by Janet Douglas, Richard Sullivan
Abstract:
Background This unique social work research examined the rationale for child protection interventions with families found living in illegal cannabis grow operations, based on the assumption of risk in the presence of probable medical harm. Methods The study examined the household, family and individual characteristics of 181 children found living in cannabis grow operations in two regions in British Columbia, Canada. Data was collected on-site on the physical characteristics of the homes, the health characteristics of the children, and their prescription drug history. Comparison of prescription drug use was also made with a group of children from the same geographic areas. Results This study found that there was no significant difference between the health of the children living in cannabis grow operations and the comparison group of children, based on their prescription history and their reported health at the time. Conclusion The findings of this study challenge contemporary child welfare approaches and have implications for both child protection social workers and the policymakers who develop frameworks for practice.
Reference:
The role of child protection in cannabis grow-operations (Janet Douglas, Richard Sullivan), In International Journal of Drug Policy, volume 24, no. 5, 2013.AbstractBackground This unique social work research examined the rationale for child protection interventions with families found living in illegal cannabis grow operations, based on the assumption of risk in the presence of probable medical harm. Methods The study examined the household, family and individual characteristics of 181 children found living in cannabis grow operations in two regions in British Columbia, Canada. Data was collected on-site on the physical characteristics of the homes, the health characteristics of the children, and their prescription drug history. Comparison of prescription drug use was also made with a group of children from the same geographic areas. Results This study found that there was no significant difference between the health of the children living in cannabis grow operations and the comparison group of children, based on their prescription history and their reported health at the time. Conclusion The findings of this study challenge contemporary child welfare approaches and have implications for both child protection social workers and the policymakers who develop frameworks for practice.KeywordsChild welfare ()
Bibtex Entry:
@article{Douglas2013445,
title = "The role of child protection in cannabis grow-operations ",
journal = "International Journal of Drug Policy ",
volume = "24",
number = "5",
pages = "445 - 448",
year = "2013",
note = "",
issn = "0955-3959",
doi = "http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2013.01.003",
url = "http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0955395913000042",
author = "Janet Douglas and Richard Sullivan",
keywords = "Cannabis",
keywords = "Grow-operation",
keywords = "Child health",
keywords = "Child welfare ",
abstract = "Background This unique social work research examined the rationale for child protection interventions with families found living in illegal cannabis grow operations, based on the assumption of risk in the presence of probable medical harm. Methods The study examined the household, family and individual characteristics of 181 children found living in cannabis grow operations in two regions in British Columbia, Canada. Data was collected on-site on the physical characteristics of the homes, the health characteristics of the children, and their prescription drug history. Comparison of prescription drug use was also made with a group of children from the same geographic areas. Results This study found that there was no significant difference between the health of the children living in cannabis grow operations and the comparison group of children, based on their prescription history and their reported health at the time. Conclusion The findings of this study challenge contemporary child welfare approaches and have implications for both child protection social workers and the policymakers who develop frameworks for practice. "
}