Effects of Family Violence on School Aged Children

¶ … Family Abuse on Children

The widespread prevalence of family abuse has been increasingly the focus of media, societal, and scholarly attention. This research paper examines the effects of various forms of family abuse on the psychological development of children, and its long-term consequences for adult functioning. The scope of the paper includes research on the causes of family abuse and a discussion on the need for social interventions to minimize the effects of abuse on children.

The well-rounded development of children is a matter of great societal concern since they constitute the citizens of the future. As such, society has a definite stake in ensuring that its children are nurtured well today, in order that they function as responsible adult members of society tomorrow. This is a well-recognized fact as evidenced by governmental, societal, and legal interventions in providing for the development of children through free education, child care subsidies, and the foster care system. However, as a wide body of research literature indicates, there is little that has been achieved in the area of protecting children from the often devastating consequences of abusive family situations. Whereas this is an area that calls for serious social intervention given alarming statistical evidence that the American family represents an estimated 20% chance of becoming a stage for violence (Witt, 1987, p. 293). It is the purpose of this paper to establish the need for concerted social intervention in protecting children from family abuse. To do so, the paper will research the effects of an abusive family environment on the psychological development of children, and its subsequent impact on the child's ability to function as a responsible adult member of society. Further, given the penultimate objective, the paper will also summarize research findings on the causes of family abuse and possible methods of social intervention. To start with, however, it would be important to establish the critical role family plays in the development of children.

The Importance of The Family as a Social Group

It is common knowledge that the family unit plays an important role in the nurturing and development of children, especially in the early formative years when a child's level of dependence on adults is high. Indeed, while social forces such as religion, education, media, and peer groups can exercise a moderating influence on an individual's psychological and cognitive development, the fact remains that the family unit plays the primary role. As Witt (1987, p. 291) observes, "Ideally, we define the family as the social group to nurture us, instruct us in social and moral values, and protect us from harm. This is the case in virtually every postindustrial society where people...tend to depend emotionally on their immediate family." Logically, therefore, when a family unit fails or falls short of fulfilling its parental and social responsibility in nurturing its children; it often results in adversely affecting a child's immediate and long-term psychological well-being. This is particularly true of children who experience or witness various forms of abuse within the family environment.

Historically, society has always projected the family as an ideal unit of caring interdependence, which brings up children to be responsible adult citizens. To that extent, one would expect families to try and live up to that ideal. Yet, increasingly there are widespread media reports of family abuse. Thus, there seems to be a gap between projected social norms and reality. To explain this apparent dichotomy between social ideals and the prevalence of family abuse, perhaps it would be important to place in context the external influence of the larger social environment on the individual family unit.

Sociocultural Factors That Impact Family Behavior

The fields of psychology, social psychology, and sociology offer several theories that attempt to explain the phenomenon of family violence. David Witt, in his article "A Conflict Theory of Family Violence," (1987, p. 291-300) integrates three such main theories, to suggest that there is a basic conflict between social and cultural norms and the prevention of family violence. Witt points out that firstly, the family is subject to cultural norms, which often suggest various forms of violence as necessary, correct, and good for family members. Common examples are constant reminders of shortcomings, blame for material inadequacies, and failure to be supportive. Such verbally abusive behavior results in creating feelings of shame, guilt, and inadequacy in individual family members, especially vulnerable children. Secondly, the norms of such a broader culture are repeatedly transmitted through a social learning process, largely within the family. Thirdly, family violence is indirectly encouraged by a society that views the economic failure of the head of a household and the breaking down of marital relationships as unacceptable. Fourth, the propagation of gender stereotypes such as the earning male member and the nurturing female creates further stress, especially in times of recession and unemployment. Fifth, the economic ideology of society vests on strong, hardworking, and wholesome families. The last, the author suggests, is a convenient passing on of responsibility by society given the impact of political and economic policy decisions on unemployment and family benefits. Thus, Witt concludes that the broader social and cultural context encourages conflict and violence in families by the setting up of norms that are not always realistically achievable.

Other research studies support Witt's conclusions that external socioeconomic and cultural factors influence family violence and abuse. For example, a longitudinal investigation study, conducted to test whether violence in the family of origin predisposes an individual to react to stress by aggressing against one's spouse, found that stress predicted marital aggression one year later for women, but not for men. Though this study did not find any effects linked to violence in the family of origin, it did establish the existence of a relationship between work and life stress and marital aggression. Further, the researchers offer an explanation for no stress effects emerging for the men in the study: "Strauss (1980) found that men who were high in marital satisfaction were less likely to be violent toward their wife when they were under high stress. In the present sample...perhaps no stress effect emerged...because the men were enjoying high marital satisfaction." (MacEwen & Barling, 1988, p. 73-83)

While the research conducted by MacEwen and Baring offers a useful framework for further studies in that, it examines the effects of negative perceptions of multiple stressors on marital aggression, it must be pointed out that the study was limited to a small sample size of just 275 couples. In addition, the research design necessitated the selection of only newly married couples in order to record the incidence of violence in the family of origin and pre-marital stress factors. This implies that the men in the group were more likely to be enjoying high marital satisfaction. Nevertheless, for the purposes of this paper, the findings of the study were useful in reiterating Witt's observations on the correlation between work stress and family violence.

One clear inference that can be drawn from the preceding research findings, as Witt (1987, p. 300) points out, is that "producing change in the levels of family violence involves radical change in several aspects of the culture. The goal is to reduce the amount of social stress produced by economic flux and to devalue violence as an appropriate response to stress in other aspects of social life."

Jones & McCurdy (1992, p. 201-215) reach a similar conclusion; post an examination of the relative impact of demographic characteristics of the child, family structure, and economic variables, on types of child abuse and neglect. Finding that physical neglect, as a form of child abuse, is clearly related to economic factors such as low income and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) status, the authors suggest the need for a strong commitment to working with and providing services to families in poverty: "In 1987, the U.S. poverty rate for young children was 23%, nearly 1 out of every 4 children.... An unwillingness to begin to tackle these issues is resulting in the deterioration of the country's major resource: children."

The preceding research findings clearly establish the role of economic stress in creating family violence. This implies the need for social intervention in the area of economic and social welfare policies that aim at reducing the effects of poverty on child rearing practices. In this connection, it is encouraging to note the advent of enlightened management practices by big businesses, based on human behavioral theories of motivation. One such theory is Maslow's Need Hierarchy, which categorizes human needs into deficiency and growth needs. Deficiency needs are defined as physiological, safety, belongingness, and love, and are those that must be satisfied in order for people to be secure and healthy. Growth needs such as esteem and self-actualization, on the other hand, allow individuals to realize their full potential. Using Maslow's model, organizations like Stride Rite Shoe Company in Boston, Merck Pharmaceuticals in New Jersey, and Zale Corporation in Texas have begun to address unfulfilled employee deficiency needs of providing for their children's safety, belongingness, and love. These companies have achieved this by operating child care centers (Harris, 1993, p. 429-433).

However, working towards the economic and material well-being of all sections of society is not the only magic bullet needed to ensure that children are brought up in a caring, non-abusive family environment. For, as observed earlier, cultural norms need to be taken into consideration as well. The fact is that society and culture, in many ways almost glorifies violence. One only needs to watch a few hours of television, or read a few best sellers to take cognizance of the fact. Indeed, adults and children alike are constantly being exposed to violence in one form or the other. While, no doubt, a democratic society must allow for freedom of expression, it is important that social institutions such as family, religion, educational institutions, and the media exercise a moderating influence by consciously educating citizens, especially children, on the harmful effects of violence.

Of course, human nature instinctively uses anger and aggression as tools to control or defend a perceived hostile environment. But unless such reactions are controlled, families and society will eternally be caught in a vicious cycle of violence begetting violence. One way of breaking that cycle is for society to consciously stop rewarding male aggression by dispelling the historical myth surrounding macho behavior and physical brute strength. In fact, it would be enormously beneficial if new role models of strength could be developed. For instance, if the very social emphasis on strength could move away from physical to emotional control power, it could serve as the new social ideal to be aspired to. This is perhaps the kind of radical change Witt referred to in his "conflict theory of family violence."

The need for such a radical change in the external socioeconomic and cultural environment becomes even more evident on studying the effects of abusive family environments on children.

Effects of Family Abuse on the Psychological Development of Children

Usually, the phrase "family violence," or "child abuse" brings images of physical or sexual assault to mind. This is hardly surprising given that this is the only form of family abuse that has hitherto invited social and legal intervention. The fact is, however, that family abuse occurs in many forms, each of which can negatively affect the psychological well-being and healthy development of children. Jones & McCurdy (1992, p. 201) categorize four common types of maltreatment: physical abuse; sexual abuse; physical neglect; and emotional maltreatment. It is also important to note that an abusive family environment affects a child, irrespective of whether the child is directly victimized or not.

Further, though it may be commonly inferred that physical and sexual abuse are more likely to damage a child's physiological as well as psychological well-being, the fact is that the apparently milder forms of abuse can extract a severe toll as well. Indeed, there are media reports that reveal the severe consequences of physically and emotionally neglecting a child. Take, for example, the case of 12-year-old Daniel, whose mother kept him away from school for 45 days as his school mates were tormenting him. Ironically, the mother was working as a teacher's assistant in the same school. Yet, the mother seems to have chosen to keep the child at home instead of resolving the conflict situation in school. For 45 days, Daniel was left at home, while his mother worked 60 hours, a week. Obviously suffering from psychological problems, the child spent most of his time nestled inside his closet, until the day, he committed suicide. Post this incident, a statewide law was passed requiring school reporting of bullying incidences to parents (Paley, Oct. 2003). Though, in this case, the state did take action in terms of attempting to mitigate at least one of the causes behind Daniel's death, reading between the lines, it appears that Daniel's death was more a consequence of parental neglect rather than any incidence of bullying at school.

Daniel's case highlights one other critical fact, which is that family abuse does not seem to discriminate on the basis of education or socioeconomic status. For, in Daniel, there is a case of a teacher's child suffering from physical and emotional neglect. Daniel's case also highlights the importance of conducting research to examine the incidence and effects of family abuse among the more educated and elite strata of society. Currently, this seems to be a major gap in the wide body of literature on the subject of child abuse.

Daniel's story makes it evident that family abuse in any form can result in devastating consequences for children. This is true even if the child is merely a witness and not a direct victim. Research literature on the subject suggests that children who witness family violence are more prone to deviant behaviors such as bullying, physical aggression, cheating, and lying. Such children also exhibit symptoms of depression and anxiety, in addition. In fact, the effects of witnessing family violence on children's behavior has been personally observed by the author of this paper, while working at a domestic violence shelter. Children of abused mothers at the shelter exhibited the range of behaviors described above, and were hard to manage as their responses were so unpredictable. They would be quiet and reserved one minute, and lash out in anger the next.

The behavioral observations described above are also borne out by Stiles (2002, p. 2-7). In addition, Stiles states that the deviant behavior of children who witness domestic violence extends to the school environment, leading to poor academic performance and problems with social relationships. The author analyzes the root causes of such behavioral outcomes as a feeling of low self-worth, and self-blame, resulting from the witnessing of abuse in the family environment. It is also disturbing to note that such children suffer from somatic complaints such as headaches and stomachaches. The findings presented by Stiles are useful in corroborating the evidence from other studies, though it must be mentioned that the author's observations are generalized, without attempting to look for impact of variables such as socioeconomic status and differences in gender.

The fact is, as the research study conducted by Lemmey et.al (2001) shows, there are age and gender differences in the effect of family abuse on children's behavior. Further, there is a link between the severity of the abuse witnessed with the severity of child behavioral problems. Using a descriptive framework, Lemmey et.al interviewed 83 women in a criminal justice agency serving abused women. Two questionnaires were administered, the Severity of Violence Against Women Scale (SVAWS) and Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL). The results were then analyzed using correlational procedures to investigate the relationship between the form, frequency, and severity of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) and child behavioral problems. The study, though limited by self-reports of the abused mother, nevertheless found that children of abused women exhibit more behavioral problems than the norm. Behavioral problems reported included nightmares, nervous movements, picking at body, and somatic complaints such as headaches and nausea. Further, the study established that that the effects of family violence on girls is more than boys, and affects younger children more. The research also examined for differences in internalizing (withdrawal, depression, anxiety) and externalizing behaviors (delinquency, aggression). And though no significant difference was found with internalizing and externalizing behaviors, the study substantiates that increasing physical violence experienced by the mother is associated with increasing internalizing behavioral problems in the child.

One point of interest in the literature reviewed by Lemmey et.al (2001, cited Fantuzzo & Lindquist,) is the finding that "male witnesses to IPV are more likely to exhibit externalizing problems, whereas female witnesses of IPV are more likely to exhibit internalizing problems." This fact can be linked back to the earlier observation about cultural stereotypes of male aggression, and therefore, serves to reiterate the importance of society developing new role models of male strength. Indeed, this can be termed almost a critical mission given estimates that in the United States, 10 million children witness the punching, kicking, stabbing, or strangling of the child's parent, most commonly the mother (Lemmey et.al, cited Carlson & Humphreys, 2001).

The statistics quoted above are shocking enough, but the severity of the problem faced by children in abusive family environments is likely to be multiplied many times over if all the types of child abuse are taken into account. The magnitude of the problem perhaps is one reason why child abuse is increasingly receiving attention from the media. Of course, social norms have also changed to the extent that families are not as hesitant to come out in the open with their problems. This is an encouraging trend, as it will hopefully serve to raise societal consciousness about the problem and lead to a more concerted effort to prevent the problem from occurring at all.

Currently, however, it appears that social interventions, when they occur, are more reactive in nature. One horrific example of such reactive interventions is the case of Vanessa and Ray Jackson, who were arrested for abusing four of their adopted children. Officials finally became aware of the abuse only when a neighbor called the police to report a child foraging through his trash. Till then, no one in the neighborhood or community realized that the Jacksons had been starving four of their adopted children for several years. Worse, four caseworkers and one inspector from New Jersey's Department of Human Services paid 38 visits to the Jacksons' residence since 1999, and not one voiced any concern over the boys' haggard appearance or took any action. The Jacksons are now in Camden County jail, while other foster families are caring for their nonbiological children. The five child-welfare field-workers and four managers have subsequently been fired because of the case (Tresniowski et.al, 2003, p. 89).

Reportedly, the four boys who were malnourished after suffering abuse at the hands of the Jacksons for several years are now doing well. But, the question still needs to be asked, doing well by what measures? Just the fact that they are now being fed properly? What about the psychological ill-effects of years of maltreatment? Even presuming that the State has now arranged for the boys to receive counseling, the fact remains that the entire episode could have been perhaps prevented or at the least, truncated with more timely social intervention. Indeed, the Jackson case throws up several pertinent questions on the effectiveness of the foster system in taking care of children's well-being.

In fact, Herrenkohl et.al (2003, p. 367-380), have examined the relationship between stability of living arrangements and adolescent deviance in a longitudinal study of maltreated and nonmaltreated children. The basis of the study was the presumed absence of a stable, maturing family environment in the lives of abused and neglected children, given frequent changes of residences and caretakers. For example, the children's parents may move them to the homes of friends or relatives because of economic or emotional instability; the children may be removed by a child welfare agency for protection from abuse and placed in foster care; or the child may witness several changes in marital partners. Interestingly, the authors of the study observe that though the decision to destabilize the children's lives is made in the interests of gaining more positive parenting for the children, the foster system in particular fails to do so. "An overall breakdown rate in long-term foster placement of 43% has been cited by Triseliotis (2002), and a breakdown rate as high as 57% has been found by D.K. Smith, Stormshak, Chamberlain, and Whaley (2001)."

Being a longitudinal study, Herrenkohl et.al followed the maltreated and nonmaltreated children from their preschool years through late adolescence and found that transitions in caretaker situations and residences of children have a statistically significant relationship to five indicators of adolescent deviant behavior: delinquency, alcohol use, drug use, status offenses, and school dropout. These results suggest that although the experience of maltreatment in childhood poses a risk for later deviance in adolescence, the risk can be even greater in the cases of children who experience too many changes in residences or caretakers.

The Herrenkohl et.al study not only reveals the inadequacy of the foster care system, it establishes a clear correlation between the absence of stable nurturing in a child's life and its adverse externalizing behavioral effects. Obviously, therefore, even the reactive social interventions that currently exist are woefully inadequate in ensuring the healthy development of children in a nonabusive environment. Further, it appears that there is a reluctance to intervene by social institutions such as schools even though there is a wide recognition of the almost universal presence of abused children in the classroom. This is evident in the findings of a 1988 Carnegie Foundation Study, which reveals that 89% of 22, 000 teachers surveyed reported child abuse as a problem in their schools.

Abrahams et.al (1992), conducted a research precisely to understand the reasons behind the reluctance of teachers to intervene in suspected cases of child abuse. The research survey found that many teachers are simply not equipped with the necessary knowledge to deal with cases of abused children. Of course, they are also uncomfortable about reporting suspected cases of child maltreatment. Perhaps this reluctance can be traced to the fact that historically, society has always sanctified family affairs as private. Thus, once again, the effect of sociocultural factors is observed. And unless, such social norms change, children will continue to suffer and be deprived of timely help.

In fact, in 1986, out of 57% of child maltreatment reports filed, only 16.3% came from school personnel (cited AAPC, 1988). Further, another nationwide study by the National Committee for Prevention of Child Abuse (NCPA), across forty school districts in twenty-nine randomly selected counties, also revealed that teachers were not sufficiently trained in addressing child abuse issues. This situation is unfortunate as teachers can play an effective role in preventing child abuse. Romano (1989, p. 229) suggests three ways that teachers can work towards ensuring the safety and well-being of children. One, teachers can provide a surrogate nurturing relationship, which offers the abused child support and guidance. Two, teachers can put together child assault prevention material to promote awareness and self-protection skills among students. Three, teachers can model non-violent conflict resolutions.

Besides such positive proactive measures, teachers have an important role in actively watching for signs of child abuse. Indeed, school personnel are mandated by law to report suspected child abuse. Teachers particularly need to keep a careful watch during report card times. Dr. Romero (ibid, p. 3) points out that poor report card grades often serve as a trigger for abusive parents to commit violence. As such, children may be at the receiving end of severe physical, emotional, and verbal abuse after handing in a bad report card. Abuse at such times constitutes gross injustice because it is an abusive environment, in the first place, that leaves the child with little energy to cope with school work.