Evaluating Media's Use of Child Abuse Research at Wickham Point

This essay critically examines how a media article utilized published research regarding child abuse claims at the Wickham Point detention center. It analyzes the information and data extracted from the research, focusing on the media's message concerning the detention of children and alleged sexual abuse. The essay explores the exclusion of certain research data by the media, questioning the justifications behind these omissions and assessing whether the media article provided adequate insights into the original research. Further, it evaluates the strengths and limitations of the original research methodology, including sampling procedures and data analysis, and determines whether these aspects were addressed in the media's portrayal. The analysis highlights potential biases and misconceptions in the media's reporting, particularly regarding the mental health and well-being of asylum-seeking children. The essay concludes by emphasizing the importance of conducting thorough and unbiased research to accurately inform public discourse on sensitive issues such as child abuse in detention centers. Desklib provides a platform for students to access similar essays and study resources.

Title: Claims of sexual abuse against children at Wickham Point detention centre
(The ABC, February 4, 2016 news reported)
Discuss how the media article has used the published research including: What
information/data did they use from the published research and why? What message is the
media article trying to communicate?
The first part of the media article in discussion is of the qualitative type. In this section is
discussed a significant amount of the paediatrician data is discussed. The majorly data discussed
comprises of the interview of 69 different families and 220 people who had been categorised
under asylum seekers. The report also highlights 70 cases were considered wherein children had
taken to self-harms and other suicidal attempts as the responses to the major incidents that
affected their lives. These events were all considered in the composition of the report by The
ABC in the year 2016. In reality, the report concentrated on the mental health as well as the well-
being of the discussed people, however, the media chose to republish the concerned report. The
media report as published is observed to have deliberately framed the report to be one that deals
with the various activities of the sexual abuse that was implemented on the children. The report
that was published by the media had raised its voice in positive light of the sexual abuses of the
children that was taking place all across the detention centres and attempted an opposition
against the detention of the children. The institutional bias sheds light on the fact that the media
had supported the claims of the paediatricians that the detention of the children has not been
effective in deterring the smugglers in harming the children. The detention of the children poses
a threat to the health and the well-being of the researchers as discussed by the media report by
The ABC in the year 2016.

Has any data/information of the published research not been included in the media article?
Why do you think this information has been excluded? Does the author provide
justification?
The media reports tend to have an influence on the perceptions as well as depicts
uniformity within the similar themes. However, ABC (2016), the report failed to provide
adequate background data or the methodology that was used to deal with the collection as well as
the analysis of the research articles that were used for the report. The media article failed to use
the proper terms that were required for the article and instead discussed the factors like the
sexual abuse, the attempts of self-harm, the toxic environment of detention and other such factors
in order to validate the claim that violence is practiced as an inseparable part of the immigration.
Has the media article provided adequate insights into the published research?
No. The report by ABC (2016) was majorly biased on the social factors and several
misconceptions that were presented on the media role. The media role deserves a better and
careful examination as is required for the report of the pediatrician. The high court had rejected
the earlier inquiry report, for instance, and it is thus important to put forth an acknowledgement
on the misconceptions that surround the asylum seekers as well as their aims. AHRC (2015)
argues on the fact that the public declarations fail to provide a link between the sexual abuse
claimed by the ABC press and the mental illness.
Evaluate the strengths and limitations of the original published research by referring to the
research question, method (e.g. sampling, procedures, and analysis) and results. Were these
strengths and limitations addressed in the media article?

The examination of the media report, the research objectives, the specific domains of
development suggests the fact that the media failed to address the differences of rating that were
observed in the data collection method and the procedure of sampling. Quinlivan et al. (2017)
argued that the duplication of the results within the studies that are larger in size would lead to
the increase in the importance of the implication of the same. This is due to the fact that the
clinicians are generally observed to perform a screening of the children while practicing
according to the guidelines of the AAP. There are a number of tools like CTSQ, HOPES and
PEDS that are implemented by the doctors in order to collect the observations of the parents on
the development of the children. These are generally used for the children who have been
experiencing the delays in development, experiencing PTSD or are at high risk of suicide or self-
harm. Quinlivan et al. (2017) further opines that these tools are generally used for the
identification of the children who face a high risk in the developmental problems.
Their results, however, raised concerns regarding the discordance and skills required for
these tools Gerace and Muir-Cochrane (2016) state that these tools are the best tools that are
available for the identification of the problem of the mental health as well as the status of the
development in the subpopulations. The other issue that was presented within the research
referred to the standardization of the sampling and the screening that were lacking in the factors
that were present within the settings for detention care and the settings and only a few children
were selected from the centers for the detention care. Lai et al., (2015) stated that the
administration of these tools had generally taken place in terms of the negative events in the life
with the help of the tools like the CTSQ, HOPES and PEDS. This led to the rise of the concerns
that the tools might not function in a proper manner in the practice settings like the validation of
the processes of Clinician administration.

In support of the above, the research by Chan, Lai and Chi (2014) stated the exclusivity
of the choice of the CTSQ, HOPES and PEDS as commented by the reviewers and the clinicians.
This indicates that usage of cut-off of ≥2 prediction might majorly fail in the prediction of the
accuracy in the screening within the clinical practice. This could lead to the missing out of half
of the children who face developmental issues which in turn would lead to the sensitivity of the
screening procedure. In a similar manner, the consideration of the CTSO and HOPES is known
to have been working only in cases wherein the child has failed in 2 among the 5 domains but
has been nearing the cut-off. Gerace and Muir-Cochrane (2016) opine that this tool creates a
similar problem like PEDS through a reduction in the sensitivity of the tool.
Walliman (2015) on the other hand suggests that the results tend not to negate the
importance of the conduction of a formal research for the development in the screening through
the validation of the practice of primary care. The study has been evidenced to have a huge
number of the limitations which has led to the systematic bias. This has led to the awareness of
the providers due to the earlier results and have met with the parents before the completion of the
screening as well as the fact that the original research was not deemed to be designed for the
comparison of the tools. The sample sizes of the quantitative results were small in a relative
manner and did not include an evaluation of the diagnostics. Thus, it was not possible for the
identification of the children of the sub-population who suffered from issues of mental health.
Lai et al., (2015) further opines that the systematic developmental screening of children
might result in the success rates that are statistically important but are however unable in
providing the accurate predictions in many cases like the negative events detention centers for
life. Whitty (2017) opines that in researches of cultures and societies, the predictive accuracies of
the professional tools for the assessment of clinical risk are slightly better than the chances. This

is due to the evidences that depict the fact that the regularly made remands of Paediatricians in
cases that involve asylum seekers that are based on the false positive and negative predictions.
Thus on the basis of the non-utilization of the general populations data by the Paediatricians
states that it is difficult, or possible, in the ethical-decision making for the determination of the
underlying contributors involving the administrative disparities in the interpretations of results at
all points, institutional bias, political power, legal factors. Kara (2015) state that this is due to the
fact that the effectiveness is dependent on the professional abilities or the opinions of the
evaluators or researcher for accurate prediction of the risk on any bias or error. The conduction
of the research on the diverse and the larger sample using the screening tools that are used in a
common parlance in the real life scenarios is important. This is inclusive of the studies that are in
direct comparison of the performances of the screening tools through the use of the completion
orders that are assigned in a random fashion. This helps in the proper understanding of the use of
the screenings, the relative performances and the limitations of the concerned researcher.

References
ABC, 2016. Feb 4, ABC New: Claims of sexual abuse against children at Wickham Point
detention centre, NT, Australia: ABC
AHRC, 2015. The health and well-being of Children in Immigratiion detention report to the
Australia Right Commission. [Online]
Available at: https:// www.humanrights.gov.au/our-work/asylum-seeker-ans refugees/publ
[Accessed 13 April 2016].
Chan, C. L., Lai, C. K., & Chi, I. 2014. International journal of psychiatry in clinical practice.
Initial validation of the Chinese interRAI Mental Health in people with psychiatric illness, 18(3),
p. 182-189.
Gerace, A., & Muir-Cochrane, E. 2016. Containment Practices in Psychiatric Care. In Power
and the Psychiatric Apparatus (pp. 113-138). Routledge.
Kara, H. 2015. Creative research methods in the social sciences: A practical guide. Policy Press.
Lai et al., 2015. Current psychology. Hurricane Katrina: Maternal depression trajectories and
child outcomes, 34(3), pp.515-523.
Quinlivan et al., 2017. The British Journal of Psychiatry. Predictive accuracy of risk scales
following self-harm: multicentre, prospective cohort study, 210(6), pp.429-436.
Walliman, N. 2015. Social research methods: The essentials. Sage.
Whitty, G., 2017. Sociology and school knowledge: Curriculum theory, research and politics.
Routledge.