Professionals and interfamily violence against children and adolescents: in between legal and conceptual precepts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify the conceptions of professionals regarding interfamily violence against children and adolescents. METHOD: A qualitative study conducted with 15 professionals who had taken children and adolescents under their care as a result of interfamily violence. Data were collected between November, 2013, and March, 2015, through semi-structured interviews. Data were organized and analyzed using the Textual Discourse Analysis technique. RESULTS: The professional discourse highlighted that some legal aspects regarding the handling of interfamily violence against children and adolescents are neglected; an omission supported by the justification of professionals to preserve the family. We highlight the confrontation between the concept of family as a caregiver and the family that commits violence against children, in addition to the positioning of professionals, which does not include the family or the aggressor in the intervention process in facing situations of interfamily violence attended to by the services. CONCLUSION: Acting against interfamily violence requires professionals to do away with some pre-established concepts in ordee to put the actual needs of victims and families into evidence. OBJETIVO: Identificar, com base no discurso dos profissionais, suas concepções a respeito da violência intrafamiliar contra crianças e adolescentes. MÉTODO: Estudo qualitativo, realizado com 15 profissionais, que tiveram sob seus cuidados crianças e adolescentes atendidas em decorrência da violência intrafamiliar. Os dados foram coletados entre novembro de 2013 e março de 2015, por meio de entrevistas semiestruturadas. Os dados foram organizados e analisados utilizando a técnica de Análise Textual Discursiva. RESULTADOS: O discurso dos profissionais colocou em evidência que alguns aspectos legais em relação ao manejo da violência intrafamiliar contra crianças e adolescentes são negligenciados, omissão respaldada pela justificativa dos profissionais de preservar a família. Destaca-se o confronto entre a concepção de família como cuidadora e a família que violenta os filhos, além do posicionamento dos profissionais, os quais não incluem a família e o agressor nos processos de intervenção frente às situações de violência intrafamiliar atendidas nos serviços. CONCLUSÃO: Atuar frente à violência intrafamiliar requer do profissional romper com algumas concepções preestabelecidas para colocar em evidência as reais necessidades de vítimas e famílias.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".