Pediatricians in Israel: factors which affect the diagnosis and reporting of maltreated children
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 30, 2026
An Experimental Analysis of Children's Ability to Provide a False Report about a Crime
Published on: May 3, 2016
1The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Paul Baerwald School of Social Work, Mount Scopus, Israel.
Insights
Israeli pediatricians may overlook child abuse and neglect, especially non-biomedical cases. Reporting willingness varies based on perceived risk and the receiving agency, with police involvement sometimes disregarded.
Area of Science:
- Pediatrics
- Child Welfare
- Medical Ethics
Background:
- Child maltreatment remains a significant public health concern.
- Pediatricians play a crucial role in identifying and reporting child abuse and neglect.
- Understanding healthcare professionals' perceptions is vital for improving child protection systems.
Purpose of the Study:
- To assess Israeli pediatricians' definitions of child abuse and neglect.
- To evaluate pediatricians' willingness to report suspected child maltreatment.
- To identify factors influencing pediatricians' reporting decisions.
Main Methods:
- Quantitative cross-sectional survey design.
- 135 pediatricians surveyed using a custom instrument.
- Vignettes and signs rated for risk perception and reporting likelihood.
Main Results:
- Biomedical neglect perceived as higher risk than psychological or educational neglect.
- Concrete evidence and negative consequences increased maltreatment perception.
- Pediatricians were more willing to report to welfare departments than police.
Conclusions:
- Pediatricians may miss certain abuse/neglect cases due to insufficient psychosocial awareness.
- Reporting willingness is influenced by perceptions of receiving agencies.
- Police involvement in child maltreatment cases may be underestimated or avoided.
Objectives:
First, to examine what Israeli pediatricians consider to be abuse or neglect of children, second, to examine their willingness to report child maltreatment, and third, to examine the factors which may affect their approach.
Method:
A quantitative cross-sectional survey research design was employed. One hundred and thirty-five pediatricians responded to a specially constructed instrument sent to a systemic, randomly chosen sample. The participants rated 40 vignettes of abuse and neglect according to their perception of the extent of the risk to the welfare of the child and their willingness to report these situations. They also rated 15 signs according to their perception of the extent to which each sign could lead to a suspicion of maltreatment.
Results:
Situations which fell within the biomedical perspective were ranked as containing a higher level of risk to the child than situations which were not (i.e., psychological abuse and educational neglect). Situations describing explicit signs or negative consequences of an act were ranked higher than those in which rationalization by the parent was included. These findings indicate that concrete evidence affects pediatricians judgement of what constitute maltreatment. The pediatricians were less willing to report situations of child maltreatment to the police than to the welfare department.
Conclusions:
Certain situations of abuse or neglect might be overlooked by pediatricians in the process of diagnosing maltreated children. This may be explained by inadequate awareness of the psychosocial factors needed to identify maltreated children. Pediatricians' willingness to report seemed to depend on their altitude toward the receiving professional, and situations requiring involvement of the police may be disregarded.
