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.