Introduction
Mandatory Reporting
Intersectionality
Current Study
Method
Participants
# | % | |
---|---|---|
Gender (n = 2448) | ||
Women- | 2145 | 87.6% |
Men- | 265 | 10.8% |
Trans & Gender Non-Conforming | 38 | 1.6% |
Sexual Orientation (n = 2417) | ||
Heterosexual | 2037 | 84.3% |
Bisexual | 188 | 7.8% |
Gay/Lesbian | 92 | 3.8% |
Sexually fluid | 100 | 4.1% |
Race/Ethnicity (n = 2317) | ||
White/Caucasian | 1317 | 57.1% |
Latino/a/ Hispanic | 366 | 15.9% |
Black/ African American | 324 | 14.0% |
Asian/ Asian American | 164 | 7.1% |
Multi-racial/ Mixed race | 136 | 5.9% |
χ2 Analysis | Logistic Regression | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Predictors | χ2 | df | # Yes (%) | Odds Ratio (n = 2106) | 95% CI |
Race/Ethnicity (n = 2148) | 6.03 | 4 | |||
API | 45 (32.6%) | 0.92 | [0.62, 1.35] | ||
Black | 93 (30.2%) | 0.79 | [0.60, 1.05] | ||
Latinx | 125 (37.7%) | 1.12 | [0.87, 1.44] | ||
Multiracial | 49 (40.2%) | 1.18 | [0.80, 1.75] | ||
White | 443 (35.5%) | – | – | ||
Sexual Orientation (n = 2250) | 1.81 | 3 | |||
Bisexual | 69 (39.9%) | 1.13 | [0.81, 1.57] | ||
Gay/Lesbian | 30 (34.9%) | 0.88 | [0.54, 1.44] | ||
Sexually Fluid | 34 (37.4%) | 1.05 | [0.65, 1.70] | ||
Heterosexual/Straight | 665 (35.0%) | – | – | ||
Gender Identity (n = 2269) | 27.79*** | 2 | |||
Woman- | 734 (36.8%) | 0.48 | [0.22, 1.05] | ||
Man- | 53 (21.7%) | 0.22*** | [0.10, 0.50] | ||
TGNC | 18 (56.3%) | – | – |
χ2 Analysis | Logistic Regression | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Predictors | χ2 | df | # Yes (%) | Odds Ratio (n = 2076) | 95% CI |
Race/Ethnicity (n = 2118) | 13.00* | 4 | 13 (10.0%) | ||
API | 37 (12.5%) | 0.65 | [0.36, 1.19] | ||
Black | 45 (13.8%) | 0.79 | [0.54, 1.16] | ||
Latinx | 30 (24.2%) | 0.88 | [0.62, 1.25] | ||
Multiracial | 195 (15.7%) | 1.65 | [1.05, 2.59] | ||
White | – | – | |||
Sexual Orientation (n = 2208) | 5.69 | 3 | 36 (20.6%) | ||
Bisexual | 11 (13.6%) | 1.32 | [0.88, 1.97] | ||
Gay/Lesbian | 18 (19.8%) | 0.70 | [0.34, 1.43] | ||
Sexually Fluid | 275 (14.8%) | 1.23 | [0.68, 2.23] | ||
Heterosexual/Straight | – | – | |||
Gender Identity (n = 2227) | 16.23*** | 2 | 306 (15.7%) | ||
Woman- | 23 (9.5%) | 0.43* | [0.19, 0.98] | ||
Man- | 12 (34.3%) | 0.25** | [0.10, 0.64] | ||
TGNC | – | – |
Materials and Procedure
Analytical Approach
Quantitative Data Analysis
Qualitative Data Analysis
Mixed Methods Analysis
Reflexivity Statement
Results
Mandatory Reporting Affects Who Survivors Turn to for Support
Survivors Were Afraid to Ask for Help
Mandatory Reporting Affects the Help Survivors Received
Survivors Seeking Help Receive Warnings
χ2 Analysis | Logistic Regression | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Predictors | χ2 | df | # Yes (%) | Odds Ratio (n = 307) | 95% CI |
Race/Ethnicity (n = 308) | 2.20 | 4 | |||
API | 6 (46.2%) | 0.56 | [0.18, 1.75] | ||
Black | 20 (57.1%) | 0.92 | [0.43, 1.96] | ||
Latinx | 24 (55.8%) | 0.79 | [0.40, 1.56] | ||
Multiracial | 20 (66.7%) | 1.48 | [0.62, 3.53] | ||
White | 115 (61.5%) | – | – | ||
Sexual Orientation (n = 325) | 2.42 | 3 | |||
Bisexual | 24 (68.6%) | 1.35 | [0.61, 2.99] | ||
Gay/Lesbian | 5 (45.5%) | 0.32 | [0.07, 1.47] | ||
Sexually Fluid | 9 (52.9%) | 0.56 | [0.17, 1.84] | ||
Heterosexual/Straight | 160 (61.1%) | – | – | ||
Gender Identity (n = 326) | 2.27 | 2 | |||
Woman- | 182 (61.9%) | 0.54 | [0.11, 2.70] | ||
Man- | 9 (45.0%) | 0.28 | [0.04, 1.74] | ||
TGNC | 7 (58.3%) | – | – |
Survivors Seeking Help Trigger Mandatory Reports
Predictors | χ2 Analysis | Logistic Regression | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
χ2 | df | # Yes (%) | Odds Ratio (n = 1818) | 95% CI | |
Race/Ethnicity (n = 1857) | 7.37 | 4 | |||
API | 7 (5.9%) | 0.50 | [0.21, 1.16] | ||
Black | 20 (7.4%) | 0.63 | [0.37, 1.05] | ||
Latinx | 24 (8.2%) | 0.70 | [0.44, 1.12] | ||
Multiracial | 15 (14.2%) | 1.37 | [0.75, 2.52] | ||
White | 111 (10.4%) | – | – | ||
Sexual Orientation (n = 1940) | 9.57* | 3 | |||
Bisexual | 13 (8.8%) | 0.76 | [0.41, 1.43] | ||
Gay/Lesbian | 0 (0.0%) | 0.00 | [0.00, 0.00] | ||
Sexually Fluid | 11 (13.8%) | 1.27 | [0.60, 2.72] | ||
Heterosexual/Straight | 161 (9.8%) | – | – | ||
Gender Identity (n = 1958) | 11.58** | 2 | |||
Woman- | 179 (10.4%) | 0.79 | [0.16, 3.88] | ||
Man- | 7 (3.3%) | 0.26 | [0.04, 1.49] | ||
TGNC | 3 (14.3%) | – | – |
I thought what I was saying to the victims’ advocate was confidential unless I gave permission. After our session, she said she had to give some of the info over to the DA. The DA was going for a much more severe consequence when I wanted a different type of help for my abuser not a long-term incarceration or more DV/anger management classes that he could BS his way through or prison which wasn't the help he needed. I didn't trust anyone again in this type of position.
Interestingly, this White man- described the most positive outcome of CPS out of the entire sample. They kept custody of their children, the abuse against their ex was substantiated, and they have been living with other family, awaiting additional supports. Although this represents a potentially best-case scenario, even this survivor rated the impact of the report to have made the situation much worse, and they described needing additional supports to get their needs met.Child Protective Services got involved back in May and now they've found my wife to be substantiated in the case…. I'm now with my parents and have my son with me but I am not sure now where to turn to get assistance for our own living arrangements and further assistance to protect my son.