Effects of Family Abuse on Children's Psychological Development

Introduction

The widespread prevalence of family abuse has become an increasingly prominent 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 the long-term consequences for adult functioning. The scope of the paper includes research on the causes of family abuse and a discussion of 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 children constitute the citizens of the future. As such, society has a definite stake in ensuring that its children are nurtured well today so that they may function as responsible adult members of society tomorrow. This is a well-recognized fact, as evidenced by governmental, societal, and legal interventions that provide for children's development through free education, child care subsidies, and the foster care system. However, as a wide body of research literature indicates, little has been achieved in the area of protecting children from the often devastating consequences of abusive family situations — 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 researches 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, the paper summarizes research findings on the causes of family abuse and possible methods of social intervention. To begin, however, it is important to establish the critical role the 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. 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 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 projected the family as an ideal unit of caring interdependence that brings up children to be responsible adult citizens. To that extent, one would expect families to strive to live up to that ideal. Yet increasingly there are widespread media reports of family abuse, suggesting a gap between projected social norms and reality. To explain this apparent dichotomy between social ideals and the prevalence of family abuse, it is 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, pp. 291–300), integrates three such theories to suggest that there is a basic conflict between social and cultural norms and the prevention of family violence. Witt points out that, first, the family is subject to cultural norms that often suggest various forms of violence as necessary, correct, and good for family members. Common examples include constant reminders of shortcomings, blame for material inadequacies, and failure to be supportive. Such verbally abusive behavior creates feelings of shame, guilt, and inadequacy in individual family members, especially vulnerable children. Second, the norms of the broader culture are repeatedly transmitted through a social learning process, largely within the family. Third, family violence is indirectly encouraged by a society that views the economic failure of the head of a household and the breakdown 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 is vested in strong, hardworking, and wholesome families, which Witt suggests represents a convenient passing of responsibility by society given the impact of political and economic policy decisions on unemployment and family benefits. Witt concludes that the broader social and cultural context encourages conflict and violence in families by establishing 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. A longitudinal investigation conducted to test whether violence in the family of origin predisposes an individual to react to stress by aggressing against a 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. The researchers offer an explanation for the absence of stress effects among 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, pp. 73–83).

While the research conducted by MacEwen and Barling offers a useful framework for further studies — examining the effects of negative perceptions of multiple stressors on marital aggression — it must be noted that the study was limited by 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, which implies that the men in the group were more likely to be enjoying high marital satisfaction. Nevertheless, the findings usefully reiterate 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 and McCurdy (1992, pp. 201–215) reach a similar conclusion following 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 argue 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."

These research findings clearly establish the role of economic stress in creating family violence, implying the need for social intervention in the area of economic and social welfare policies that aim to reduce the effects of poverty on child-rearing practices. In this connection, it is encouraging to note the advent of enlightened management practices by large businesses, based on human behavioral theories of motivation. One such theory is Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, which categorizes human needs into deficiency and growth needs. Deficiency needs — defined as physiological, safety, belongingness, and love — must be satisfied in order for people to be secure and healthy. Growth needs such as esteem and self-actualization allow individuals to realize their full potential. Using Maslow's model, organizations such as Stride Rite Shoe Company, Merck Pharmaceuticals, and Zale Corporation have begun to address unfulfilled employee deficiency needs by providing for their children's safety, belongingness, and love through the operation of workplace child care centers (Harris, 1993, pp. 429–433).

However, working towards the economic and material well-being of all sections of society is not the only remedy needed to ensure that children are raised in a caring, non-abusive family environment. Cultural norms must be taken into consideration as well. Society and culture, in many ways, almost glorify violence — a fact readily apparent after only a few hours of television or a few best-selling novels. Adults and children alike are constantly exposed to violence in one form or another. While a democratic society must allow for freedom of expression, it is important that social institutions such as the family, religion, educational institutions, and the media exercise a moderating influence by consciously educating citizens — especially children — about the harmful effects of violence.

Human nature instinctively uses anger and aggression as tools to control or defend against a perceived hostile environment. But unless such reactions are controlled, families and society will remain 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. It would be enormously beneficial if new role models of strength could be developed — for instance, if social emphasis on strength could shift from physical force to emotional self-control, that could serve as a 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.

Effects of Family Abuse on the Psychological Development of Children

The phrase "family violence" or "child abuse" typically brings to mind images of physical or sexual assault — hardly surprising, given that these are the forms of family abuse that have historically attracted 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 and 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 merely a witness.

Though it may be commonly assumed that physical and sexual abuse are more likely to damage a child's physiological and psychological well-being, apparently milder forms of abuse can exact a severe toll as well. Consider the case of a 12-year-old child whose mother kept him out of school for 45 days because his classmates were tormenting him. Ironically, the mother worked as a teacher's assistant in the same school, yet she chose to keep the child at home rather than resolve the conflict. For 45 days, the child was left alone at home while his mother worked 60 hours a week. Suffering from evident psychological problems, the child spent most of his time inside his closet, until the day he committed suicide. Following this incident, a statewide law was passed requiring schools to report bullying incidents to parents (Paley, Oct. 2003). While the state did take action to address one of the contributing causes, reading between the lines suggests that the child's death was more a consequence of parental neglect than of bullying at school.

This case highlights a critical fact: family abuse does not discriminate on the basis of education or socioeconomic status. Here, it was a teacher's child who suffered from physical and emotional neglect. The case also underscores the importance of conducting research on the incidence and effects of family abuse among more educated and economically advantaged strata of society — a major gap in the existing literature on child abuse.

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, and also exhibit symptoms of depression and anxiety. The behavioral effects of witnessing family violence were personally observed by the author while working at a domestic violence shelter. Children of abused mothers at the shelter exhibited the range of behaviors described above and were difficult to manage due to the unpredictability of their responses — quiet and withdrawn one moment, lashing out in anger the next.

These behavioral observations are corroborated by Stiles (2002, pp. 2–7), who additionally 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. Stiles analyzes the root causes of such behavioral outcomes as feelings of low self-worth and self-blame resulting from witnessing abuse in the family environment. It is also disturbing to note that such children suffer from somatic complaints such as headaches and stomachaches. While Stiles's observations are useful in corroborating evidence from other studies, it should be noted that they are generalized and do not account for variables such as socioeconomic status or gender differences.

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

One notable finding in the literature reviewed by Lemmey et al. (2001, citing Fantuzzo & Lindquist) is 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 finding can be linked back to earlier observations about cultural stereotypes of male aggression, and thus reiterates the importance of developing new role models of male strength. This is a critical mission given estimates that in the United States, 10 million children witness the punching, kicking, stabbing, or strangling of a parent — most commonly the mother (Lemmey et al., 2001, citing Carlson & Humphreys).

These statistics are alarming, but the severity of the problem is likely multiplied many times over when all types of child abuse are taken into account. The magnitude of the problem is one reason why child abuse is receiving increasing media attention. Social norms have also changed to the extent that families are less hesitant to come forward with their problems — an encouraging trend that will hopefully raise societal consciousness and lead to more concerted preventive efforts.

Currently, however, social interventions appear to be more reactive than preventive in nature. One troubling example is the case of Vanessa and Ray Jackson, who were arrested for abusing four of their adopted children. Officials became aware of the abuse only when a neighbor called police to report a child foraging through his trash. Until then, no one in the neighborhood realized that the Jacksons had been starving four adopted children for several years. Four caseworkers and one inspector from the Department of Human Services paid 38 visits to the Jacksons' residence since 1999, and not one voiced concern over the boys' haggard appearance or took any action. The Jacksons were jailed while other foster families took in their nonbiological children, and five child-welfare field workers and four managers were subsequently fired because of the case (Tresniowski et al., 2003, p. 89).

The four malnourished boys are reportedly now doing well — but well by what measures? The fact that they are now being fed properly does not address the psychological harm of years of maltreatment. Even presuming the state has arranged for counseling, the entire episode could have been prevented, or at least curtailed, with more timely intervention. The Jackson case raises serious questions about the effectiveness of the foster care system in protecting children's well-being.

Herrenkohl et al. (2003, pp. 367–380) examined the relationship between stability of living arrangements and adolescent deviance in a longitudinal study of maltreated and nonmaltreated children. The study was premised on the presumed absence of a stable, maturing family environment in the lives of abused and neglected children, given frequent changes of residences and caretakers — whether because parents move children to the homes of friends or relatives due to economic or emotional instability, because a child welfare agency removes children and places them in foster care, or because children witness several changes in marital partners. The authors observe that although the decision to destabilize children's lives is often made in the interest of securing better parenting, the foster system frequently fails to deliver: "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)."

Following the maltreated and nonmaltreated children from their preschool years through late adolescence, Herrenkohl et al. found that transitions in caretaker situations and residences 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 maltreatment in childhood poses a risk for later deviance in adolescence, the risk can be even greater for 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 but establishes a clear correlation between the absence of stable nurturing in a child's life and adverse externalizing behavioral effects. Even the reactive social interventions that currently exist are woefully inadequate in ensuring children's healthy development. Further, there appears to be a reluctance among social institutions — including schools — to intervene, even though abused children are widely recognized as almost universally present in classrooms. This is evident in the findings of a 1988 Carnegie Foundation study, which revealed that 89% of 22,000 teachers surveyed reported child abuse as a problem in their schools.

Conclusion

It is evident from the findings of research studies that child abuse leads to an inability to function well as an adult. In fact, one of the more grave consequences of child abuse is its effect on the individual's socioeconomic status as an adult — an outcome that is not surprising given the presence of low self-worth and esteem documented throughout the literature. This aspect was one of the dimensions explored by Martin and Elmer (1992, p. 80) in their research. Taken together, the body of evidence reviewed in this paper makes a compelling case for proactive, coordinated social intervention — addressing both the economic and cultural conditions that give rise to family abuse and the needs of the children who suffer its consequences.

References

Abrahams, N., Casey, K., & Daro, D. (1992). Teachers' knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about child abuse and its prevention. Journal of Child Abuse & Neglect.

Becker, K. B. (2002). Attention and conduct problems in children exposed to family violence.

Fontes, L. (2000). Children exposed to marital violence: How school counselors can help.

Greenwald, E., Leitenberg, H., Cado, S., & Tarran, M. J. (1992). Childhood sexual abuse: Long-term effects on psychological and sexual functioning in a nonclinical and nonstudent sample of adult women. Journal of Child Abuse & Neglect, 14, 503–513.

Harris, T. E. (1993). Applied organizational communication: Perspectives, principles, and pragmatics. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Herrenkohl, E. C., Herrenkohl, R. C., & Egolf, B. P. (2003, October). The psychosocial consequences of living environment instability on maltreated children. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 73(4), 367–380.

Jones, E. D., & McCurdy, K. (1992). The links between types of maltreatment and demographic characteristics of children. Journal of Child Abuse & Neglect, 16, 201–215.

Lemmey, D., et al. (2001, May/June). Severity of violence against women correlates with behavioral problems in their children. Pediatric Nursing, 27(3), 265+.

MacEwen, K. E., & Barling, J. (1988). Multiple stressors, violence in the family of origin, and marital aggression: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Child Abuse & Neglect, 13, 73–83.

Martin, J. A., & Elmer, E. (1992). Battered children grown up: A follow-up study of individuals severely maltreated as children. Journal of Child Abuse & Neglect, 16, 75–87.

Paley, R. (2003, October). People Magazine, 60.

Romano, Dr. F. Child abuse & report cards. Ibid., 3.

Stiles, M. M. (2002). Witnessing domestic violence: The effect on children.

Tresniowski, A., Herbst, F., Hamm, L., & Cotliar, S. (2003, November 10). How could they? People Magazine, 60(19), 89+.

Witt, D. D. (1987). A conflict theory of family violence. Journal of Family Violence, 2(4), 291–301.