Still blaming parents? Describing the "evidence base" underpinning child neglect intervention programs.

BACKGROUND: Recent efforts attempt to reframe child neglect as a consequence of ecologically layered disadvantages or "overload." However, it is unclear if this ecological focus is reflected in the research base backing neglect interventions. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the state of the research evidence for child neglect interventions. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: We sampled programs that were rated by the California Evidence-Based Clearinghouse (CEBC) as evidence-based. Based on inclusion criteria, our final dataset comprised nine evidence-based intervention and prevention programs. We then compiled a list of all articles cited as peer-reviewed evidence for supporting the CEBC scientific rating. METHODS: We conducted content analysis on the resulting 46 articles to determine the extent to which these programs: explicitly addressed neglect as a distinct maltreatment type, discussed the primary prevention of neglect, or measured neglect as an outcome of the respective intervention. RESULTS: We found that only 11% of the articles comprising the "evidence base" for neglect interventions addressed neglect as a distinct maltreatment type; 80% of those articles targeted mothers. Though 60% of articles referenced ecological theory, only one article addressed a structural risk factor for neglect (poverty). CONCLUSIONS: Recent theorizing and empirical evidence suggest factors outside of the family are critical to the etiology of neglect. Given the prevalence of neglect, its direct harm to children, families, and society, and the economic costs of neglect, we conclude that this disconnect between accepted interventions and our best understanding of the causes of neglect is cause for alarm.