Skip to main content

Table 4 Comparison of Social Workers with Differing Beliefs of Child Neglect Regarding a Child’s Potential Access to a Loaded Firearm When No Cap Law is Presenta

From: Social workers’ determination of when children’s access or potential access to loaded firearms constitutes child neglect

 

No Child Neglect at Any Age

n (col %)b

Child Neglect for Some Ages

n (col %)b

p value

Group N

92

364

 

Sex

 Male

22 (24%)

55 (15%)

0.042

 Female

68 (76%)

307 (85%)

Population Served

 Urban

22 (25%)

117 (34%)

0.037

 Suburban

19 (22%)

97 (28%)

 Rural

47 (53%)

133 (38%)

Household Owns Firearms

 True

36 (44%)

103 (30%)

0.018

 False

46 (56%)

241 (70%)

Have Used a Firearm

 True

53 (65%)

149 (43%)

<0.001

 False

28 (35%)

196 (57%)

“There should be a law requiring firearms be safely stored (including separately stored ammunition) so that unwanted access to a loaded firearm cannot be gained by a …..”

Child Age ≤11

 Strongly Agree

61 (74%)

324 (94%)

<0.001

 Agree

8 (10%)

16 (5%)

 Neutral

6 (7%)

1 (0.3%)

 Disagree

4 (5%)

% (1%)

 Strongly Disagree

3 (4%)

0 (0%)

Child Age ≤13

 Strongly Agree

53 (65%)

313 (89%)

<0.001

 Agree

16 (20%)

26 (7%)

 Neutral

5 (6%)

5 (1%)

 Disagree

4 (5%)

5 (1%)

 Strongly Disagree

4 (5%)

1 (0.3%)

Child Age ≤15

 Strongly Agree

51 (61%)

299 (85%)

<0.001

 Agree

16 (19%)

32 (9%)

 Neutral

8 (10%)

7 (2%)

 Disagree

4 (5%)

11 (3%)

 Strongly Disagree

4 (5%)

1 (0.3%)

  1. aCharacteristics of a group who did not regard Scenario 1A (potential child access to a loaded firearm with no strict CAP law) as being child neglect for any of the ages listed in the study, including 4 years of age, as compared to other survey respondents.
  2. bColumn n total may not equal N due to missing data.