Search

Schools are in a position to connect children and adolescents suspected of being victims of violence with an external source of support by making referrals to external agencies. However, several studies have identified obstacles that hinder early reporting among school staff members. Very few studies have applied a mixed-method approach to try to understand this sensitive issue. The current study used this approach to analyze to what extent the students suspected of being victimized match the ones reported by active school staff members in Spain ( n = 453, 83.5% females, age: M = 42.23, SD = 9.46). We classified the reasons given for not reporting the potential victimization cases encountered and made comparisons to determine whether there were differences in the level of knowledge, or in the sociodemographic characteristics, of respondents who gave different reasons for not reporting. Although 73.5% of school staff members had detected at least one potential case, 40.8% of them referred it to an external agency. The most common reasons for lack of reporting included deciding not to do so once concerns had been shared within the school and believing that one must be certain or that only serious violence should be reported. The findings of this study may help to further understand the decisions not to report certain suspicions of potential victimization cases to external agencies by school staff. There is an urgent need to raise awareness about the duty to report these concerns to external agencies, even in the absence of agreement from the school management team. Members of school staff need to be strongly encouraged to become familiar with the existing protocols.

Research interest in trauma as a possible cause of growth has increased in recent decades. The Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI) is widely used to measure growth after traumatic events. The present study aimed at validating the Spanish version of the PTGI in a sample of 243 young adults (age range from 18 to 35 years old, M = 21 years, SD = 2.5) who experienced interpersonal victimization during their childhood and/or adolescence. Preliminary analyses showed acceptable reliability for the PTGI subscales (Cronbach’s α ranging from .61 to .89). Exploratory factor analysis revealed a four-factor structure that included «new perception of life», «relating to others», «personal strength», and «spiritual change». All types of victimization correlated significantly with PTGI scores. These findings provide support for the factorial validity of the PTGI and the use of the PTGI in future research examining posttraumatic growth among Spanish victims of interpersonal violence in childhood. Keywords : Victimization; Posttraumatic Growth Inventory; trauma; growth. Estructura factorial del Inventario de Crecimiento Post-traumatico en una muestra espanola de victimas adultas de violencia interpersonal durante la infancia Resumen : El interes cientifico en el trauma como posible fuente de crecimiento ha aumentado en las ultimas decadas, siendo el Inventario de Crecimiento Post-traumatico (PTGI) uno de los instrumentos mas usados para medirlo. El estudio pretende validar la version en castellano del PTGI en una muestra de 243 adultos jovenes (entre 18 y 35 anos, M = 21 anos, DT = 2.5), victimas de violencia en la infancia y/o adolescencia. Los analisis mostraron una fiabilidad aceptable para todas las subescalas (α =.61- .89). El analisis factorial exploratorio revelo una estructura de cuatro factores: «nueva percepcion de la vida», «relacion con los demas», «fuerza personal» y «cambio espiritual». Todos los tipos de victimizacion correlacionaron significativamente con las puntuaciones del PTGI. Los resultados aportan evidencia sobre la validez de la estructura interna del PTGI y el uso del PTGI en futuras investigaciones que examinen el crecimiento post-traumatico en victimas espanolas de violencia interpersonal durante la infancia. Palabras clave : Victimizacion; inventario de crecimiento post-traumatico; trauma; crecimiento.

Highlights • We tested the effect of knowledge in detecting and reporting victimization cases from school. • School staff with more years of experience were more likely to detect potential victimization cases. • Knowing that a report can be made without the principal’s consent predicted reporting behavior. • Hours per day spent in contact with children increased the likelihood of reporting. • Training and interventions should focus on these aspects to increase early reporting., Knowledge of child victimization among school staff is believed to affect the detection and reporting of potential cases in the school environment, but the current evidence is scarce and contradictory. We assessed the link between knowledge of victimization and other relevant reporter characteristics in detecting and reporting children suspected to be victims of violence in a sample of 184 school staff members from Spain (84.02% females, M = 43.40, SD = 10.37). We compared participants who had never detected nor reported any cases (i.e., non-detectors) with participants who had detected but not reported outside school (i.e., inconsistent reporters) and participants who had detected and reported at least one potential case (i.e., consistent reporters). Knowledge about the reporting procedures varied significantly across groups. Years of experience was the only variable to significantly predict having detected at least one case across job experience. Knowing whether a report can be made anonymously or without the principal’s consent was significant to predict the likelihood of being a consistent reporter, along with hours spent daily in contact with students. Trainings for school staff should be aware of what specific aspects of knowledge tend to increase detection and reporting. Interventions should include more specific guidelines and ways of recreating experience (e.g., role-playing, virtual scenarios) as an effective strategy to respond to cases of potential victimization encountered at school.

Sexual offences are committed by a very heterogeneous population, within which we can distinguish paraphilic and non-paraphilic sex offenders (SOs). In addition, paraphiliacs vary in multiple factors, such as the target, origin, recurrence and intensity of their sexual fantasies, arousal or behaviours. Compared to other types of offenders, convicted SOs usually stay longer in forensic care, have more severe legal sanctions (e.g. community registration, residential restriction, extended supervision) and are perceived by the community as more dangerous. As a result, this affects their length of stay in care facilities. That is why accurately predicting recidivism is extremely important when it comes to SO. Actuarial instruments and professional guidelines help assessing the likelihood of a SO to reoffend in order to carefully make decisions that might seriously affect them and/or the community, such as their length of stay. Treatments should be chosen based on multiple factors, including demographic variables, information about the type of paraphilia, comorbidity with mental disorders, medical examination, past experiences, recidivism risk and risk of violence, personal and interpersonal factors and many others (even more so in adolescents). Combinations of pharmacological (i.e. SSRIs, antiandrogen treatment) and psychological (i.e. BT, CBT) interventions have proven their efficacy in reducing recidivism risk among SOs. Despite the profound social cost of paraphilic behaviour, paraphilic disorder is still under-researched.