Supervisory neglect: Critical questions regarding child supervision and protection system responses

Abstract

Concerns about child supervision are present in a large proportion of the circumstances responded to by North American child protection systems. This paper examines different perspectives on low-supervision, from parental-deficit to critical-ecological formulations, to address two questions that are central to assessing reports: why low-supervision is deemed to be harmful, and why low-supervision events occur The implications of this knowledge for child protection system responses is explored, and the conceptualization and application of supervisory neglect as a maltreatment category is critically questioned in order to tease apart what this label may represent in practice. The paper considers how thinking could be reframed to make supervisory neglect a more discrete classification which informs subsequent action, including centering the environmental hazard in supervisory neglect formulations and giving primacy to the impact on the child rather than to parent behavior. The role of normative thinking in decision-making and the risk of perpetuating social inequalities and oppressive power is also considered. More research is required to examine responses and outcomes under current systems of practice, and how child protection workers and systems reflexively analyze reports. In addition, more societal dialogue is needed to prevent widespread risk-averse thinking about how children should be supervised, which can reinforce restrictive child protection policy.