children`s exposure to violence survey

8/16/2019 Children`s Exposure to Violence Survey

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/childrens-exposure-to-violence-survey 1/12

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Access OJJDP publications online at ojjdp.ncjrs.org

Children’s Exposure to ViolenceN A T I O N A L S U R V E Y O F

Children’s Exposure to Violence

Ofce of Justice Programs Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods www.ojp.usdoj.go

Jeff Slowikowski, Acting Administrator October 2009

Access OJJDP publications online at ojjdp.ncjrs.org

A Message From OJJDPChildren are exposed to violenceevery day in their homes, schools,and communities. They may bestruck by a boyfriend, bullied by aclassmate, or abused by an adult.They may witness an assault on aparent or a shooting on the street.Such exposure can cause signicantphysical, mental, and emotional harmwith long-term effects that can lastwell into adulthood.

In 1999, OJJDP created the SafeStart Initiative to prevent and reducethe impact of children’s exposure toviolence through enhanced practice,research, evaluation, training andtechnical assistance, resources, and

outreach. The initiative has improvedthe delivery of developmentally appro-priate services for children exposed toviolence and their families.

Understanding the nature and extentof children’s exposure to violenceis essential to combating its effects.Partnering with the Centers for Dis-ease Control and Prevention, OJJDPhas sponsored the most compre-hensive effort to date to measurechildren’s exposure to violence. TheNational Survey of Children’s Expo-sure to Violence is the rst surveyto ask children and caregivers aboutexposure to a range of violent inci-dents and maltreatment.

As amply evidenced in this Bulletin,children’s exposure to violence ispervasive and crosses all ages. Theresearch ndings reported here arecritical to informing our efforts to pro-tect children from its damaging effects.

Access OJJDP publications online at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ojjdp

Children’s Exposureto Violence:

A ComprehensiveNational Survey

David Finkelhor, Heather Turner, Richard Ormrod,Sherry Hamby, and Kristen Kracke

This Bulletin discusses the National Sur-vey of Children’s Exposure to Violence(NatSCEV), the most comprehensivenationwide survey of the incidence andprevalence of children’s exposure to vio-lence to date, sponsored by the Office ofJuvenile Justice and Delinquency Preven-tion (OJJDP) and supported by the Cen-ters for Disease Control and Prevention(CDC). Conducted between January andMay 2008, it measured the past-year andlifetime exposure to violence for childrenage 17 and younger across several majorcategories: conventional crime, childmaltreatment, victimization by peers andsiblings, sexual victimization, witnessingand indirect victimization (including expo-sure to community violence and familyviolence), school violence and threats, andInternet victimization. (For more detailed

information on the types of violence thatchildren were questioned about, see“Screening Questions” on page 2.) Thissurvey is the first comprehensive attemptto measure children’s exposure to vio-lence in the home, school, and communityacross all age groups from birth to age 17,

and the first attempt to measure the cumu-lative exposure to violence over the child’slifetime.

The survey confirms that most of oursociety’s children are exposed to violencein their daily lives. More than 60 percentof the children surveyed were exposedto violence within the past year, eitherdirectly or indirectly (i.e., as a witness toa violent act; by learning of a violent actagainst a family member, neighbor, orclose friend; or from a threat against theirhome or school) (for full details on theseand other statistics cited in this Bulletin,see Finkelhor et al., 2009). Nearly one-halfof the children and adolescents surveyed(46.3 percent) were assaulted at least oncein the past year, and more than 1 in 10(10.2 percent) were injured in an assault; 1in 4 (24.6 percent) were victims of robbery,vandalism, or theft; 1 in 10 (10.2 percent)suffered from child maltreatment (includ-ing physical and emotional abuse, neglect,or a family abduction); and 1 in 16 (6.1 per-cent) were victimized sexually. More than 1in 4 (25.3 percent) witnessed a violent act



2

and nearly 1 in 10 (9.8 percent) saw onefamily member assault another. Multiplevictimizations were common: more thanone-third (38.7 percent) experienced 2 ormore direct victimizations in the previ-ous year, more than 1 in 10 (10.9 percent)experienced 5 or more direct victimiza-

tions in the previous year, and more than1 in 75 (1.4 percent) experienced 10 ormore direct victimizations in the previousyear.

Reports of lifetime exposure to violencewere generally about one-third to one-halfhigher than reports of past-year exposure,although the difference tended to begreater for less frequent and more severetypes of victimization. (For example, morethan three times as many respondentsreported being victims of a kidnappingover their lifetimes as did in the pastyear.) Nearly seven in eight children (86.6

percent) who reported being exposedto violence during their lifetimes alsoreported being exposed to violence withinthe past year, which indicated that thesechildren were at ongoing risk of violentvictimization. The reports of lifetimeexposure also indicate how certain typesof exposure change and accumulate asa child grows up; nearly one in five girlsages 14 to 17 (18.7 percent) had been thevictim of a sexual assault or attemptedsexual assault, and more than one-third ofall 14- to 17-year-olds had seen a parentassaulted.

Background

The Problem of ViolenceAgainst ChildrenChildren in the United States are morelikely to be exposed to violence and crimethan are adults (Finkelhor, 2008; Hashimaand Finkelhor, 1999). In 2005, juvenilesand young adults ages 12 to 19 were morethan twice as likely to be victims of vio-lent crimes as the population as a whole(Baum, 2005). 1 Each year, millions of chil-dren and adolescents in the United States

are exposed to violence in their homes,schools, and communities as both victimsand witnesses. Even if they are not physi-cally present, children may be affectedby intentional harm done by another(for example, the murder of or an assaulton a family member or close neighbor).Children react to exposure to violence indifferent ways, and many children showremarkable resilience. All too often,

however, children who are exposed toviolence undergo lasting physical, mental,and emotional harm. They suffer fromdifficulties with attachment, regressive

behavior, anxiety and depression, andaggression and conduct problems. Theymay be more prone to dating violence,delinquency, further victimization, andinvolvement with the child welfare andjuvenile justice systems. Moreover, beingexposed to violence may impair a child’scapacity for partnering and parenting laterin life, continuing the cycle of violenceinto the next generation.

Research has found that early identifica-tion, intervention, and continued followupare valuable strategies to prevent ordecrease the impact of exposure to vio-

lence. Families, teachers, police, judges,pediatricians, mental health providers,child protection workers, domestic vio-lence advocates, and others who interactwith children have a responsibility tocreate interventions, both physical andpsychological, that decrease or preventthe harms associated with exposure toviolence. 2 These include ways of interact-ing sensitively and expeditiously with

Screening QuestionsThe survey asked screening questions about 48 types of victimization in the fol-lowing categories:

u Conventional crime. Nine types of victimization, including robbery, theft, destruction ofproperty, attack with an object or weapon, attack without an object or weapon, attempted

attack, threatened attack, kidnapping or attempted kidnapping, and hate crime or biasattack (an attack on a child because of the child’s or parent’s skin color, religion, physi-cal problem, or perceived sexual orientation).

u Child maltreatment. Four types of victimization, including being hit, kicked, or beaten byan adult (other than spanking on the bottom); psychological or emotional abuse; neglect;and abduction by a parent or caregiver, also known as custodial interference.

u Peer and sibling victimization. Six types of victimization, including being attacked bya group of children; being hit or beaten by another child, including a brother or sister;being hit or kicked in the private parts; being chased, grabbed, or forced to do some-thing; being teased or emotionally bullied; and being a victim of dating violence.

u Sexual victimization. Seven types of victimization, including sexual contact or fondlingby an adult the child knew, sexual contact or fondling by an adult stranger, sexual contactor fondling by another child or teenager, attempted or completed intercourse, exposure or“ashing,” sexual harassment, and consensual sexual conduct with an adult.

u Witnessing and indirect victimization. These fall into two general categories, expo-sure to community violence and exposure to family violence. For exposure to commu-nity violence, the survey included 10 types of victimization, including seeing someoneattacked with an object or weapon; seeing someone attacked without an object orweapon; having something stolen from the household; having a friend, neighbor, or fam-ily member murdered; witnessing a murder; witnessing or hearing a shooting, bombing,or riot; being in a war zone; knowing a family member or close friend who was fondledor forced to have sex; knowing a family member or close friend who was robbed ormugged; and knowing a family member or close friend who was threatened with a gunor knife.

For exposure to family violence, eight types of victimization were assessed: seeing aparent assaulted by a spouse, domestic partner, or boyfriend or girlfriend; seeing abrother or sister assaulted by a parent; threat by one parent to assault the other; threat

by a parent to damage the other parent’s property; one parent pushing the other;one parent hitting or slapping the other; one parent kicking, choking, or beating upthe other; and assault by another adult household member against a child or adult inthe household.

u School violence and threat. Two types of victimization, including a credible bombthreat against the child’s school and re or other property damage to the school.

u Internet violence and victimization. Two types of victimization, including Internetthreats or harassment and unwanted online sexual solicitation.



3

children, ensuring protective environ-ments and caregivers, and helping chil-dren use positive coping skills. Muchmore research is warranted about whatworks to mitigate the effects of exposureto violence.

Too little is known about the numbers ofchildren exposed to violence. Althoughseveral studies have attempted to mea-sure children’s exposure to violence,these estimates have varied greatly andhave often measured only a subset ofthat exposure. 3 Not only does this partialmeasurement fail to reveal the full extentof violence against children, it also failsto account fully for the multiple victimiza-tions that many children experience; theco-occurrence of certain types of violence(for example, intimate partner violenceand child maltreatment or neglect within ahousehold); the extent to which exposure

to one type of violence may make a childmore vulnerable to other types of violenceand victimization; and the cumulativeeffects of repeated exposure to violenceas both a direct victim and a witness.Basic epidemiological data are importantto determine the extent of the publichealth problem, the need for services, anda baseline for evaluating progress.

Prior Attempts atComprehensiveMeasurementsThere have been many studies on the

health and behavioral consequences ofchild maltreatment and, to a lesser extent,on other forms of violence against chil-dren. 4 However, most of these studiesfocused on only one type of violence oron a few types within a single categorysuch as child abuse. 5 Two notable earlierstudies attempted to measure children’sexposure to violence and its adverseeffects in a more comprehensive fash-ion. The Adverse Childhood Experiences(ACE) study, cosponsored by CDC andKaiser Permanente, looked at the conse-quences for future health and well-beingof exposure to seven types of adversechildhood experiences 6 under the cat-egories of abuse, neglect, and householddysfunction. Almost two-thirds of thosesurveyed had suffered at least one adversechildhood experience, and more thanone in five respondents reported three ormore such experiences. The survey foundincreased rates of a number of long-termharms to physical, mental, and emotionalhealth associated with those experiences,

including alcoholism, drug abuse, depres-sion, severe obesity, and several chronicadult diseases. The survey further foundthat multiple adverse experiences com-pounded those harms. Although the ACEstudy was one of the first to documentthe long-term consequences of multiplechildhood victimizations, it had a differentfocus than NatSCEV. For one, the studyquestioned adults on their memories ofadverse childhood experiences ratherthan surveying children directly, and theset of adverse experiences was more lim-ited than those included in NatSCEV.

The other major attempt to examine theprevalence and incidence of children’sexposure to violence was the Develop-mental Victimization Survey (DVS), a pre-cursor to NatSCEV. DVS asked a nationallyrepresentative sample of 2,030 childrenages 10 to 17 and caregivers of childrenages 2 to 9 about their past-year exposureto crime and violence in five categories:conventional crime, child maltreatment,peer and sibling victimization, sexualassault, and witnessing and indirect vic-timization (Finkelhor et al., 2005; Krackeand Hahn, 2008). DVS was the first surveyto simultaneously examine these variousforms of victimization to obtain a compre-

hensive picture of children’s exposure toviolence. It was also the first national sur-vey to estimate the incidence of many spe-cific forms of victimization such as biasattacks and witnessing physical abuse(Finkelhor et al., 2005; Kracke and Hahn,2008). DVS generally found a higher rate ofspecific types of victimization than earlierstudies such as the National Crime Victim-ization Survey. Nearly three-quarters ofthe respondents (71 percent) reported a

direct or indirect victimization within thepast year, and the average young victimreported three separate types of victim-izations in separate incidents. More thanone-third of those surveyed reported thatthey witnessed violence or were otherwiseindirect victims of violence. DVS, however,provided only a limited assessment oflifetime incidence of exposure to violence;did not look specifically at items such asthreats and Internet victimization; andhad limited measurement of exposure tofamily violence, exposure to communityviolence, and school violence and threats.DVS also did not include children youngerthan age 2. NatSCEV expands on DVS bycomprehensively assessing lifetime expo-sure, considering additional forms of vio-lence, and including infants in the sample.With its much larger sample size, NatSCEValso allows for much more reliable esti-mates of rarer forms of victimization andmore accurate rates within different sub-groups of the population (Finkelhor et al.,2009).

History of theCurrent StudyUnder the leadership of then DeputyAttorney General Eric Holder in June1999, OJJDP created the Safe Start Initia-tive to prevent and reduce the impact ofchildren’s exposure to violence. As a partof this initiative and with a growing needto document the full extent of children’sexposure to violence, OJJDP launched theNational Survey of Children’s Exposure toViolence.

Safe Start’s NatSCEV is the first nationalincidence and prevalence study to examine



4

where the exposure to violence occurred,whether injury resulted, how often thechild was exposed to a specific type ofviolence, and the child’s relationship

to the perpetrator and (when the childwitnessed violence) the victim. In addi-tion, the study documents differences inexposure to violence across gender, race,socioeconomic status, family structure,region, urban/rural residence, and devel-opmental stage of the child; specifies howdifferent forms of violent victimization“cluster” or co-occur; identifies individual,family, and community-level predictors ofviolence exposure among children; exam-ines associations between levels/types ofviolence exposure and child mental andemotional health; and assesses the extentto which children disclose incidents of vio-lence to various individuals and the natureand source of assistance or treatment pro-vided (if any).

This study began in 2007 with fundingfrom OJJDP’s Safe Start Initiative. OJJDPthen partnered with CDC to collect addi-tional data on safe, stable, and nurturingrelationships—a key focus for CDC’s childmaltreatment prevention activities. Thecombined approach by OJJDP and CDC is

providing critical national data on levels ofviolence as well as data on key indicatorsof protective factors.

Highlights of theSurvey ResultsNatSCEV estimates both past-year andlifetime exposure to violence across anumber of categories, including physicalassault, bullying, sexual victimization,child maltreatment, dating violence, andwitnessed and indirect victimization(See “Methodology” on page 6 for moredetailed definitions of these terms). Exhib-it 1 illustrates the past-year exposure forall survey respondents to selected catego-ries of violence. Some of the more notablefindings are outlined below (see Finkelhoret al., 2009, for more details).

As noted earlier, the NatSCEV surveyfound that children’s exposure to violenceis common; more than 60 percent of thechildren surveyed had been exposed toviolence in the past year and more than 1in 10 reported 5 or more exposures. Thisexposure occurs across all age ranges ofchildhood and for both genders. In gen-eral, however, the types of exposure thatwere most prevalent among younger chil-dren were less serious, such as assaultswithout a weapon or without injury,assaults by a juvenile sibling, or bullyingand teasing, all of which were most com-mon among 6- to 9-year-olds and declinedthereafter. Older adolescents ages 14 to17 were the most likely to experiencemore serious forms of violence, includingassaults with injury, gang assaults, sexualvictimizations, and physical and emo-tional abuse, and to witness violence inthe community. (See exhibit 2 for a list ofthe most common victimizations for eachage range from infancy to later adoles-cence.) This is not a hard and fast distinc-tion; some serious forms of victimization,including kidnapping and assaults with aweapon, were most common among 10- to13-year-olds. This age group was also themost likely to witness violence within the

home, including domestic violence involv-ing their parents and assaults by otherfamily members.

The following sections provide more detailsabout the findings of the study regardingchildren’s exposure to major categories ofviolence, including assaults, bullying, sexualvictimization, child maltreatment, andwitnessing and indirect victimization. TheBulletin then discusses the study’s findingsabout multiple and cumulative exposures

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Anyexpo sure

Assaultwith noweaponor inju ry

Assaultwith

weaponan d/

or injur y

Sexualvictim-ization

Childmaltreat-

me nt

Witness-ing

familyassault

Witne ss-ing

commu nitya s sault

P e r c e n

t a g e o

f c

h i l d r e n e x p o s

e d

Type of v iolence

Da tingviolenc e *

60.6%

36.7%

14.9%

6.1%

10.2%

1.4%

9.8%

19.2%

Exhibit 1: Past-Year Exposure to Selected Categories of Violence forAll Children Surveyed

* Figures for dating violence are only for children and adolescents age 12 and older.

comprehensively the extent and natureof children’s exposure to violence acrossall ages, settings, and timeframes (see“Methodology” on page 6). It measures

their experience of violence in the home,school, and community. It asked childrenand their adult caregivers about not onlythe incidents of violence that childrensuffered and witnessed themselves butalso other related crime and threat expo-sures, such as theft or burglary from achild’s household, being in a school thatwas the target of a credible bomb threat,and being in a war zone or an area whereethnic violence occurred. It includes boththe past-year and lifetime exposure toviolence of children of all ages up to age17. The study was developed under thedirection of OJJDP, and was designed andconducted by the Crimes against ChildrenResearch Center of the University of NewHampshire. It provides comprehensivedata on the full extent of violence inthe daily lives of children. The primarypurpose of NatSCEV is to document theincidence and prevalence of children’sexposure to a broad array of violent expe-riences across a wide developmental spec-trum. The research team asked followupquestions about specific events, including



55

highest incidence occurs among 6- to9-year-olds, who had rates of 21.5 percentpast-year incidence and 28.0 percent life-time incidence.

About 1 in 5 children (19.7 percent)reported having been teased or emo-tionally bullied in the previous year andnearly 3 in 10 reported having been teasedor emotionally bullied in their lifetimes.Teasing or emotional bullying followed asimilar pattern to physical bullying amongage groups, rising to reach a peak among6- to 9-year-olds, nearly one-third of whom(30.4 percent) reported having beenteased in the past year and then fallingsteadily thereafter.

Internet harassment was less commonthan other forms of bullying. Questionsabout Internet harassment were askedonly of youth age 10 and older, who mightbe most likely to independently use acomputer. Unlike other forms of bullying,the peak risk period for Internet harass-ment was ages 14 to 17. In this group, 5.6percent reported Internet harassmentwithin the past year and 7.9 percent dur-ing their lifetimes.

Boys were more likely than girls to bephysically bullied or threatened, but girlswere more likely to be victims of Internetharassment. For past-year rates, therewere no significant gender differences inemotional bullying; however, for lifetimerates, girls reported more cumulativeexposure to emotional bullying than boys(Finkelhor et al., 2009).

Sexual VictimizationOverall, 6.1 percent of all children sur-veyed had been sexually victimized in thepast year and nearly 1 in 10 (9.8 percent)over their lifetimes. Sexual victimizationsincluded attempted and completed rape(1.1 percent past year, 2.4 percent life-time); sexual assault by a known adult (0.3percent past year, 1.2 percent lifetime), anadult stranger (0.3 percent past year, 0.5percent lifetime), or a peer (1.3 percentpast year, 2.7 percent lifetime); flashing orsexual exposure by an adult (0.4 percentpast year, 0.6 percent lifetime) or peer(2.2 percent past year, 3.7 percent life-time); sexual harassment (2.6 percent pastyear, 4.2 percent lifetime); and statutorysexual offenses (0.1 percent past year,0.4 percent lifetime). 7 Adolescents ages14 to 17 were by far the most likely to besexually victimized; nearly one in six (16.3percent) was sexually victimized in the

to violence, including documentation thatchildren who are exposed to one form ofviolence are at greatly increased risk forbeing exposed to violence in other forms.

Physical AssaultNearly one-half (46.3 percent) of all thechildren surveyed were physically assault-ed within the previous year, and morethan one-half (56.7 percent) had beenassaulted during their lifetime. Physicalassaults are extremely common acrossthe entire span of childhood and peakduring middle childhood. Assaults by sib-lings especially show a marked develop-mental trend, peaking during the middlechildhood years (ages 6 to 9) and thendeclining. Incidence for the most severeassaults, however, rises steadily with age.Among 14- to 17-year-olds, nearly one infive (18.8 percent) had been injured in the

past year in a physical assault. New formsof violence, such as dating violence, alsoemerge during adolescence, reaching a5.6-percent past-year incidence rate andan 8.8-percent lifetime rate for the oldestadolescents. The lifetime incidence ofassault victimization generally rose steadi-ly as children grew older, with more than7 in 10 14- to 17-year-olds (71.1 percent)reporting that they had been assaultedduring their lifetimes (Finkelhor et al.,2009).

In general, boys are somewhat more likelythan girls to be victims of assault. The

past-year incidence of assault is 50.2percent for boys and 42.1 percent forgirls, and the lifetime incidence of assaultis 60.3 percent for boys and 52.9 percentfor girls. These patterns are consistentwith other data on criminal victimization,which typically show that males are themost common targets of physical assault(Finkelhor, 2008; Kilpatrick, Saunders, andSmith, 2003; Baum, 2005; Rand, 2008).

BullyingThe survey looked at bullying separatelyfrom assault and asked about multiple

types of bullying: physical bullying,emotional bullying, and Internet harass-ment. Overall, 13.2 percent of those sur-veyed reported having been physicallybullied within the past year, and morethan one in five (21.6 percent) reportedhaving been physically bullied duringtheir lifetimes. The risk of bullying peaksduring middle childhood in a patternsimilar to that for sibling assault. The

Exhibit 2: DevelopmentalPatterns in Exposure toViolence

Victimization in Infancy

Most common victimizations duringthis period:

Assault by a siblingAssault with no weapon or injuryWitnessing family assault

Victimization in the Toddler Years(Ages 2 to 5)

Most common victimizations duringthis period:

Assault by a siblingAssault with no weapon or injuryBullying (physical)Witnessing family assault

Victimization in Middle Childhood(Ages 6 to 9)

Peak risk period for:Assault by a siblingAssault with no weapon or injuryBullying (physical)Emotional bullying/teasing

Victimization in Preteens and EarlyAdolescence (Ages 10 to 13)

Peak risk period for:Assault with weaponSexual harassment (same rate

ages 10 to 17)KidnappingWitnessing family assaultWitnessing intimate partner

(interparental) violence

Victimization in Later Adolescence(Ages 14 to 17)

Peak risk period for:Assault with injuryAssault by peer (nonsibling)Genital assaultDating violenceSexual victimizations of all typesSexual assaultSexual harassment (same rate

ages 10 to 17)Flashing or sexual exposureUnwanted online sexual solicitationAny maltreatmentPhysical abusePsychological or emotional abuseWitnessing community assaultExposure to shootingSchool threat of bomb or attack



6

past year, and more than one in four (27.3percent) had been sexually victimizedduring their lifetimes. The most commonforms of sexual victimization were flashingor exposure by a peer, sexual harassment,and sexual assault.

Girls were more likely than boys to besexually victimized: 7.4 percent of girlsreported a sexual victimization within thepast year, and nearly one in eight (12.2percent) reported being sexually victim-ized during their lifetimes. Girls ages 14 to17 had the highest rates of sexual victim-ization: 7.9 percent were victims of sexualassault in the past year and 18.7 percentduring their lifetimes (Finkelhor et al.,2009).

Child MaltreatmentOverall, more than 1 in 10 children sur-veyed (10.2 percent) suffered some formof maltreatment (including physical abuseother than sexual assault, psychologicalor emotional abuse, child neglect, andcustodial interference) during the pastyear and nearly 1 in 5 (18.6 percent) dur-ing their lifetimes. Both the past-year andlifetime rates of exposure to maltreatmentrose as children grew older, particularlyfor children age 10 and older: one in six14- to 17-year-olds (16.6 percent) sufferedmaltreatment during the past year andnearly one in three (32.1 percent) duringtheir lifetimes.

Patterns of child maltreatment were simi-lar for girls and boys with the exceptionof psychological or emotional abuse, theincidence of which was somewhat higherfor girls than for boys. Rates of sexualassault by a known adult (not limited tocaregivers) were also higher for girls thanfor boys, in a pattern that was similar toother forms of sexual victimization.

Witnessing and IndirectExposure to ViolenceNatSCEV found that witnessing violencewas a common occurrence for children,particularly as they grew older. Over-all, more than one-quarter of childrensurveyed (25.3 percent) had witnessedviolence in their homes, schools, andcommunities during the past year; andmore than one-third (37.8 percent) hadwitnessed violence against another per-son during their lifetimes. The proportionof children who witnessed violence bothwithin the past year and during their life-times rose from one age group to the next.

MethodologyThe National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence (NatSCEV) was con-ducted between January and May 2008. Researchers conducted interviewsabout the experiences of a nationally representative sample of 4,549 childrenand adolescents age 17 and younger. They interviewed by telephone youth ages10 to 17 and adult caregivers of children age 9 and younger. Because telephone

interviews afford greater anonymity and privacy than in-person interviews, theymay encourage those interviewed to be more forthcoming about such sensitivematters as being exposed to violence or being victims of crime.

The interview sample ( n = 4,549) consisted of 2 groups: a nationally representa-tive sample of telephone numbers within the contiguous United States ( n = 3,053)and an oversample of telephone exchanges with 70 percent or greater AfricanAmerican, Hispanic, or low-income households to ensure a proportion of minor-ity and low-income households large enough for subgroup analysis. Both groupswere sampled through random-digit dialing. The cooperation rate for the rstgroup was 71 percent and the response rate was 54 percent. The oversamplehad somewhat lower cooperation (63 percent) and response rates (43 percent).A nonresponse analysis conducted on households that could not be contacted orthat declined to participate indicated that the risk of victimization for those house-holds did not differ systematically from the risk for households that took part inthe survey.

An adult, usually a parent, provided demographic information for each partici-pating household, including race/ethnicity (one of four categories: white, non-Hispanic; black, non-Hispanic; other race, non-Hispanic; and Hispanic, any race)and household income. The child in the household with the most recent birthdaywas then selected to be surveyed. Interviewers spoke directly with children age10 and older; for children age 9 and younger, the parent or other adult caregiver“most familiar with the child’s daily routine and experience” was interviewed.Comparison of a number of indicators, including reports of child maltreatment orneglect and violence by family members, found no evidence that caregivers whoanswered for younger children failed to report neglect or violence that was occur-ring in the family.

Interviews averaged about 45 minutes in length and were conducted in both Englishand Spanish. Approximately 279 caregiver interviews were conducted in Spanish;almost all interviews with children and adolescents 10 and older were in English.

Types of Violent Victimization SurveyedInterviewers asked the children or their caregivers about their exposure toselected types of violence in the past year and over their lifetimes (see “Screen-ing Questions” on page 2). In addition, interviewers asked followup questionsabout the perpetrator, the use of a weapon, injury, and whether multiple events

Of all forms of victimization measured inNatSCEV, witnessing community violenceshowed the strongest age trends. Therewas more than a sevenfold increase inrates from toddlers (2- to 5-year-olds) to

older adolescents (14- to 17-year-olds).More than 7 in 10 14- to 17-year-olds hadwitnessed violence against another personduring their lives.

These age trends were due mostly to wit-nessing violence in the community. Thepast-year incidence of witnessing assaultsin the community rose from 5.8 percentamong 2- to 5-year-olds to 42.2 percentamong 14- to 17-year-olds; lifetime incidence

rose even more dramatically, from 9.0percent of 2- to 5-year-olds to nearly two-thirds (64.2 percent) of 14- to 17-year-olds.Witnessing of shootings also rose sharplyin both past-year and lifetime incidence

from one age group to the next. Amongchildren younger than 2 years old, 1.1percent were exposed to shootings in thepast year, whereas more than 1 in 10 14-to 17-year-olds (10.2 percent) witnesseda shooting in the past year. Similarly, 3.5percent of 2- to 5-year-olds had witnesseda shooting during their lifetimes, whereasmore than one in five 14- to 17-year-olds(22.2 percent) had witnessed a shooting.As striking as these age trends are, even



7

likely to witness violence in the commu-nity, murder, and shootings both in thepast year and during their lifetimes. Therewere no gender differences in witnessingfamily violence (Finkelhor et al., 2009).

Multiple and CumulativeVictimizationsA large proportion of children surveyed(38.7 percent) reported more than onedirect victimization (a victimization direct-ed toward the child, as opposed to anincident that the child witnessed, heard,or was otherwise exposed to) within theprevious year. Of those who reported any

direct victimization, nearly two-thirds(64.5 percent) reported more than one. Asignificant number of children reportedhigh levels of exposure to violence in thepast year: more than 1 in 10 (10.9 percent)reported 5 or more direct exposures toviolence, and 1.4 percent reported 10 or

more direct victimizations. (Victimiza-tions that could be counted in more thanone category, such as physical abuse bya parent or caregiver that could also beconsidered an assault, were not includedin the counting of multiple victimizations.See “Methodology” for a discussion of thispoint.)

Children who were exposed to one typeof violence, both within the past year andover their lifetimes, were at far greaterrisk of experiencing other types of vio-lence. For example, a child who was physi-cally assaulted in the past year would be

five times as likely to also have been sexu-ally victimized and more than four timesas likely also to have been maltreatedduring that period. Similarly, a child whowas physically assaulted during his or herlifetime would be more than six times aslikely to have been sexually victimizedand more than five times as likely to havebeen maltreated during his or her lifetime.

Implications forPolicymakers,Researchers, and

PractitionersThe findings of the NatSCEV study con-firm that for many children in the UnitedStates, violence is a frequent occurrence.Of the nationally representative sample ofU.S. youth who participated in the study,more than 60 percent reported that theywere victims of direct or indirect violencein the past year. Furthermore, nearly two-thirds of those participants were victim-ized more than once. Nearly one-half of thechildren surveyed reported that they wereassaulted during the previous year, andmore than 10 percent of them were injured

as a result. More than one-fourth of thechildren witnessed another person beingviolently attacked. More than 10 percent ofthe children surveyed reported that theywere indirectly exposed to violence.

More needs to be understood about howexposure to individual episodes of vio-lence, repeated exposure to violence, andmultiple types of exposure affect childrenand families, providing many avenues

the lower numbers among young childrenare cause for great concern.

In contrast to the patterns for witnessingcommunity violence, few age trends inexposure can be seen for witnessing vio-lence within the family. Rates for witness-ing family violence were fairly constantacross the span of childhood, with all agegroups falling in a fairly narrow range ofapproximately 6 to 11 percent.

Over the course of their lifetimes, boysoverall were slightly more likely than girlsto witness violence (40.1 percent of boysand 35.4 percent of girls). Boys were more

Methodology (continued)occurred together. Because different types of victimization can occur togetherand some events fall into more than one category (for example, physical abuseby a parent or caretaker can also be considered an assault), a number of itemswere rescored. A total of 51 victimization items were extracted in the followingcategories:

u Assaults. These included any physical assault, assault with a weapon, assault withinjury, assault without a weapon, attempted assault, attempted or completed kidnapping,assault by a brother or sister, assault by another child or adolescent, nonsexual genitalassault, dating violence, bias attacks, and threats.

u Bullying. This included physical bullying, teasing or emotional bullying, and Internetharassment.

u Sexual victimization. This included completed or attempted rape; sexual assault by anadult acquaintance, an adult stranger, or another child or adolescent; ashing by an adultor another child or adolescent; sexual harassment orally or in writing; statutory sexualoffenses; and unwanted online sexual solicitation.

u Child maltreatment by an adult. This included physical abuse, psychological or emo-tional abuse, neglect, and custodial interference or family abduction.

u Witnessed and indirect victimization. Witnessed victimization included witnessing thefollowing: an assault by one parent or family member against another, an assault by aparent on a brother or sister, an assault on a family member by someone outside thehousehold, an assault outside the home, or a murder. Types of indirect victimizationincluded exposure to shooting, bombs, or riots; exposure to war or ethnic conict; beingtold about or seeing evidence of a violent event in the child’s household or community;theft or burglary from the child’s household; or a credible threat of a bomb or attackagainst the child’s school.

LimitationsThe survey methodology has several limitations that may cause it to understate chil-dren’s actual exposure to violence. First, because the survey required the cooperationof the family, it ran the risk of missing those children who were most vulnerable to beingexposed either to violence in general or to specic types of violence. Second, parentsor caregivers who answer for younger children may not know about all of a child’s expo-sure to violence or may underreport or minimize certain types of victimization. Third, thescreening and followup questions may miss some episodes of victimization and incorrectlyclassify others. Fourth, children may not recall some exposure to violence, particularly lessserious exposure, or may not accurately recall the timing of their exposure (i.e., whetheror not the exposure occurred within the past year). Despite these limitations, NatSCEVprovides the most detailed and comprehensive data available on youth victimization.



8

for research and policy development. Asin this study, future research and policy

development efforts must incorporatea broader perspective in documentingthe full scope of children’s exposure toviolence.

Understanding theProgression of ViolenceNatSCEV detailed the extent to whichchildren in this country are exposed toserious violence. The study found that inthe year prior to being interviewed, 1 in 20children witnessed someone being shot,1 in 200 witnessed a murder, and 1 in 50was sexually assaulted. The survey showed

that as children grow older the incidencesof victimization increase. Among 14- to17-year-old participants, 1 in 10 witnesseda shooting in the past year, 1 in 75 wit-nessed a murder, and 1 in 20 was sexuallyassaulted. NatSCEV differs from earlierstudies in that it looks across the full spec-trum of violence, examining and comparingthe incidence of different types of violencewithin broad categories and determiningwhich types are more or less frequent. Thestudy looks not only at when and how chil-dren become more vulnerable to increas-ingly serious types of violence as theygrow older, it also tracks the cumulativeeffects of exposure to violence over time.For example, although all age groups arevulnerable to simple assault, older childrenand adolescents are several times morelikely to be sexually assaulted or to witnessa shooting than are younger children.

The NatSCEV study clearly illustrates thecumulative effects on children exposedto multiple incidents of violence and how

exposure to one form of violence maymake a child more vulnerable to other

forms. Nearly two in five children surveyedwere exposed to two or more types ofviolence in the previous year. More than1 in 10 was exposed to 5 or more differenttypes of violence during that year. Thesechildren are the most likely to suffer seri-ous long-term physical, emotional, andmental harm (Finkelhor, Ormrod, andTurner, 2007a, 2007b, 2007c). Many previ-ous studies have shown how exposure toviolence has damaging consequences forthe physical and mental health of youth(Gilbert et al., 2009; Widom, 1998; Fantuzzoand Mohr, 1998; Hurt et al., 2001) and theirlong-term functioning and well-being asadults (Fergusson, Boden, and Horwood,2008; Fergusson and Horwood, 1998;Kendall-Tackett, 2003).

Expanding the InquiryResearchers and practitioners need to askchildren more specific questions about abroader range of victimizations, includ-ing dating violence, emotional abuse, andexposure to violence within the family. Itis also critical to ask children who are suf-fering from one form of victimization aboutadditional forms of victimizations they mayhave experienced to fully address theirmental and emotional health needs. Practi-tioners also need to investigate victimiza-tion across all age ranges with the help ofinstruments geared to younger childrenand (as was done in the NatSCEV study)the use of proxies, such as parents andcaretakers.

NatSCEV differs from earlier studies in thatit examines and compares the incidenceof different types of violence within broad

categories and determines which types ofviolence occur more or less frequently. Forexample, the research team broke assaultsdown into peer and sibling assaults, as-saults without weapon or injury, andmore serious types of assaults. Peer andsibling assaults were common across all

age ranges and across both genders. Moreserious types of assaults included assaultswith a weapon, assaults with injury, gangassaults, attempted assaults, genital as-saults, dating violence, and bias attacks(which were less common).

Monitoring ExposureOver TimeMore research is also needed that fol-lows children into adulthood to assessthe effects of violence on their long-termhealth and well-being. Such research wouldcomplement those studies, such as the

ACE study discussed earlier, that havetaken a retrospective look at the effects ofadverse childhood experiences. NatSCEV’sfindings affirm that more needs to be doneto measure children’s exposure to violenceon an ongoing and systematic basis usingpublic surveillance mechanisms, includingfollowup surveys and long-term monitoring(Kracke and Hahn, 2008).

The estimates of specific exposures inNatSCEV are roughly equivalent to orsomewhat higher than the estimates inprevious community survey studies ofchild physical abuse (Theodore et al.,

2005); sexual victimization (Theodore etal., 2005); sexual assault (Kilpatrick, Saun-ders, and Smith, 2003; Finkelhor, Hammer,and Sedlak, 2008); physical assault with aweapon (Kilpatrick, Saunders, and Smith,2003); witnessing violence (Kilpatrick,Saunders, and Smith, 2003); dating vio-lence (Wolitzky-Taylor et al., 2008); andbullying (Nansel et al., 2003). Differencesin age range and definition account forsome variations between the findings ofthis and other studies. Because this is thefirst national study to ask children andtheir caregivers directly about exposureto certain types of family violence, suchas assaults by one parent on another, theexposure rate of 6.2 percent is severaltimes greater than estimates obtainedfrom cases disclosed to child protec-tion agencies (Administration on Chil-dren, Youth and Families, 2004) and lawenforcement (Federal Bureau of Investiga-tion, 2007).



9

welfare and protection agencies, earlychildhood educators and childcare pro-viders, schools and educational institu-tions, domestic violence service providersand advocates, law enforcement agencies,and the justice system). The Safe Start Ini-tiative has worked toward a comprehen-

sive approach across the continuum ofprevention, intervention, treatment, andresponse for 10 years and has made sig-nificant progress in increasing knowledge,skills, and awareness of children’s expo-sure to violence. More work is needed.

The next step in addressing children’sexposure to violence and efforts to ame-liorate or eliminate the harm it causes isto foster and sustain a comprehensiveapproach in both practice and researchthat builds on the groundwork establishedunder Safe Start and this study. It is impor-tant to develop, implement, and evaluate

programs and policies designed to preventchildren’s exposure to violence; to craftand implement strategies and interven-tions to help children who have beenexposed to violence and their families; andto replicate those programs, policies, andinterventions that prove to be effective inpreventing and lessening violence againstchildren in communities across the Nation.

The NatSCEV study represents the bestattempt to date to quantify children’sexposure to violence. Understanding cat-egories and forms of violence is critical tocreating appropriate interventions to pre-

vent and suppress violence and to treat itsvictims. This study’s greatest contribution,however, is that it highlights the degreeto which children in this country live withviolence in their daily lives. Violence takesa toll on children whether as victims orwitnesses. Seemingly minor incidents mayhave long-lasting and far-reaching conse-quences. If policymakers, practitioners,advocates, and the general public are torespond effectively to curb the negativeeffects of children’s exposure to violence,everyone must look at the problem in itstotality and make a coordinated effort tohelp the children and their families whosuffer these effects.

For Further InformationTo learn more about the Safe Start Ini-tiative, visit www.safestartcenter.org.

For more information about theNational Survey of Children’s Expo-sure to Violence, visit the Crimesagainst Children Research CenterWeb site at www.unh.edu/ccrc.

Reaching Across DisciplinesThis study’s findings confirm that moreneeds to be done at all levels of policyand practice to reach across disciplinesto identify children at risk from exposureto violence and to coordinate the deliveryof services to these children. For example,

first responders and providers who areinvolved in incidents of domestic violenceand deal with victims in their aftermath(e.g., police, emergency room physiciansand nurses, social workers, domestic vio-lence advocates, and judges) should beaware not only of the adult victims but alsoof the children who may have witnessedthe incident. They may also need to workwith childcare providers, teachers, andschool counselors and psychologists toassess the effects on a child’s interactionwith his or her classmates and to provideneeded help.

Expanding IdenticationCapabilitiesResearchers, practitioners, and policy-makers need to collaborate to develop andexpand effective screening and assessmenttools that are developmentally appropriatefor children across all age ranges and typesof violence. These instruments and toolscan identify children who are sufferingemotionally, socially, physically, and devel-opmentally. More importantly, these instru-ments can aid practitioners, advocates,frontline service providers, and responders

across all service sectors to reach andhelp those children. Understanding the fullextent of children’s exposure to violenceand the interactions among multiple typesof violence more comprehensively canfurther practitioners’ ability to respond tothose families who need support and toalleviate the harmful effects of exposure toviolence (Kracke and Hahn, 2008).

Coordinating Across SectorsFinally, just as the NatSCEV study by itscomprehensive nature addresses the frag-mentation that, until now, characterizedmany attempts to look at child victimiza-tion and exposure to violence, greatercoordination of the efforts to combat theeffects of that victimization are needed.For example, recent initiatives haveformed to separately address bullying,dating violence, and sexual harassment.At the Federal, State, tribal, and locallevels, responsibility for dealing with chil-dren’s exposure to violence is distributedacross all service and response sectors(e.g., health departments, hospitals, child

Endnotes1. According to the 2005 National Crime

Victimization Survey, 44 per 1,000 juve-niles ages 12 to 15 and 44.2 per 1,000adolescents and young adults ages 16to 19 were victims of violent crime, ascompared with a victimization rate of21.2 per 1,000 for all persons age 12and older (Baum, 2005).

2. Background material adapted frominformation on the Safe Start CenterWeb site. For more detailed informa-tion, go to www.safestartcenter.org.

3. Kracke and Hahn (2008) cite studiesthat estimate children’s exposure toviolence as ranging from 3 million to17 million incidents. As they note,however, these studies measured onlychildren’s witnessing of domestic vio-lence. They did not measure violencethat was inflicted on children directlyor violence that children witnessedoutside the home.

4. For an overview of these studies, seeKracke and Hahn (2008).

5. For an overview of research on childabuse and other forms of maltreat-ment and their long-term health andbehavioral consequences, see Repetti,Taylor, and Seeman (2002).

6. The categories of adverse childhoodexperiences studied were psychologi-cal, physical, or sexual abuse; violenceagainst mother; or living with house-

hold members who were substanceabusers, mentally ill or suicidal, or everimprisoned. For more information onthe ACE study, see Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention (2006) andFelitti et al. (1998).

7. The aggregate figure for any sexualvictimization did not include unwantedonline sexual solicitation (Finkelhor etal., 2009).

8. Previous studies have also notedthat low-income and minority youthare many times more likely to havewitnessed serious violence in thecommunity. Kracke and Hahn (2008)cite studies noting that only 1 percentof upper-middle-class youth had wit-nessed a murder and 9 percent hadwitnessed a stabbing (Gladstein, Ruso-nis, and Heald, 1992), whereas 43 per-cent of low-income African Americanschool-aged children had witnessed amurder and 56 percent had witnesseda stabbing (Fitzpatrick and Boldizar,1993).



10

Fergusson, D.M., Boden, J.M., and

Horwood, L.J. 2008. Exposure to child-hood sexual and physical abuse andadjustment in early adulthood. Child

Abuse & Neglect 32:607–619.

Fergusson, D.M., and Horwood, L.J. 1998.Exposure to interparental violence inchildhood and psychosocial adjustmentin young adulthood. Child Abuse & Neglect 22(5):339–357.

Finkelhor, D. 2008. Childhood Victimiza- tion: Violence, Crime, and Abuse in the

Lives of Young People. New York, NY:Oxford University Press.

Finkelhor, D., Hammer, H., and Sedlak, A.2008. Sexually Assaulted Children: National

Estimates and Characteristics. Washington,DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office ofJustice Programs, Office of Juvenile Jus-tice and Delinquency Prevention.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., and Turner,H.A. 2007a. Poly-victimization: A neglectedcomponent in child victimization trauma.Child Abuse & Neglect 31:7–26.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., and Turner,H.A. 2007b. Poly-victimization and traumain a national longitudinal cohort. Develop-

ment and Psychopathology 19(1):149–166.Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., and Turner,H.A. 2007c. Revictimization patterns ina national longitudinal sample of chil-dren and youth. Child Abuse & Neglect 31(5):479–502.

Finkelhor, D., Ormrod, R.K., Turner, H.A.,and Hamby, S.L. 2005. The victimizationof children and youth: A comprehen-sive, national survey. Child Maltreatment 10(1):5–25.

ReferencesAdministration on Children, Youth andFamilies. 2004. Child Maltreatment 2002:

Reports From the States to the NationalChild Abuse and Neglect Data System. Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofHealth and Human Services, Administra-tion on Children, Youth and Families.

Baum, K. 2005. Juvenile Victimization andOffending, 1993–2003. Washington, DC:U.S. Department of Justice, Officeof Justice Programs, Bureau of JusticeStatistics.

Centers for Disease Control and Preven-tion. 2006. Adverse Childhood Experiences

Study: Major Findings. Atlanta, GA: U.S.Department of Health and Human Ser-vices, Centers for Disease Control andPrevention. Available from www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/ace/findings.htm.

Fantuzzo, J., and Mohr, W. 1999. Preva-lence and effects of child exposure todomestic violence. The Future of Children 9(3):21–32.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. 2007.Crime in the United States, 2006. Avail-able from www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius/2006/.

Retrieved from the Internet on February11, 2009.

Felitti, V.J., Anda, R.F., Nordenberg,D., Williamson, D.F., Spitz, A.M., andEdwards, V. 1998. Relationship of child-hood abuse and household dysfunctionto many of the leading causes of deathin adults: The Adverse Childhood Experi-ences (ACE) Study. American Journal of

Preventive Medicine 14(4):245–258.

Finkelhor, D., Turner, H.A., Ormrod, R.K.,and Hamby, S.L. 2009. Violence, crime,and exposure in a national sample ofchildren and youth. Pediatrics 124(5)(November).

Fitzpatrick, K.M., and Boldizar, J.P. 1993.The prevalence and consequences ofexposure to violence among African-American youth. Journal of the American

Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 32:424–430.

Gilbert, R., Widom, C.S., Browne, K.D.,Fergusson, D.M., Webb, E., and Janson, S.2009. Burden and consequences of childmaltreatment in high-income countries.The Lancet 373(9657):68–81.

Gladstein, J., Rusonis, E.J., and Heald,F.P. 1992. A comparison of inner-city andupper-middle-class youth’s exposure toviolence. Journal of Adolescent Health

13:275–280.Hashima, P., and Finkelhor, D. 1999.Violent victimization of youth versusadults in the National Crime VictimizationSurvey. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 14(8):799–820.

Hurt, H., Malmud, E., Brodsky, N.L., andGiannetta, J. 2001. Exposure to violence:Psychological and academic correlates inchild witnesses. Archives of Pediatrics &

Adolescent Medicine 155(12):1351–1356.

Kendall-Tackett, K. 2003. Treating the Lifetime Health Effects of Childhood Vic-

timization. Kingston, NJ: Civic ResearchInstitute.

Kilpatrick, D.G., Saunders, B.E., and Smith,D.W. 2003. Youth Victimization: Prevalenceand Implications. Washington, DC: U.S.Department of Justice, Office of JusticePrograms, National Institute of Justice.

Kracke, K., and Hahn, H. 2008. The natureand extent of childhood exposure to vio-lence: What we know, why we don’t knowmore, and why it matters. Journal of Emo- tional Abuse 8(1/2):29–49.

Nansel, T.R., Overpeck, M.D., Haynie, D.L.,Ruan, W.J., and Scheidt, P.C. 2003. Rela-tionships between bullying and violenceamong US youth. Archives of Pediatrics &

Adolescent Medicine 157(4):348–353.

Rand, M.R. 2008. Criminal Victimization,2007. Washington, DC: U.S. Department ofJustice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureauof Justice Statistics.



11

Wolitzky-Taylor, K.B., Ruggiero, K.J.,Danielson, C.K., Resnick, H.S., Hanson,R.F., Smith, D.W., Saunders, B.E., andKilpatrick, D.G. 2008. Prevalence andcorrelates of dating violence in a nationalsample of adolescents. Journal of the

American Academy of Child and Adolescent

Psychiatry 47(7):755–762.

Repetti, R.L., Taylor, S.E., and SeemanT.E. 2002. Risky families: Family socialenvironments and the mental and physi-cal health of offspring. Psychology Bulletin 128(2):330–366.

Theodore, A.D., Chang, J.J., Runyan,D.K., Hunter, W.M., Bangdiwala, S.I., andAgans, R. 2005. Epidemiologic featuresof the physical and sexual maltreatmentof children in the Carolinas. Pediatrics 115(3):331–337.

Widom, C.S. 1998. Childhood victimiza-tion: Early adversity and subsequentpsychopathology. In Adversity, Stress, and

Psychopathology, edited by B.P. Dohren-wend. New York, NY: Oxford UniversityPress.

AcknowledgmentsThis Bulletin was written by David Finkelhor, Ph.D., Director, Crimes against Chil-dren Research Center, University of New Hampshire; Heather Turner, Ph.D., Pro-fessor, Crimes against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire;Richard Ormrod, Ph.D., Research Professor, Crimes against Children ResearchCenter, University of New Hampshire; Sherry Hamby, Ph.D., Research Associ-ate Professor, Department of Psychology, Sewanee, University of the South; andKristen Kracke, M.S.W., Safe Start Initiative Coordinator and Program Manager,Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). OJJDP wishes toacknowledge the contributions to this Bulletin of James A. Mercy, Ph.D., SpecialAdviser for Strategic Directions, Division of Violence Prevention, National Centerfor Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; andRebecca T. Leeb, Ph.D., Epidemiologist, Division of Violence Prevention, NationalCenter for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Pre-vention. OJJDP also wishes to acknowledge the support of CDC for the NationalSurvey of Children’s Exposure to Violence and its partnership in the Safe StartInitiative to create safe, stable, and nurturing environments for children and theirfamilies. The authors wish to thank Brian Higgins, Writer/Editor, Lockheed Martin’sOffice of Justice Programs Communication and Publication Support Services, forhis assistance in editing and coordinating the production of this Bulletin.

This Bulletin was prepared under cooperativeagreement number 2005–JL–FX–0048 from theOffice of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Pre-vention (OJJDP), U.S. Department of Justice.

Points of view or opinions expressed in thisdocument are those of the authors and do notnecessarily represent the official position orpolicies of OJJDP or the U.S. Department ofJustice.

The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance; the Bureau of Justice Statistics; the Community Capacity Development Office; the National Institute of Justice; the Office for Victims of Crime; and the

Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking(SMART).

Share With Your ColleaguesUnless otherwise noted, OJJDP publications are not copyright protected. Weencourage you to reproduce this document, share it with your colleagues, andreprint it in your newsletter or journal. However, if you reprint, please cite OJJDP

and the authors of this Bulletin. We are also interested in your feedback, such ashow you received a copy, how you intend to use the information, and how OJJDPmaterials meet your individual or agency needs. Please direct your comments andquestions to:

Juvenile Justice Clearinghouse Publication Reprint/FeedbackP.O. Box 6000Rockville, MD 20849–6000800–851–3420301–519–5600 (fax)Web: tellncjrs.ncjrs.gov



PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/OJJDP

PERMIT NO. G–91

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention

Washington, DC 20531

Official BusinessPenalty for Private Use $300

NCJ 227744Bulletin

*NCJ~227744*

children`s exposure to violence survey

Documents