Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

2013 DFCS Child Fatality Analysis Presentation

253

Published on

This powerpoint presentation was put together by Martha Duke, Child Death Liaison, Division of Family and Children Services and presented on August 8 at our Georgia Children's Advocacy Network …

This powerpoint presentation was put together by Martha Duke, Child Death Liaison, Division of Family and Children Services and presented on August 8 at our Georgia Children's Advocacy Network (GA-CAN!) Forum. This month we looked at Deconstructing Child Deaths in Georgia: A Discussion of the 2013 DFCS Child Fatality Report

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
253
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
3
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • For a child’s death to be included in this report, the child must have been in the custody of DFCS or his or her family must have had child protective services history with DFCS within the previous 5 years.
    2nd click: We call this “DFCS history” for short, and I will likely reference it several times throughout this presentation. So before we go any further, let’s discuss the basics of how we define “DFCS history” for the purposes of this report.
  • For a child’s death to be included in this report, the child must have been in the custody of DFCS or his or her family must have had child protective services history with DFCS within the previous 5 years.
    Child Protective Services history covers a wide array of potential encounters between DFCS and a family, ranging from a report that did not rise to the level of agency intervention to intensive involvement with the family.
    When a report comes in to DFCS, it can go one of three routes: it could be investigated, referred for family support services or screened out.
    Anything from the report on is considered history.
    Any report that does not meet Georgia statute and DFCS policy requirements for child abuse and/or neglect is screened out and not acted on further by the agency.
    Any report that establishes the potential of child maltreatment and it appears that a child is apparently unsafe in his or her current situation is investigated.
    Any report with allegations of child abuse and/or neglect, but has no indication of an imminent or impending risk of harm will be referred for family support services.
    The two gold boxes indicate reports that require more intensive agency involvement, meaning DFCS will likely open some sort of “CASE” on the family.
  • CLICK: Before we talk about DFCS history with regard to child deaths, we should offer some context that gives the complete picture of DFCS intervention activities in the state of Georgia.
    Click 1: In 2013, DFCS …
    Click 2: received 76,995 reports of abuse or neglect in person, over the phone or electronically.
    Click 3: assigned 54,101 cases for follow up by a caseworker, either for family support services, an abuse or neglect investigation or for family preservation.
    Click 4: had custody of 13,067 children at some point in time throughout the year
    Click 5: worked to keep 6,057 families together through family preservation services.
  • For children who died with DFCS history in 2013:
    For about 10 percent of the deaths in 2013 with defined “DFCS history” involved children whose came into contact with the agency for the first time with the injuries that caused their deaths.
    For 58 percent, DFCS was involved and working an active case at the time of the child’s death.
    For the remaining 60 percent, DFCS had provided the family services and closed the case in the last five years.
    For 29 of these cases in the green section, DFCS involvement pre-dated the life of the child whose death is recorded in this report.
  • 63 percent of the deaths detailed in the report were determined to be a result of natural causes and unintentional injuries. For the remaining deaths, causes were either undetermined or ruled as homicides or suicides.
    This breakdown is somewhat in line with the deaths reported by the agency last year.
  • This chart breaks down the child deaths with DFCS history by the child’s age at the time of death.
    The red, green, gold and orange colors represent children from 0 to 4 years old, and make up 72 percent of the deaths with agency history for 2013.
    Of all of these, it is pretty clear in this chart that children under 1 are most at risk for death.
    Of the 180 reported child deaths with DFCS history, nearly half of them were children younger than 12 months of age, and more than one-third were younger than six months old.
    So what factors are at play with these children under the age of 1?
  • Sleep-related deaths account for 23% of all child deaths with DFCS history in 2013, and nearly half of all deaths for children under the age of one.
    These deaths were categorized under several different manners, including “undetermined,” “natural,” and “accidental.”
    Co-sleeping with siblings or adults, or unsafe sleeping environments, such as a sofa, car seat or a crib with blankets and pillows, may have been a contributing factor in the deaths.
    In 2012, Sleep-related deaths accounted for about 40 percent of the recorded deaths with DFCS history.
    After co-sleeping was identified as a trend in sleep-related deaths, the Division developed a campaign to educate families on the dangers of co-sleeping and the importance of safe sleep habits in 2012.
    While the data from 2012 isn’t completely comparable to that collected for 2013 -- and it is certainly too early to state a trend ---we may be seeing a decline in these types of deaths, due to outreach efforts by both the Department of Public Health and DFCS.
    Other:
    There were 86 total deaths for children under the age of 1 in 2013
    Nine of the deaths for children in this age group were classified as homicides.
    12 children never left the hospital.
    Some were born prematurely—some due to substance abuse…..
    Drug use and its impact on parents’ ability to care for their children is a critical factor in DFCS involvements that precede child deaths.
    Of the 180 children who died with DFCS history in 2013, 78 had caretakers who were alleged to be using drugs at some time during the agency’s involvement with the family;
  • Drug use and its impact on parents’ ability to care for their children is a critical factor in DFCS involvements that precede child deaths.
    Of the 180 children who died with DFCS history in 2013, 78 had caretakers who were alleged to be using drugs at some point during the agency’s involvement with the family;
    While not all of these deaths were directly attributed to the parent or caretaker’s drug use, this statistic provides further insight into the risk factors at play in the lives of children whose families come into contact with DFCS.
  • These are a few of the high level items we’ve identified in our review of 2013 fatalities.
    Again, this data only covers a specific population of children, and isn’t as comprehensive as the Child Fatality Review, which should help stakeholder develop prevention efforts.
    We hope, that by providing this information to the public and to our staff, we will be able to identify trends, target intervention efforts
  • ×