clinicians were found to be significantly less likely to disclose issues pertaining to child neglect to their direct supervisors than office-based clinicians. Our studies show preliminary evidence for a needed increase of individual supervision in wraparound practice, in addition to a greater focus on clinician disclosures related to incidents of child abuse and neglect.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, J. F., & Maynard, P. F. (2000). Evaluating training needs for home-based family therapy: A focus group approach. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 28, 41–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2009). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (4th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertram, R. M., Suter, J. C., Bruns, E. J., & Rourke, K. E. (2011). Implementation research and wraparound literature. Journal Child and Family Studies, 20, 713–725. doi:10.1007/s10826-010-9430-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brosig, C. L., & Kalichman, S. C. (1992). Child abuse reporting decisions: Effects of statutory wording of reporting requirements. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 23, 486–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R., & Stozier, M. (2004). Resisting abuse at what cost? The impact of mandated reporting laws on the process and content of therapy. Contemporary Family Therapy: An International Journal, 26, 45–60. doi:10.1023/B.COFT.00000/6911.48914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, E. J., Sather, A., Pullman, M. D., & Stambaugh, L. F. (2011). National trends in implementing wraparound: Results from the state wraparound survey. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 20, 726–735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, E. J., Walrath, C. M., & Sheehan, A. K. (2007). Who administers wraparound? An examination of the training, beliefs, and implementation supports for wraparound providers. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 15, 156–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Callahan, J. L., Almstrom, C. M., Swift, J. K., Borga, S. E., & Heath, C. J. (2009). Exploring the contribution of supervisors to intervention outcomes. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, 72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowell, K., & Levi, B. H. (2012). Mandated reporting thresholds for community professionals. Child Welfare, 91, 35–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daly, J. M., Jones, J. K., Gereau, P. L., & Levy, B. T. (2011). Nonresponse error in mail surveys. Top ten problems. Nursing Research and Practice. doi:10.1155/2011/987924.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: the tailored design method (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson, L. M., & Koocher, G. P. (1991). Professional judgment and child abuse reporting in sexual abuse cases. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 22, 464–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gateway, Child Welfare Information. (2009). Making and screening reports of child abuse and neglect: Summary of state laws. In State Statutes Series, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

  • Glebova, T., Foster, S. L., Cunningham, P. B., Brennan, P. A., & Whitmore, E. (2012). Examining therapist comfort in delivering family therapy in home and community settings: Development and evaluation of the therapist comfort scale. Psychotherapy, 49, 52–61. doi:10.1037/a0025910.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grosz, D., Schutte, K., & Walker, J. (2002). Strategies for increasing the effectiveness of individualized service planning (wraparound teams). In Building on Family Strengths Conference Proceedings, pp. 193–197.

  • Henggeler, S. W. (2011). Efficacy studies to large transport: The development and validation of multisystemic therapy programs. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 7, 351–381. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032210-104615.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6, 65–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kernberg, O. F., Selzer, M. A., Koenig, M. A., Koeningsberg, H. W., Carr, A. C., & Applebaum, A. H. (1989). Psychodynamic psychotherapy of borderline patients. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, S., & Baturin, R. (2014). Pennsylvania child abuse recognition and reporting: 2015. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knapp, S., & Slattery, J. M. (2004). Professional boundaries in nontraditional settings. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 35, 553–558. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.35.5.553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladany, N., Hill, C. E., Corbett, M. M., & Butt, E. A. (1996). Nature, extent, and importance of what psychotherapy trainees do not disclose to their supervisors. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 10–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leeb, R. T., Paulozzi, L. J., Melanson, C., Simon, T. R., & Arias, I. (2008). Child maltreatment surveillance: uniform definitions for public health and recommended data elements (version 1.0). Atlanta, GA: Center for Disease Control.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehr, K.E., Ladany, N., & Caskie, G.I.L. (2014, March 24). Factors influencing trainee willingness to disclose in supervision. Training and Education in Professional Psychology. Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/101037/tep0000028.

  • Openden, D., Symon, J. B., Koegel, L. K., & Koegel, R. L. (2006). Developing a student respite provider system for children with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 8, 119–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare. (2014). Annual child abuse report, 2013. Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania Department of Public Welfare.

    Google Scholar 

  • Protect Our Children Committee. (2012). Child protection report: Digging deeper to understand how Pennsylvania defines child abuse. Retrieved from http://http://www.protectpachildren.org/files/Child-Protection-Report-On-Defining.pdf.

  • Reichelt, S., Gullestad, S. E., Hansen, B. R., Ronnestead, M. H., Togersen, A. M., Jacobsen, C. H., et al. (2009). Nondisclosure in psychotherapy group supervision: The supervisee perspective. Nordic Psychology, 61, 5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renninger, S. M., Veach, P. M., & Bagdade, P. (2002). Psychologists, knowledge, opinion, and decision-making processes regarding child abuse and neglect reporting laws. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 33, 19–23. doi:10.1037/0735-7028.33.1.19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenwald, S., Halliday-Boykins, C. A., & Henggler, S. W. (2003). Client-level predictors of adherence to MST in community service settings. Family Process, 42, 345–359.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schumacher, J. A., Slep, A. M., & Heyman, R. E. (2001). Risk factors for child neglect. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 6, 231–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slattery, J. M. (2005). Preventing role slippage during work in the community: Guidelines for new psychologists and supervisees. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, and Training, 42, 383–394. doi:10.1037/0033-3204.42.3.384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, J. S., Bruns, E. J., Conlan, L., & LaForce, C. (2011). The national wraparound initiative: A community of practice approach to building knowledge in the field of children’s mental health. Best Practices in Mental Health, 7, 26–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walter, U. M., & Petr, C. G. (2011). Best practices in wraparound: A multidimensional view of the evidence. Social Work, 56, 73–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, A., & Wheeler, S. (1998). How honest do counselors dare to be in the supervisory relationships?: An exploratory study. British Journal of Guidance and Counseling, 26, 509–524. doi:10.1080/03069889800760431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph Michael Roberts.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roberts, J.M., Roberts, J.L., Harrington, A.L. et al. Clinical Supervision Dilemmas Related to Child Abuse in Wraparound Treatment. J Child Fam Stud 25, 2258–2267 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-016-0394-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-016-0394-9

Keywords

Navigation