How neighborhoods influence child maltreatment: A review of the literature and alternative pathways

Abstract

Objective

To review the literature on the relationships between neighborhoods and child maltreatment and identify future directions for research in this area.

Method

A search of electronic databases and a survey of experts yielded a list of 25 studies on the influence of geographically defined neighborhoods on child maltreatment. These studies were then critically reviewed by an interdisciplinary research team.

Results

Numerous studies demonstrate that child maltreatment cases are concentrated in disadvantaged areas. A number of socio-economic characteristics of neighborhoods have been shown to correlate with child maltreatment rates as measured by official reports to child protective service agencies. Only a few studies examine direct measures of parenting behaviors associated with maltreatment, and these show a weaker relationship with neighborhood disadvantage. Moreover, the processes that link neighborhood conditions to either maltreatment reports or parenting behaviors are not yet confirmed by the research literature. Selection bias, neighborhood definitions and spatial influences are largely uncontrolled in the existing research.

Conclusions

We propose a framework for pursuing further study of neighborhoods and child maltreatment that addresses the gaps in the current literature. Neighborhood-based strategies to prevent and reduce child maltreatment will be enhanced by research that provides a better understanding of how neighborhood conditions act as stressors or supports for families at risk of child maltreatment.

Introduction

Conceptualization of the etiology of child maltreatment has evolved from a focus on the individual characteristics of children or their parents to ecological models that highlight the interactions among individuals, families, neighborhoods, and larger communities. One aspect of the ecology, the neighborhood, has received increased research attention in recent years. Although the concentration of child maltreatment in particular neighborhoods is well established (Coulton, Korbin, Su, & Chow, 1995; Drake & Pandey, 1996; Ernst, 2001, Freisthler, 2004, Fromm, 2004; Garbarino & Crouter, 1978; Garbarino & Sherman, 1980; Hyde, 1999, Zuravin, 1986, Zuravin, 1989), studies have yet to confirm the processes that explain these patterns. Thus, how neighborhoods influence child maltreatment remains unclear and this lack of clarity limits the applicability of this line of research to the field.

As a first step toward addressing these ambiguities, this article critically reviews the extant literature on neighborhoods and child maltreatment. The review is guided by a framework that delineates several possible pathways for neighborhood influence. The proposed framework does not tackle the entire etiological question, but rather focuses on the ways in which where a family lives might influence the chances that a child will experience maltreatment and/or be the subject of a child maltreatment report. The review is based on studies that specifically include neighborhood as a measured and primary factor in child maltreatment. The article summarizes the main findings of the studies, identifies a number of conceptual and methodological challenges and points to a future research agenda that would examine alternative explanations for the apparent concentration of child maltreatment in disadvantaged neighborhoods.

Two major research traditions have influenced the thinking about the relationships between neighborhoods and child maltreatment: one focuses on social disorganization and the other on ecological-transactional development. The first tradition, led by sociologists and social workers, examines the relationship between geographic concentrations of social problems and social processes within neighborhoods thought to contribute to social control, such as network ties, shared norms, collective efficacy, institutional resources, and routines (Sampson, Morenoff, & Gannon-Rowley, 2002). Testa and Furstenberg (2002) note that social workers and sociologists as far back as the early 1900s have repeatedly documented “the tendency for delinquent and neglected children to concentrate geographically in a common set of Chicago neighborhoods” (p. 238). More recently, the focus has turned to the consequences of concentrated poverty in central city neighborhoods and the accompanying social isolation from the mainstream as a factor in a number of poor outcomes for children (e.g., Wilson, 1987; for a review see Small & Newman, 2001). In response to this concern, there is tremendous interest in how neighborhoods can be strengthened to support families and to reduce child maltreatment (Melton, 2005; US Advisory Board on Child Abuse and Neglect, 1993). The strength of the social disorganization tradition is that it describes some of the specific social structures and process within neighborhoods that may be related to child maltreatment and other problems and provides some explanation as to how social structure and process are related. However, social disorganization theory provides little specificity about how these neighborhood characteristics might influence the behaviors and development of children and families.

The second tradition, led by developmental psychologists, examines how child development and parenting are influenced by the environment, including neighborhoods (Belsky, 1993; Belsky & Jaffee, 2006; Bronfenbrenner, Moen, & Garbarino, 1984; Cicchetti & Lynch, 1993; Garbarino, 1977). In 1991, the Commissioner for Children, Youth, and Families in the US Department of Health and Human Services asked the National Academy of Sciences to convene an expert panel on child maltreatment research (National Research Council, 1993). The panel selected a developmental/ecological/transactional model of the etiology of child maltreatment to review the existing research. The model views child maltreatment within a system of risk and protective factors interacting across four levels: the individual or ontogenic level, the family or microsystem level, the exosystem (which includes neighborhoods), and the social or macrosystem. More recently, this model has been used to demonstrate reciprocal relationships between children's exposure to community violence, child maltreatment, and child functioning over time (Cicchetti & Valentino, 2006). The strength of this approach is that it describes some of the specific ways the environment may influence the transactions between a parent and child and between a family and the neighborhood. However, the ecological-transactional model provides limited explanation about how neighborhood conditions and social processes influence these transactions and about how and why these neighborhood conditions and processes occur.