Background Little is known about the nature and reactions to sexual abuse of children with intellectual disability (ID). The aim was to fill this gap. Method Official reports of sexual abuse of children with ID in state care were examined (N = 128) and compared with children without ID (N = 48). Results Clear signs of penetration or genital touching by male (adolescent) peers or (step/foster) fathers were found in most ID reports. Victims often received residential care and disclosed themselves. Type of perpetrator seemed to affect the nature and reaction to the abuse. Cases of children with and without ID seemed to differ in location and reports to police. Conclusions Screening of (foster)homes seems crucial. Residential facilities should find a balance between independence of children and protection. Care providers should be trained in addressing sexual issues and sexual education, accounting for different types of perpetrators (peers/adults). Uniform reporting guidelines are needed.
DOCUMENT
The purpose of this research is to find evidence for the assumption that allowing children to create their own news messages is an effective approach to teach them how to distinguish between reliable news and fake news. Three students of the primary teacher training programme of The Hague University of Applied Sciences developed five lessons concerning fake news and five Kahoot! quizzes for each of those lessons. They taught the lessons they developed under the supervision of a primary school teacher and one of their lecturers from the university. A Friedman test on the scores of the Kahoot! quizzes indicate that the children made progress over the course of the study. In addition, it appears that the children appreciated the lessons and that they have learned how news is created and how fake news can be recognised. The outcomes of this study have prompted a larger, international Erasmus+ project. Schools and libraries in three countries will investigate similar innovative blended-learning approaches for pupils between ages 12 to 15.
MULTIFILE
When following a systems-based approach in child protection, caution is neededto stay focused on the safety of children. However, practice-oriented knowledgeon how to succeed is lacking. To explore whether professionals were able tokeep focus on child safety, research was carried out into the experiences of casemanagers applying an innovative, systems-based methodology in child protectionand youth parole services in the Netherlands, named: Intensive Family CaseManagement (IFCM). A representative sample of family meetings at the YouthProtection Amsterdam Area agency was monitored. Additionally, quality assurance instruments, case notes, and Family Plans filled out by case managers and their supervisors were examined on the use of children’s safety and needs tools. The results show that family meetings were organised in half of the cases. In only 25% of these face-to-face contacts all the family members were present. In nearly all families, the tools for child safety (94%), children’s needs (81%), and safety and risk assessment (90%) were used. Although the implementation of the IFCM methodology was still ongoing at the time of data collection, the analyses showed that case managers used the tools for almost all families. In contrast to this they had difficulties in adequately applying the systems-based approach. The results suggest that ongoing monitoring and support in daily practice is essential for working in accordance with a systems-based approach.
DOCUMENT
The project’s aim is to foster resilient learning environments, lessen early school leaving, and give European children (ages 4 -6) a good start in their education while providing and advancing technical skills in working with technology that will serve them well in life. For this purpose, the partnership has developed age appropriate ICT animation tools and games - as well as pedagogical framework specific to the transition phase from kindergarten to school.
Youth care is under increasing pressure, with rising demand, longer waiting lists, and growing staff shortages. In the Netherlands, one in seven children and adolescents is currently receiving youth care. At the same time, professionals face high workloads, burnout risks, and significant administrative burdens. This combination threatens both the accessibility and quality of care, leading to escalating problems for young people and families. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers promising opportunities to relieve these pressures by supporting professionals in their daily work. However, many AI initiatives in youth care fail to move beyond pilot stages, due to barriers such as lack of user acceptance, ethical concerns, limited professional ownership, and insufficient integration into daily practice. Empirical research on how AI can be responsibly and sustainably embedded in youth care is still scarce. This PD project aims to develop practice-based insights and strategies that strengthen the acceptance and long-term adoption of AI in youth care, in ways that support professional practice and contribute to appropriate care. The focus lies not on the technology itself, but on how professionals can work with AI within complex, high-pressure contexts. The research follows a cyclical, participatory approach, combining three complementary implementation frameworks: the Implementation Guide (Kaptein), the CFIR model (Damschroder), and the NASSS-CAT framework (Greenhalgh). Three case studies serve as core learning environments: (1) a speech-to-text AI tool to support clinical documentation, (2) Microsoft Copilot 365 for organization-wide adoption in support teams, and (3) an AI chatbot for parents in high-conflict divorces. Throughout the project, professionals, clients, ethical experts, and organizational stakeholders collaborate to explore the practical, ethical, and organizational conditions under which AI can responsibly strengthen youth care services.
Using technology to improve the adolescents' journey to school by bike in province of Drenthe and Groningen.All unsafe area that children spotted on the map, are because the lack of traffic safety ( lack of visibility, high speed, etc). In general children do not have a positive perception of cycling to school, and their favourite mode of traveling to school is car. What technology based intervention can make adolescents’ cycling to and from school safer and more attractive for them? Also does it help to encourage those who live far from the school (>10 km) to cycle to and from school more often?
