Abstract
-
Purpose
To investigate the factors contributing to child maltreatment in Indonesia during the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic, highlighting the overlooked impact of parenting practices on various maltreatment forms during this unprecedented period.
-
Methods
Using a cross-sectional design, the research used the ICAST-C (Indonesian version of Child Abuse Screening Tools for Children) tool to assess instances of child maltreatment. The study consisted of 219 high school students from Bekasi and Bandung City in West Java, Indonesia, selected through a stratified proportionate random sampling approach, followed by recruitment and consent procedures. An online questionnaire facilitated data collection, which was analyzed using multivariate logistic regression.
-
Results
Children experiencing parental rejection were significantly more likely to face violence (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 2.99; p<.001). Rejection-based parenting was identified as a significant causal factor contributing to psychological maltreatment (AOR, 3.59; p<.001), whereas higher parental education levels directly contributed to increased psychological maltreatment (AOR, 1.99; p=.024). Additionally, rejection significantly influenced physical maltreatment (AOR, 5.17; p<.001) and neglect (AOR, 3.29; p<.001). Interestingly, emotional warmth is also linked to heightened neglect (AOR, 2.29; p=.017). These findings highlight rejection as a critical factor influencing overall child maltreatment (AOR, 6.99; p<.001).
-
Conclusion
This study establishes a significant causal relationship between parental rejection and various forms of child maltreatment, excluding sexual violence. It emphasizes the need for targeted interventions, such as parenting education and community support, to address parental rejection and promote healthier parenting practices. Longitudinal studies are essential for further exploring these dynamics.
-
Key words: Child abuse; Child neglect; COVID-19; Cross-sectional; Parenting
INTRODUCTION
In early 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic fundamentally altered global dynamics, prompting the implementation of social distancing and lockdown measures that effectively curtailed virus transmission [
1]. However, these necessary precautions inadvertently heightened the risk of child maltreatment, exposing millions of children to violence and neglect [
2]. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), child maltreatment is violent and neglecting behavior that occurs against children under the age of 18 years [
3]. WHO categorizes violence against children into four main types: physical, emotional or psychological, sexual, and neglect. This categorization is recognized as a standard and has long-term implications for child development. The Indonesian version of Child Abuse Screening Tools for Children (ICAST-C) instrument developed by the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect adheres to these categories while adding the dimension of exposure to family violence, making it a more comprehensive tool for surveying children’s experiences of violence [
4]. An estimated 300 million children worldwide experienced various forms of maltreatment during this period, with prevalence rates for physical abuse ranging from 0.1% to 71.2%, psychological abuse from 4.9% to 61.8%, neglect from 7.3% to 40%, and sexual abuse from 1.4% to 19.5% [
3,
5]. Notably, reports have indicated a significant 94% increase in incidents of child violence during lockdowns [
2], leading to profound social and economic consequences. These repercussions include escalating mental health issues and an estimated economic burden of 428 billion US dollars (USD), encompassing both direct and indirect costs [
6]. This alarming trend underscores the urgent need for targeted interventions and support systems for affected children and their families.
In Indonesia, reports of child maltreatment surged from 11.055 cases in 2019 to 16.106 cases in 2022, underscoring a critical issue intensified by the constraints of lockdown measures [
7]. The increase in child maltreatment during the COVID-19 pandemic aligns with the implementation of stay-at-home measures in March 2020. Prior research in Indonesia has primarily focused on emotional abuse and emotional neglect during the COVID-19 pandemic [
8]. While these studies provide essential insights, they often examine these types of maltreatment in isolation and rarely integrate the dimensions of parenting as crucial explanatory factors.
Research conducted in Indonesia during the pandemic has predominantly focused on indirect risk factors, such as economic stress, parental mental health, family dynamics, and mobility restrictions, rather than on child maltreatment itself [
8]. As a result, empirical evidence specifically examining child maltreatment within this context remains limited. Parenting practices serve as a vital yet underexplored mechanism that connects pandemic-related stressors to incidents of maltreatment [
9]. In addition, parental emotional support has been widely recognized as a key protective factor influencing adolescents’ psychological and behavioral outcomes [
10]. However, its role in child maltreatment, particularly under pandemic-related stress, remains insufficiently explored. Existing Indonesian studies have primarily contrasted supportive versus hindered parenting or authoritative versus authoritarian styles, illustrating their relationships with parental stress and the children’s emotional and behavioral challenges. Notably, Indonesian parents tend to exhibit a stronger inclination toward authoritarian parenting than their Western counterparts, a trend associated with higher levels of parenting stress and poorer outcomes for children [
11].
Authoritarian parenting is strict and hindered parenting is constrained, whereas rejection parenting is marked by emotional withdrawal, hostility, and a lack of warmth and may be more directly related to child maltreatment. However, it remains underexplored as a distinct construct, particularly in crisis contexts such as the COVID-19 pandemic. To fill this gap, the present study aims to simultaneously examine multiple types of child maltreatment among adolescents aged 10–19 while investigating rejection parenting as a significant associated factor in the Indonesian context during the pandemic. By employing validated instruments and focusing on culturally specific parenting practices, this study endeavors to provide new empirical evidence that enriches the existing body of Indonesian research on child maltreatment and parenting.
METHODS
Ethical statements: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Universitas Indonesia (approval number: SK-60/UN2.F12.D1.2.1/ETIK2021). All participants provided informed consent.
1. Research Design
A cross-sectional descriptive-analytic study was conducted to explore the factors associated with child maltreatment during the COVID-19 pandemic. This research seeks to shed light on the complexities of child welfare in these challenging times. This study followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines.
2. Population and Samples
This study population consisted of high school adolescents in Bandung and Bekasi, West Java, Indonesia. The sample included 219 students selected using stratified proportionate random sampling to enhance representativeness and minimize selection bias. Participants were deemed eligible based on several criteria: they must be registered high school students aged 10–19 years, possess a device for completing online forms, provide informed consent for participation, and demonstrate adequate literacy skills. The exclusion criteria included individuals who started but did not complete the questionnaire, as well as those who had interacted with their parents or caregivers for less than six months. This careful selection process ensured a representative sample for the study.
The sample size was determined using G*Power ver. 3.1.9.7 (Z test for logistic regression; Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf) based on an expected odds ratio of 2.06 for recent parental violence and outcome prevalence of 40% derived from prior research [
12]. We set the significance level (α) at .05 and the desired power (1–β) at .95, and the minimum sample was 199 participants. After adding 10% to account for potential non-response or incomplete data, the final target sample size was 219 participants to ensure the validity of the analysis conducted.
1) Demographic and health characteristics
The researchers developed a structured digital questionnaire to collect demographic information, including the characteristics of parents, children, and the environment. Child characteristics include age, gender, education level, and disability status. Parent characteristics included age, education level, parenting style, and parental emotional support. Additionally, environmental characteristics covered residence and ethnicity.
2) Emotional support
Emotional support was evaluated through eight statements modified from existing studies, prompting participants to express their perceptions using a code system of “almost always” (2), “sometimes” (1), and “almost never” (0). Higher scores correspond to greater perceived parental emotional support [
10,
13]. Scores are categorized to enhance interpretation, being labeled as “good” if they meet or exceed the mean value and “poor” if they fall below this threshold. This classification aids in understanding performance levels more clearly. This tool was examined for legibility by two experts in the field of pediatric nursing and was tested at one of the senior high schools in Bandung City. The Cronbach’s alpha was .78, meaning that the reliable value of this tool was strong.
3) Parenting style
The Short Egna Minnen Beträffande Uppfostran (s-EMBU) consists of 23 items aimed at assessing adolescents’ perceptions of different parental styles, focusing on rejection, warmth, and overprotection, using a 4-point Likert scale for ratings. The s-EMBU, a shortened version of the original EMBU, consists of 23 items focusing on three dimensions: rejection (items 1, 4, 7, 13, 15, 16, 21), warmth (items 2, 6, 12, 14, 19, 23), and overprotection (remaining items) [
14]. The predominant parenting style was determined by assessing whether the average score met or exceeded the mean (“yes”) or fell below it (“no”), thereby facilitating interpretation. In this study, Cronbach’s alpha was .74.
4) Child maltreatment
Child maltreatment was assessed using the ICAST-C, developed by the International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (ISPCAN). The Indonesian version includes 59 items covering five domains: exposure to violence (seven items), physical violence (18 items), psychological violence (19 items), neglect (11 items), and sexual violence (four items), with responses measured on a 5-point Likert scale and categorized using median cutoffs. This instrument has already been translated into Indonesian and has been validity tested. The results had a Spearman score of >0.30, which indicates that they are valid. A reliability test using Cronbach’s alpha formula with an alpha score resulted in >.70, which is considered reliable. Notably, the exposure to violence domain captures indirect experiences of interpersonal and community violence, offering a broader ecological perspective [
15].
Before data collection, the researcher translated all English instruments into Indonesian with the original author’s permission. To minimize information bias, tested questionnaires were used. Reliability testing was performed in April 2021 at a senior high school in Bandung City (no part of the study sample). The link to the instrument(s) used in this study is provided below:
https://bit.ly/kuesionerfaktorCM-Covid19.
The data was collected between May and June 2021 from eight secondary schools located in Bandung and Bekasi, West Java, areas identified as having relatively high reported rates of child maltreatment in late 2020 and early 2021 [
16]. School selection was initially conducted using a stratified random sampling approach based on city-level distribution, drawing on official records from The Ministry of Education [
17]. Among the 112 eligible junior and senior high schools identified across both cities, 17 schools were proportionally selected (four schools in Bandung and 13 in Bekasi) using a computer-assisted randomization procedure (
https://spinthewheel.io/) (
Figure 1). However, during the recruitment and consent process, several schools declined participation or were unreachable, resulting in a final sample of eight schools (three schools in Bandung and five in Bekasi). Consequently, the analyzed sample did not fully retain the original proportional allocation. Despite this, the final sample included both public and private schools, ensuring variation in institutional characteristics. This process highlights both the structured sampling strategy employed and the practical challenges of institutional recruitment in real-world settings. The potential impact of differential attrition, particularly in Bekasi, was considered during data interpretation and is acknowledged as a limitation of the study.
Following approval from school officials, the principal investigator randomly selected classes and developed communication messages using electronic media that provided a brief explanation of the study, the inclusion criteria, a link to a video tutorial for completing the questionnaire, and a link to the digital Google Forms questionnaire (Google LLC). With the support of selected class teachers, the investigator distributed the questionnaire to students with odd-numbered attendance, who were identified by marking a yellow dot next to their names. Students were provided with a clear explanation of the study purpose, procedures, and their rights prior to participation. The questionnaire was completed during school recess in a supportive environment to minimize potential discomfort, requiring approximately 30 minutes. A total of 266 responses were received, with 239 participants agreeing to take part. After excluding seven respondents who did not meet the inclusion criteria, seven with incomplete questionnaires, and six duplicate submissions, 219 valid responses were included in the final analysis. Sensitivity analyses confirmed that the missing data did not significantly impact the estimates.
5. Data Analysis
Descriptive statistics summarized the participant characteristics, while chi-square tests and Fisher’s exact test assessed the associations in the categorical data. Bivariate analyses were conducted to inform covariate selection for the multivariate logistic regression model. Variables showing relevant bivariate associations with
p-values less than .25 and possessing theoretical relevance (including parenting style and emotional support) were included to control for confounding factors [
18]. These variables were selected based on prior literature demonstrating their influences on child maltreatment outcomes [
10,
19]. This selection aimed to prevent the premature exclusion of potentially meaningful predictors in the multivariate modeling process. An assessment of multicollinearity was conducted using variance inflation factor and tolerance values, resulting in the exclusion of variables exceeding the specified thresholds. Sexual violence was omitted from multivariate analysis due to a lack of statistically significant associations in the bivariate analysis, thereby failing to meet the inclusion criteria. The finalized variables associated with each outcome are presented in
Table 1.
Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the effects of demographic, health, emotional support, and parenting style factors on child maltreatment. Distinct models were specified for each type of maltreatment, with covariates selected according to their relevance to the specific outcome. As a result, adjusted odds ratios (AORs) are not directly comparable across outcomes. Model results are presented as B coefficients, AOR, and 95% confidence intervals (CI) while controlling for confounders like parental education. The AOR indicates model strength and suitability, refining the results after adjusting for various factors. All analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS ver. 23.0 (IBM Corp.). Ethical clearance for this study was obtained from the university ethics committee. All participants received written information about the study and provided informed consent before participation. Relevant local site authorities granted additional approval to meet institutional research governance requirements.
6. Ethical Considerations
In conducting this research, several ethical considerations were prioritized to ensure the integrity and welfare of the participants. Participants were assured of the confidentiality and anonymity of their responses and had the option to withdraw from the study at any time without any repercussions. To acknowledge their time and effort, participants received a mobile data allowance as a token of appreciation.
RESULTS
1. Demographic Characteristics of the Participants
A total of 219 students participated in the study, with a mean age of 15.0 years. The participants were relatively balanced in terms of age, gender, and education level. Most parents were aged 44.88 years or older, and over half had a low level of education. The majority of participants were primarily from Bekasi and non-Sundanese ethnic groups. The demographic and participant characteristics are detailed in
Supplement 1.
Parental emotional support was generally supported as inadequate. Emotional warmth was the most commonly perceived parenting style, followed by rejection and overprotection. Approximately half of the participants reported experiencing some form of child maltreatment, with varying prevalence across types (
Supplement 1).
Overall, most child and parent demographic characteristics were not significantly associated with child maltreatment outcomes. By contrast, parental emotional support and parenting style exhibited consistent associations with multiple maltreatment outcomes. Children with poor emotional support were significantly more likely to experience violence exposure, psychological maltreatment, physical maltreatment, and neglect than those reporting adequate support (p=.002, p=.002, p=.004, p<.001).
Rejection-based parenting emerged as the strongest correlate of violence exposure, psychological maltreatment, physical maltreatment, and neglect. Children exposed to rejection-based parenting had markedly higher rates of violence exposure, psychological maltreatment, physical maltreatment, and neglect than those not exposed (all p<.001).
Conversely, emotional warmth appeared protective. Children raised with emotional warmth experienced significantly lower levels of violence exposure, neglect, and overall maltreatment (
p=.009,
p=.002,
p=.002). Higher parental education was associated with reduced psychological maltreatment (
p=.004). No significant associations were observed between any child or parental characteristic and sexual maltreatment. Detailed statistical results are presented in
Supplements 1 and
2.
To account for outcome-specific determinants, each type of child maltreatment was analyzed using a separate multivariate logistic regression model that included independent variables relevant to that specific outcome. Consequently, adjusted AOR are not directly comparable across outcomes, and differences in effect sizes across models should be interpreted with caution.
The analysis revealed a significant causal relationship between rejection-based parenting and an increased likelihood of violence exposure among children, with an AOR of 2.99 (95% CI, 1.65–5.44; p<.001). In contrast, emotional support and warmth did not exert a significant effect on exposure to violence during the pandemic (AOR, 1.60; 95% CI for OR, 0.87–2.95; p=.130 and AOR, 1.60; 95% CI for OR, 0.89–2.89; p=.119), respectively, indicating their limited influence on violence exposure. Moreover, psychological maltreatment identified rejection-based parenting as a key influence. Children experiencing rejection were much more likely to face psychological maltreatment during the pandemic (AOR, 3.59; 95% CI for OR, 1.97–6.58; p<.001). The educational level of parents also emerged as a significant factor influencing psychological maltreatment (AOR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.09–3.65; p=.024), whereas emotional support did not show a significant effect (AOR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.89–2.96; p=.118).
Furthermore, rejection-based parenting was linked to an increased risk of physical maltreatment, with children facing rejection having nearly 5 times higher adjusted odds (AOR, 5.17; 95% CI for OR, 2.75–9.72; p<.001). Emotional warmth did not significantly influence physical maltreatment (AOR, 1.46; 95% CI for OR, 0.79–2.71; p=.228). Regarding neglect, rejection parenting also showed a significant association, with children experiencing rejection being approximately 3 times more likely to face neglect (AOR, 3.29; 95% CI for OR, 1.65–6.59; p<.001). Emotional warmth was similarly associated with neglect (AOR, 2.29; 95% CI for OR, 1.16–4.51; p=.017), consistent with the findings for rejection-based parenting.
The analysis underscored the strong causal link between rejection-based parenting and a heightened risk of overall child maltreatment, with children subjected to rejection exhibiting nearly 7 times higher adjusted odds (AOR, 6.99; 95% CI, 3.74–13.07;
p<.001). In contrast, emotional warmth did not demonstrate a significant influence on maltreatment (AOR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.76–2.66;
p=.270), suggesting that its independent impact was negligible in this context (as shown in
Table 1).
DISCUSSION
The pandemic has substantially reshaped parenting practices, intensifying both nurturing behaviors and psychological strain among caregivers. While some parents demonstrated increased emotional responsiveness, heightened stress and anxiety undermined adaptive parenting in others. Negative parenting characterized by emotional disengagement and rejection has been consistently associated with impaired psychological development and poorer mental health outcomes in children, manifesting in coldness and unaffectionate behavior, hostility and aggression, indifference and neglect, and undifferentiated rejection [
20]. Each of these forms can have harmful effects on a child’s emotional well-being. Research indicates that parental exhaustion and fear regarding COVID-19 exposure contribute to significant stress, potentially disrupting adaptive changes in the maternal brain. This impairment can hinder stress regulation and diminish maternal motivation [
21]. Parents with adverse childhood experiences are more likely to exhibit rejecting behaviors due to heightened stress levels [
22]. This cyclical pattern of stress and rejection can create an environment in which children are at risk of exposure to violence and psychological maltreatment. Mothers with a history of childhood emotional abuse tend to experience elevated perceived stress that fully mediates the increase in parental load, which in turn places additional emotional strain on the child and contributes to poorer mental health outcomes, forming a unidirectional chain of association [
23].
Parental rejection is also linked to maladaptive coping mechanisms, which significantly impact the children’s psychological adjustment, particularly when such rejection is perceived as a form of violence [
24]. High rates of maternal and paternal rejection correlate with increased internalizing problems in children, and the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated these existing issues, increasing the risks of abuse due to limited oversight, heightened stress, and parental fatigue [
25]. Consistent with these broader changes, this study found a significant association between parental rejection and physical abuse, highlighting a cyclical pattern where emotional outbursts lead to physical discipline as a maladaptive coping mechanism. This cycle can perpetuate a cycle of violence, where children learn that aggression is an acceptable response to stress or frustration.
This study reveals a significant association between parental education levels and psychological maltreatment during the pandemic. Notably, higher education was correlated with an increase in psychological maltreatment. Highly educated parents often maintain demanding jobs and hold elevated expectations regarding their children’s academic and behavioral performance. The transition to homeschooling heightened these pressures, leading to increased parental stress when children struggled to meet these demands [
26]. As stress accumulates, parents may exhibit maladaptive behaviors, such as verbal hostility or emotional neglect. The compounded lack of social support and prolonged isolation during this period intensified these challenges, highlighting the complex interplay between parental education, occupational demands, and psychological maltreatment in crisis contexts [
27].
This study found a counterintuitive association between emotional warmth and child neglect, indicating that children receiving higher levels of emotional warmth were associated with higher odds of experiencing neglect. Typically viewed as a protective parenting dimension, the concept of emotional warmth can vary culturally [
28]. This counterintuitive finding may be interpreted through several contextual lenses. This aligns with the theory by Baumrind et al. [
29], which categorizes parenting styles into three types for neurotypical children: passive (high warmth and low control), authoritarian (low warmth and high control), and authoritative (high warmth and high control). The parenting style selected by caregivers is closely linked to various aspects of child development, highlighting the intricate balance needed in parenting dynamics [
29].
Another explanation is that emotional warmth, when lacking adequate parental monitoring and structure, can result in permissive parenting. Parents who express warmth while adopting an indulgent style may inadvertently foster negative outcomes, including emotional and behavioral problems, as well as increased vulnerability to risky behaviors in children and adolescents. This association highlights that high scores in emotional warmth may co-exist with unmet physical and supervisory needs, emphasizing the necessity of structure and monitoring alongside warmth to prevent neglect [
30].
This study identified parental rejection as a key factor associated with overall child maltreatment during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. Increasing stressors, such as social isolation, financial difficulties, health concerns, and the challenges associated with homeschooling, indicate potential risks for maltreatment [
31]. These stressors can contribute to maladaptive coping strategies among parents, leading to physical or psychological aggression against their children [
26]. The pandemic has inevitably shifted family dynamics, amplifying abusive parenting, particularly in households facing marital discord or financial strife.
Cultural and contextual factors significantly contribute to the differences observed in parenting styles. Societal norms and expectations surrounding child-rearing practices may influence rejective parenting, characterized by emotional neglect and hostility. In some cultures, strict parenting styles may be perceived as acceptable or even necessary for child discipline [
32], which can further complicate the dynamics of parental rejection and maltreatment.
Several limitations of this study include the absence of a pre-pandemic comparison, highlighting the need for future longitudinal research to investigate temporal differences. Additionally, the limited number of significant factors for neglect and sexual maltreatment must be interpreted with caution. Underreporting is a likely factor, particularly in self-reported surveys on sensitive topics. Sexual maltreatment is often less disclosed due to fear, stigma, and social desirability bias. In Eastern cultural contexts, strong norms surrounding taboos and shame can further inhibit open discussion, especially when such experiences are seen as dishonorable. These cultural influences may alter the understanding of neglect, leading individuals to normalize or downplay experiences that would typically qualify as maltreatment. In addition, measurement limitations, such as brief screening tools and reliance on retrospective accounts, can diminish variability and weaken associations in the analysis. Collectively, these factors likely explain the weaker correlations for neglect and sexual maltreatment compared to other forms, underscoring the necessity of culturally sensitive measurement techniques and mixed-method approaches in future studies. Furthermore, differential attrition of schools during recruitment may have introduced selection bias, as the final sample did not fully retain the initial proportional distribution.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, evidence-based programs for preventing child maltreatment were transitioned to digital formats. Home-visiting initiatives like SafeCare (National SafeCare Training and Research Center, Georgia State University) and Family Connects (Center for Child and Family Policy, Duke University) managed to maintain engagement through telehealth, achieving results similar to those of traditional methods [
33]. To minimize parental resistance, it is essential to enhance parental efficacy, customize interventions, culturally adapt content, and promote supportive communication [
34].
In Indonesia, these strategies can be implemented through existing systems. School-based counseling, health units such as UKS (Usaha Kesehatan Sekolah), and school nurses or teachers can identify and assist parents who exhibit high levels of rejection parenting. Parenting education programs delivered through schools, models of school-family collaboration, and community or school-based interventions are practical solutions for improving parenting practices. Indonesian child protection services, such as KPAI (Komisi Perlindungan Anak Indonesia), provide a policy framework to bolster these initiatives. Local research indicates that parenting education and family-centered interventions effectively lower the risk of child maltreatment and enhance parental self-efficacy [
35]. Collectively, these approaches offer accessible and culturally relevant pathways to reduce rejection parenting and improve child well-being in Indonesia.
CONCLUSION
This study found a significant causal effect of parental rejection on various forms of child maltreatment, excluding sexual violence. Additionally, higher levels of parental education were associated with an increase in psychological maltreatment, whereas greater emotional warmth contributed to elevated neglect.
These findings emphasize the urgent need for context-specific interventions, such as parenting education, school-family collaboration, and community support programs, to reduce parental rejection and foster healthy parenting practices. Future research using longitudinal designs is necessary to explore the long-term dynamics between parental rejection and child maltreatment. Examining socioeconomic factors related to negative parenting behaviors will be crucial in developing effective prevention strategies and policy initiatives to enhance child well-being in Indonesia. Incorporating mixed-method research will also yield deeper insights into the complexities surrounding sexual violence.
ARTICLE INFORMATION
Supplementary material
Supplement 1.
Participant characteristics and differences in exposure to violence, psychological and physical maltreatment according to child and parent characteristics during the COVID-19 pandemic (N=219).
Supplement 2.
Differences in neglect, sexual and child maltreatment according to child and parent characteristics during the COVID-19 pandemic (N=219).
Figure 1.The randomization process for the schools.
Table 1.Most dominant factors associated with child maltreatment during the COVID-19 pandemic
|
Variable: independent |
Variable: dependent |
|
AOR (95% CI for OR) |
p
|
|
Exposure to violence |
|
|
|
Parents’ emotional support (ref: no) |
1.60 (0.87–2.95) |
.130 |
|
Parenting style: rejection (ref: no) |
2.99 (1.65–5.44) |
<.001*** |
|
Parenting style: emotional warmth (ref: no) |
1.60 (0.89–2.89) |
.119 |
|
Constant |
0.28 |
<.001 |
|
Psychological maltreatment |
|
|
|
Parents’ education level (ref: low) |
1.99 (1.09–3.65) |
.024* |
|
Parents’ emotional support (ref: no) |
1.62 (0.89–2.96) |
.118 |
|
Parenting style: rejection (ref: no) |
3.59 (1.97–6.58) |
<.001*** |
|
Constant |
0.22 |
<.001 |
|
Physical maltreatment |
|
|
|
Parents’ emotional support (ref: no) |
1.46 (0.79–2.71) |
.228 |
|
Parenting style: rejection (ref: no) |
5.17 (2.75–9.72) |
<.001*** |
|
Constant |
0.23 |
<.001 |
|
Neglect |
|
|
|
Parenting style: rejection (ref: no) |
3.29 (1.65–6.59) |
<.001*** |
|
Parenting style: emotional warmth (ref: no) |
2.29 (1.16–4.51) |
.017* |
|
Constant |
0.12 |
<.001 |
|
Child maltreatment |
|
|
|
Parenting style: rejection (ref: no) |
6.99 (3.74–13.07) |
<.001*** |
|
Parenting style: emotional warmth (ref: no) |
1.42 (0.76–2.66) |
.270 |
|
Constant |
0.31 |
<.001 |
REFERENCES
- 1. Li L, Taeihagh A, Tan SY. A scoping review of the impacts of COVID-19 physical distancing measures on vulnerable population groups. Nat Commun. 2023;14(1):599. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-36267-9
- 2. Babvey P, Capela F, Cappa C, Lipizzi C, Petrowski N, Ramirez-Marquez J. Using social media data for assessing children’s exposure to violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. Child Abuse Negl. 2021;116(Pt 2):104747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104747
- 3. World Health Organization. Child maltreatment [Internet]. WHO; 2022 [cited 2025 Aug 20]. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/child-maltreatment
- 4. International Society for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (ISPCAN). ICAST-C tool: a child instrument for children over 11 years of age [Internet]. ISPCAN; 2022 [cited 2025 Aug 20]. Available from: https://ispcan.org/ispcan-resources/library/icast/
- 5. Zhang X, Wekerle C, Mathews B, Gonzalez A. Child maltreatment. In: Howard S, Markey CH, editors. Encyclopedia of mental health. 3rd ed. Elsevier; 2023. p. 355-364.
- 6. Afifi TO, Taillieu T, Salmon S, Davila IG, Stewart-Tufescu A, Fortier J, et al. Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), peer victimization, and substance use among adolescents. Child Abuse Negl. 2020;106:104504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104504
- 7. Ministry of Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection of the Republic of Indonesia. Basis & period [Internet]. KEMENPPPA; 2022 [cited 2025 Aug 20]. Available from: https://kekerasan.kemenpppa.go.id/ringkasan
- 8. Ramaiya A, Li M, Muluve E, Zuo X, Stones W, Mafuta E, et al. Understanding whether economic instability and food insecurity during COVID-19 moderate the change in emotional abuse and emotional neglect over time: a longitudinal pre- and during COVID-19 analysis from China, Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, and Malawi. J Adolesc Health. 2024;75(6S):S14-S23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2024.09.002
- 9. El-Khani A, Yassine A, Haar K, Narotama N, Pramitasari L, Rosilawati M, et al. Caring for your child during COVID-19: utilizing a light-touch parenting resource during lockdown in Indonesia. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(7):4046. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19074046
- 10. Grunin L, Yu G, Cohen SS. The relationship between youth cyberbullying behaviors and their perceptions of parental emotional support. Int J Bullying Prev. 2021;3(3):227-239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-020-00080-5
- 11. Riany YE, Haslam DM, Sanders M. Parental mood, parenting style and child emotional and behavioural adjustment: Australia-Indonesia cross-cultural study. J Child Fam Stud. 2022;31(9):2331-2343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-021-02137-5
- 12. Calvano C, Engelke L, Holl-Etten AK, Renneberg B, Winter SM. Almost 2 years into the COVID-19 pandemic: an update on parental stress, parent mental health, and the occurrence of child maltreatment. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2023;32(12):2593-2609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-023-02147-2
- 13. Iannotti RJ. Health Behavior in School-Aged Children (HBSC), 2009-2010. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research; 2013. https://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34792.v1
- 14. Arrindell WA, Akkerman A, Bagés N, Feldman L, Caballo VE, Oei TP, et al. The short-EMBU in Australia, Spain, and Venezuela. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2005;21(1):56-66. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759.21.1.56
- 15. Dhamayanti M, Rachmawati AD, Noviandhari A. Validity and reliability update of the Indonesian version of International Society for Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect-Child Abuse Screening Tool (ICAST-C). Paediatr Indones. 2020;60(4):218-223. https://doi.org/10.14238/pi60.4.2020.218-23
- 16. Bekasi City Office for Women’s Empowerment and Child Protection (DPPPA). Data on the Bekasi Children’s Forum 2021 [Internet]. DPPPA; 2021 [cited 2025 Aug 20]. Available from: https://dpppa.bekasikota.go.id/id/forum
- 17. Ministry of Education Culture, Research and Technology-Republic Indonesia. Data Pokok Pendidikan (DAPODIK): Direktorat Jenderal Pendidikan Anak Usia Dini, Pendidikan Dasar dan Pendidikan Menengah [Basic Education Data (DAPODIK): Directorate General of Early Childhood Education, Primary Education, and Secondary Education] [Internet]. Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education; 2021 [cited 2025 Aug 20]. Available from: https://dapo.kemendikdasmen.go.id/
- 18. Plichta SB, Kelvin EA. Munro’s statistical methods for health care research. Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2013.
- 19. Zephyr L, Cyr C, Monette S, Langlois V, Cyr-Desautels L, Archambault M. Disinhibited social engagement behaviors in young maltreated children: dysfunctional behavior of biological parents and child attachment. Child Abuse Negl. 2021;111:104791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104791
- 20. Putnick DL, Bornstein MH, Lansford JE, Malone PS, Pastorelli C, Skinner AT, et al. Perceived mother and father acceptance-rejection predict four unique aspects of child adjustment across nine countries. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2015;56(8):923-932. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.12366
- 21. Kim P. How stress can influence brain adaptations to motherhood. Front Neuroendocrinol. 2021;60:100875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yfrne.2020.100875
- 22. Narayan AJ, Lieberman AF, Masten AS. Intergenerational transmission and prevention of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). Clin Psychol Rev. 2021;85:101997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2021.101997
- 23. Rost K, Gossmann E, Fegert JM, Ziegenhain U, Köhler-Dauner F. Long-term consequences of childhood emotional abuse in mothers on parental load and child mental health. Acta Psychol (Amst). 2024;244:104169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104169
- 24. Chen C, Qin J. Emotional abuse and adolescents’ social anxiety: the roles of self-esteem and loneliness. J Fam Violence. 2020;35(5):497-507. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-019-00099-3
- 25. Katz I, Katz C, Andresen S, Bérubé A, Collin-Vezina D, Fallon B, et al. Child maltreatment reports and Child Protection Service responses during COVID-19: knowledge exchange among Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Germany, Israel, and South Africa. Child Abuse Negl. 2021;116(Pt 2):105078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2021.105078
- 26. Wu Q, Xu Y. Parenting stress and risk of child maltreatment during the COVID-19 pandemic: a family stress theory-informed perspective. Dev Child Welf. 2020;2(3):180-196. https://doi.org/10.1177/2516103220967937
- 27. Calvano C, Engelke L, Di Bella J, Kindermann J, Renneberg B, Winter SM. Families in the COVID-19 pandemic: parental stress, parent mental health and the occurrence of adverse childhood experiences-results of a representative survey in Germany. Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2022;31(7):1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-021-01739-0
- 28. Rothenberg WA, Lansford JE, Bornstein MH, Chang L, Deater-Deckard K, Di Giunta L, et al. Effects of parental warmth and behavioral control on adolescent externalizing and internalizing trajectories across cultures. J Res Adolesc. 2020;30(4):835-855. https://doi.org/10.1111/jora.12566
- 29. Baumrind D, Larzelere RE, Owens EB. Effects of preschool parents’ power assertive patterns and practices on adolescent development. Parenting. 2010;10(3):157-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295190903290790
- 30. Cui M, Graber JA, Metz A, Darling CA. Parental indulgence, self-regulation, and young adults’ behavioral and emotional problems. J Fam Stud. 2019;25(3):233-249. https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2016.1237884
- 31. Lee SJ, Ward KP, Lee JY, Rodriguez CM. Parental social isolation and child maltreatment risk during the COVID-19 pandemic. J Fam Violence. 2022;37(5):813-824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00244-3
- 32. Haslam D, Poniman C, Filus A, Sumargi A, Boediman L. Parenting style, child emotion regulation and behavioral problems: the moderating role of cultural values in Australia and Indonesia. Marriage Fam Rev. 2020;56(4):320-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2020.1712573
- 33. Self-Brown S, Reuben K, Perry EW, Bullinger LR, Osborne MC, Bielecki J, et al. The impact of COVID-19 on the delivery of an evidence-based child maltreatment prevention program: understanding the perspectives of SafeCare® providers. J Fam Violence. 2022;37(5):825-835. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00217-6
- 34. Jocson RM, Alampay LP, Lachman JM, Maramba DH, Melgar ME, Ward CL, et al. Pre-post mixed methods study of a parent and teen support intervention to prevent violence against adolescents in the Philippines. J Adolesc Health. 2023;73(1):102-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2023.02.027
- 35. Lestari L, Ramadhaniyati R, Saito R, Tsuda A. Parental perspectives on the maltreatment of children with autism spectrum disorder and associated factors: a cross-sectional study in Indonesia. J Res Dev Nurs Midwifery. 2025;22(2):39-43. https://doi.org/10.61882/jgbfnm.22.2.39
