Lessons learned from international studies on child protection decision-making employing the model of Judgments and Decisions Processes in Context (JUDPiC)

Monica Lopez Lopez, Rami Benbenishty

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterAcademicpeer-review


The study of inter-country variability of child protection decision-making has become an emerging research theme in the past decade. The present chapter draws on a variety of studies conducted using the model of Judgments and Decisions Processes in Context (JUDPiC; Benbenishty & Davidson-Arad, 2012) to compare judgments and decisions in cases of alleged maltreatment made by decision makers in five countries: Israel, the Netherlands, Northern Ireland, Portugal and Spain. The chapter begins with a brief overview of research on inter-country comparisons in the field of child protection decision-making. Next, we describe the JUDPiC model and present in some detail the first international comparison study conducted with this underlying model (Benbenishty et al., 2015). We offer next the subsequent developments of this research project in the different countries involved. In the final section, we discuss some implications for child protection policy and practice, and future research.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationDecision Making and Judgement in Child Welfare and Protection
Subtitle of host publicationTheory, Research, and Practice
EditorsJohn Fluke, Mónica López López, Rami Benbenishty, Erik J. Knorth, Donald Baumann
Place of PublicationNew York
PublisherOxford University Press
Publication statusAccepted/In press - 2020

Cite this