Thesis (M.S.)--University of Michigan, 1985.

Thesis (M. Soc. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1994. / Includes bibliographical references (151-157).

Thesis (M.A.)--University of Central Florida, 2010. / Adviser: Jana Jasinski. Includes bibliographical references (p. 48-52).

Thesis (M.Soc.Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1994. / Includes bibliographical references (151-157) Also available in print.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Rhode Island, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 215-229).

Muitas crianças e adolescentes são vítimas de maus-tratos infantis, no Brasil e no Peru, e estas práticas constituem-se em uma violação aos seus direitos. Em ambas as sociedades, tais direitos são preconizados e garantidos por dispositivos legais, tendo em vista sua proteção integral, sendo que um destes dispositivos prevê a suspensão temporária do direito de guarda pelos pais/responsáveis. A presente investigação propõe-se a conhecer melhor as famílias brasileiras e peruanas nessa situação, em termos de exposição a fatores de risco maleáveis, específicos para os maus-tratos, situados no micro e no exosistema. O referencial é o da Teoria Bioecológica e o Modelo Transacional. Trabalhou-se com amostras de conveniência no Brasil, na cidade de Ribeirão Preto - SP (n=30) e no Peru, na cidade de Arequipa (n=30), formadas por adultos mãe/pai ou cuidador, responsável legal. Os instrumentos utilizados para a coleta de dados foram: um Roteiro de Entrevista de Caracterização Sociodemográfica da Família; o Inventário de Potencial de Maus-Tratos Infantis (CAP); a Escala de Avaliação da Coesão e Adaptabilidade Familiar Versão IV (FACES IV); o Inventário de Estilos Parentais - Práticas Educativas Maternas/Paternas (IEP) ou, a depender da idade da criança, o Roteiro de Entrevista de Habilidades Sociais Educativas Parentais (RE-HSE-P); e o Questionário de Apoio Social (QAS). Cada instrumento foi corrigido segundo seus próprios critérios técnicos, sendo que os dados obtidos puderam ser categorizados e comparados estatisticamente. Os resultados indicaram que as famílias investigadas, em ambas as sociedades, seriam vulneráveis em termos socioeconômicos. No Brasil, embora padecendo menos do ponto de vista econômico, devido ao fato de serem, em sua maioria, beneficiárias de ajuda governamental, as famílias teriam baixo status social, tendo em conta o baixo nível de escolaridade dos pais/cuidadores e a situação de desemprego. No Peru, as famílias também teriam baixo status social, embora tendo em média uma escolaridade mais alta que as brasileiras. Essas, contudo, viveriam em condições mais precárias, com baixa renda, advinda de trabalho informal, e em moradias mais precárias, em regiões da cidade caracterizadas por escasso acesso aos serviços básicos. Nos dois países, as famílias perceberiam seus bairros como violentos ou perigosos: no Brasil, devido à venda de drogas; no Peru, devido à venda de álcool, aos roubos e ao pouco policiamento. Elas também se assemelhariam no tocante a aspectos de configuração: a maioria seria desconstituída e, por vezes, reconstituída, denotando-se histórico de violência entre os parceiros íntimos, para a maioria. Com relação às características pessoais dos pais/cuidadores, destaca-se que no Brasil estes seriam, em sua maioria, usuários de substâncias psicoativas e teriam familiares com envolvimento criminal. Em relação aos instrumentos padronizados, sublinha-se que, de modo geral, nas duas amostras, os dados indicaram a existência de problemáticas consideradas fatores de risco específicos para os maus-tratos. Focalizando as diferenças estatisticamente significativas (p<0,05) entre as amostras, destaca-se que no CAP os participantes brasileiros pontuaram mais alto na subescala rigidez, indicando uma problemática maior nesse plano. No FACES, as amostras apresentaram diferenças nas escalas Coesão, Flexibilidade, Comunicação e Satisfação Familiar, denotando maior disfuncionalidade na amostra brasileira. O IEP diferenciou as amostras somente na dimensão de Punição inconsistente, denotando que a amostra peruana empregaria com maior frequência esta prática negativa. Em síntese, os dados sugerem que as famílias no sistema de proteção infantil efetivamente vivem problemas associados à ocorrência dos maus-tratos. Novas pesquisas na área devem se dedicar a conhecer e a analisar se os serviços que lidam com essas famílias e com seus filhos têm contemplado suas necessidades. / Many children and adolescents are victims of child abuse in Brazil and Peru; these practices constitute a violation of their rights. In both societies such rights are recommended and guaranteed by the law, in view of its full protection, with one of these law disposition standing a temporary suspension of guard by parents / guardians. This research proposes to better understand Brazilian and Peruvian families in this context in terms of exposure to manageable risk factors specific to ill-treatment, located in the micro and exosistema. The theoretical framework is the bio-ecological theory and the transactional model. We worked with convenience samples in Brazil, in the city of Ribeirão Preto - SP (n = 30), and Peru, in the city of Arequipa (n = 30) were composed, formed by adults - mother / parent or caregiver, guardian. The instruments used for data collection were: A Sociodemographic Family characterization Interview; the Child Abuse Potential (CAP); the Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale- IV (FACES IV); Inventory of Parenting Styles - Educational Practices Maternal / paternal (IEP) or, depending on the age of the child, the Interview Script Education Social Skills Parental (RE-HSE-P); and the Social Support Questionnaire (SAQ). Each instrument has been analysed according to their own technical criteria, and data could be categorized and compared statistically. The results indicated that the families investigated in both countrys would be vulnerable in socioeconomic terms. In Brazil, although suffering less from the economic point of view, due to the fact that they are mostly beneficiaries of government aid programms, families have low social status, due to the low level of parents / caregivers`s education and the unemployment situation. In Peru, families also have low social status, while having on average higher education scores than the Brazilian. These, however, would live in precarious conditions, with low income, related to informal work ones and in precarious houses, in city regions characterized by poor access to basic services. In both countries, families perceive their neighborhoods as violent or dangerous: in Brazil, due to the sale of drugs; in Peru, due to the sale of alcohol, theft and little policing. They also would resemble regarding the configuration aspects: most would broked and sometimes reconstituted, showing up history of intimate partners violence, for most. With regard to parents/caregivers`s personal characteristics, in Brazil they would be, mostly psychoactive substances users and have family members with criminal envolvement. Regarding standardized instruments, it is emphasized that, in general, in both samples, the data indicate the presence of problematics considered specific risk factors for maltreatment. Focusing on statistically significant differences (p <0.05) between samples is emphasized that, in the CAP, , Brazilian participants scored higher in subscale Rigidity, indicating a larger problem here. In FACES, the samples showed differences in cohesion scales, flexibility, communication and family satisfaction, showing increased dysfunctionality in the Brazilian sample. The IEP differentiated samples only in the size of inconsistent punishment, indicating that the Peruvian sample used more often this negative practice. In summary, the data suggest that families in the child protection system effectively face problems associated with the occurrence of maltreatment in significant levels. New research in the area should be devoted to know and consider whether the services dealing with these families and their children contemplate their needs.

Cognitive behavioral violence prevention (CB-VP) parenting groups are commonly used for the primary and secondary prevention of violence. These groups use persuasive messages that target violence-related attitudes and cognitions, with the expectation that this will result in behavior change. Despite their frequent use as family violence prevention strategies, little is known about the actual messages being exchanged in CB-VP groups and how participants perceive and recall these messages. This study analyzes messages aimed at changing behaviors as recalled by Hispanic participants in federally funded Fatherhood groups in Miami, Florida. Applying concepts from violence prevention, behavior change messages were classified by topic, type of behavior targeted, compliance gaining strategies (Marwell & Schmitt, 1967), and sources of influence Wheeless, Baraclough & Stewart, 1983). The most common topics reported by participants included parenting role, discipline, communication content and spending time with children. Over a third of the appeals targeted behaviors that were not observable actions, but rather cognitive acts such as thinking, reflecting, and paying attention. Reward and punishment were the most frequently used compliance gaining strategies, followed by moral and expertise strategies. Most appeals were based on the expected outcomes of the proposed behaviors as the main source of influence. The results of this study provide a greater understanding of the motivations used to support behavior change messages in violence prevention parenting groups.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Victoria University of Wellington, 2010. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (D. Min.)--Northern Baptist Theological Seminary, Lombard, Ill., 2001. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 134-140).

Thesis (MA(Practical Theology))--University of Pretoria, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 114-116).