Mechanisms of Inequity: The Impact of Instrumental Biases in the Child Protection System

Abstract

The structural risk perspective conceptualizes the causes of inequities in child protection system contact as unequal exposure to the structural causes of child abuse risk, combined with biases in the responses of child welfare workers and reporters. This conceptual article proposes a third mechanism of inequity: instrumental biases. It is proposed that instrumental biases operate as a third group of mechanisms that inequitably increase the involvement of some groups and not others. Instrumental biases operate through institutional structures, interpretive concepts and risk proxies that affect how risk is coded and becomes attached to particular people. Against the background of the notify-investigate model that creates poor conditions for decision making, and shapes institutional structures, instrumental biases include the miscalibration of the demand and supply of services (an institutional cause); family-specific surveillance bias and a reliance on prior case histories (a risk proxy cause); widening legal definitions of serious harm (an interpretive concept cause); and complex responses to intimate partner violence that minimize theories of IPV and the social context it occurs within (concept and risk proxy causes). It is argued that within the decision-making context of the child protection system, how services are structured and risk becomes codified has disproportionate impacts on some communities compared to others. Examples from Aotearoa New Zealand, with reference to Māori and people living in high-deprivation areas, are used to illustrate these concepts.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.