Background Measuring violence against children (VAC) requires understanding competing sources of bias, with evidence suggesting caregivers underreport abuse. Objective This study examined differences in reported child abuse by respondent using longitudinal data and identified factors influencing maternal reporting. Participants and settings Using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), we analyzed mothers' cumulative prospective reports of physical and psychological abuse experienced by their children, alongside young adults' retrospective self-reports. Methods Difference between prevalence of abuse by respondents was estimated using McNemar's test for paired proportions. Concordance between respondents was assessed using Cohen's kappa and Prevalence-Adjusted Bias-Adjusted Kappa (PABAK). Multivariable logistic regressions identified maternal characteristics associated with reporting. Results Physical and psychological child prevalence was 6.23% (95% CI 5.51–7.02), and 11.77% (95% CI 10.80–12.81) among young adults, with significant differences by respondent (p < 0.05). Mothers reported higher prevalence of psychological abuse and lower physical abuse than young adults. Cohen's kappa was 0.11 and 0.16 for physical and psychological abuse. PABAK showed higher agreement: 0.82 and 0.63. Mothers had lower odds of reporting physical or psychological abuse when the child was a female, 0.69 (95% CI 0.51–0.93). Conclusion While reports from mothers and children showed limited concordance, there was no consistent evidence that mothers systematically underreported abuse when identical questions were used. However, mothers' reporting varied by the child's sex and maternal characteristics. This work underscores the importance of considering identity and social norms in VAC measurement, by triangulating data from multiple respondents to improve accuracy in prevalence estimates.
Background Intrafamilial child sexual abuse (IFCSA) frequently occurs in the presence of significant others who face complex challenges in recognizing the abuse. While research has increasingly examined disclosure and meaning-making in IFCSA contexts, comparatively little is known about how survivors come to know, interpret, and sustain knowledge of abuse within relational environments characterized by silencing and non-recognition. Objective This study examines how adult survivors of IFCSA come to know abuse that occurred in the presence of significant others who did not recognize it, and how knowledge of the abuse becomes possible and sustainable across relational and social contexts. Participants and methods Eighteen Israeli Jewish adult IFCSA survivors (twelve secular, three religious, three Ultra-Orthodox) participated in semi-structured in-depth interviews. All reported that significant others, understood in the symbolic interactionist sense as the close figures whose responses shape a child's sense of what is real, had been present during or aware of abusive incidents. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis within a constructivist symbolic interactionist framework. Results Three interconnected layers of silencing were developed, each representing a distinct arena in which knowledge of the IFCSA was contested, formed, and sustained against non-recognition: intrapersonal silencing, familial silencing, and social silencing. Across these layers, participants' accounts suggested that knowing developed through partial, fragmented, or delayed processes of remembering. Conclusions Knowledge of IFCSA forms and is sustained against non-recognition at three levels. The field's question thus shifts from why survivors did not disclose to the conditions under which knowing and telling become possible.
