{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013126491646778043, 'fraction_numerical': 0.002386634844868735, 'mean_word_length': 5.356060606060606, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Framing the child at risk

Abstract Risk Assessment Reports are one form of accounting practice which delineate the space of risk considered in a child abuse neglect investigation. The paper analyses two Risk Assessment Reports, contrasting what is reported, what is directly observed and what is hypothesized and implied by child protection practitioners during the assessment of risk. From an analysis of these two reports (each 4 – 5 pages long), the paper identifies the rhetorical strategies and their realizations used by two practitioners in framing the child at risk. The paper problematizes the tension between the institutional need to constrain the exercise of professional judgement through Risk Assessment Models, and the extent to which practitioners actually localize the framing of risk to specific areas of investigation.