Jana L. Jasinski, Linda M. Williams, and Albert Brewster,
with
David Finkelhor, Jean Giles-Sims, Sherry L. Hamby, Glenda Kaufman
Kantor,
Patricia Mahoney, Terri L. Weaver, Carolyn M. West, and Janis
Wolak
Family violence research has a relatively short history. A 1974 publication brought together articles from several different fields in an attempt to create a comprehensive interdisciplinary listing of the existing research on violence and families (Steinmetz & Straus, 1974). The relatively small body of the empirical research at that time was based primarily on a small number of cases or special populations such as students or shelter residents. This early research gave insight into the complexity of family violence and its meaning for the victims. There were no data available, however, to estimate of the magnitude of the problem. In 1975 the first National Family Violence Survey was conducted to measure the extent of violence in the family, to try to understand what the violence meant to the participants, and to determine what caused the violence to take place (Straus, Gelles, & Steinmetz, 1980). This was the first attempt of researchers to measure intrafamily violence in a large nationally representative sample. This survey found that individuals faced the greatest risk of assault and physical injury in their own homes by members of their own families Ten years later, in 1985, the National Family Violence Resurvey (Straus & Gelles, 1990) was conducted. By using many of the same measures used in the first survey, researchers were able to investigate trends in rates of intrafamily assault. These two surveys represent important landmarks in the field of research on family violence because together they provided estimates on the extent and pervasiveness of violence in the family in the United States. In addition, these surveys went beyond individual level analyses and examined the underlying social causes of violence in the family. These two national surveys also obtained information from both victims and perpetrators of the violence, something that had not occurred in previous studies that relied on shelter samples. In 1992, the National Alcohol and Family Violence Survey (Kaufman Kantor, Jasinski, & Aldorondo, 1994) was the first national survey designed specifically to test hypotheses pertaining to the relationships between drinking and family violence in Hispanic families compared to families of other ethnicities.
That we in the United States have begun to recognize the importance of gathering information about violence occurring within the family is evident in the recently redesigned National Crime Victimization Survey, administered by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The design of this national household survey was reconceptualized and implemented in 1993 to facilitate data collection not only on crimes taking place outside the family unit but also those within the family.
More than twenty years after the first national survey on family violence, however, there remain considerable difficulties in arriving at consensus about how to define and measure family violence, whether and how psychological abuse is incorporated into the definition of violence, and how it is measured, and the validity of distinguishing between types and degrees of severity of partner violence, as well as violence perpetrated by males and females. There also continues to be much debate about the application and influence of differing theoretical perspectives to research and practice in the field of family violence. Finally as the field has been unable to state definitively the causes of violence there is a great deal of debate about the significance of intergenerational transmission of violence. Each of these areas affects the social response to violence and as a result has created another controversy; What works to stop violence?
The twenty year history of research on violence in the family has contributed to an increasing awareness of the scope and significance of this problem. Since 1974 hundreds of articles and many books have been published. However, a comprehensive, interdisciplinary review of this research was needed. That is the aim of this document. This review of the literature synthesizes the accumulated knowledge of over twenty years of research in the area of partner violence, summarizes the major findings of the research, and delineates its strengths and limitations. In addition, we make recommendations for the field based on the research, especially in the area of prevention and treatment.
This project was supported by the United States Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Research Education and Extension Service cooperative agreement no. 95-EXCA-3-0414, the University of Missouri, funded by the United States Air Force Family Advocacy Program. The literature review was conceptualized as a comprehensive examination of the current knowledge reflected in the literature on partner violence. The work was carried out at the Family Research Laboratory (FRL) University of New Hampshire (Chapters 1,2 and 4-8) and the University of Missouri (Chapter 3).
The authors of each of the chapters included in this project were identified because of their particular expertise and interest in each area. This review, however, also incorporated a team approach in that all authors assisted in the work on each chapter by recommending articles and books to be consulted and reviewing the work of their colleagues. This maximized the input from all faculty and minimized unnecessary overlap among sections. We also utilized the weekly Family Violence Research Seminar to review works in progress and benefitted from reviewers in the United States Air Force and in consultation with the Air Force.
Definitions and conceptualizations of abuse/violence used in this review
We began this project by delineating the boundaries of our USAF funded search for relevant literature. This process included reaching agreement on terminology to be used. We chose to use the term "partner violence" when referring to violence between two married or co-habitating adults. Although the term domestic violence is often used to refer to this phenomenon, we agreed that partner violence more accurately captured the literature that the USAF wanted reviewed. Domestic violence may generally refer to other types of violence in the family, including child abuse. Another commonly used term, marital or spousal violence, implies consideration of only the violence that occurs between married individuals. Partner violence, on the other hand takes into account violence in non-marital relationships such as cohabiting relationships. While this document focuses on partner violence and there was much literature to review on this topic, we come from a long-standing tradition of examining violence in the context of the entire family and anticipate that future efforts in this area will integrate discussions of partner violence, child abuse and sibling violence.
Search of the literature
Our search of the literature cast a wide net. For purposes of this review we examined journal articles, unpublished papers, dissertations, government documents, books and treatment manuals. To locate the best and most current literature we made use of a wide array of resources available through the FRL. We consulted the FRL library devoted primarily to family violence and which has on hand approximately 3,000 books and subscriptions to 14 journals, including issues of all journals devoted to the study of violence. In addition, we relied on unpublished materials that have been produced by past and present FRL associates and from dozens of the presentations from four International Family Violence Research Conferences sponsored by the FRL. Our faculty involvement in national and international boards and review panels also provided us with access to many other publications and unpublished papers. We also relied on our network of personal contacts to obtain unpublished papers and works in progress. As part of an earlier project conducted at the FRL, we had already searched the computer databases and our resources for all empirical literature on partner violence and thus began our work with a bibliography of over 700 empirical references. Finally, we conducted searches of computer databases to acquire the most recently published literature.
In reviewing the literature on partner violence we paid particular attention to theoretical and conceptual issues and research methods and measures, findings, and implications for policy and practice. We carefully studied articles that examine interventions in family violence and document the type of intervention, the effect(s) of the intervention, and whether the strength of the effects warrants recommending this intervention to other practitioners. We also gathered articles and documents that address partner violence in military families.
Organization of the Review
We organized the review of the literature into eight chapters. Chapter 1, Dynamics of partner violence and types of abuse and abusers, introduces the literature review by focusing on prevalence rates of partner violence, dynamics of abusive relationships including typologies of batterers, documented risk markers, and the importance of assessing violence in different life stages. A comprehensive understanding of these risk factors and their different impact at various life stages is essential because they are at the heart of successful prevention and intervention models.
Partner violence has dramatic consequences for the perpetrator and victim, the family and the entire community. Chapter 2, The psychological and social impact of partner violence, reviews the literature on the consequences of partner violence with particular emphasis on the emotional consequences for victims and other family members, economic costs of treatment, costs from loss of work or school, the consequences for family norms and community standards, and the transmission of violent behaviors from one generation to the next.
Chapter 3, Partner violence: A public health problem, also examines the impact and consequences of partner violence. This chapter utilizes meta-analytic methodology to review the literature within the areas of injury and health impact following experiences of partner violence. Meta-analysis is a quantitative form of literature review which empirically examines the relative contribution of a number of predictor variables and is equipped for summarizing the results of a number of studies in spite of diverse methodologies and outcome measures.
Chapter 4, Effects of partner violence on children, looks at how partner violence effects the children who witness it or who live in the families where it occurs. The effects of partner violence on children deserve special attention because of the vulnerability of children and the importance of interrupting possible intergenerational transmission effects.
Chapter 5, Sexual assault in marriage: Prevalence, consequences, and treatment of wife rape, examines another form of partner violence in addition to physical assault; marital rape. Sexual violence deserves special attention because of the special shame and secrecy that surround it and the cross-over in the sexual assault and partner violence literatures.
Partner violence effects certain populations in unique ways that need to be understood for effective policy and intervention. Two chapters have been devoted to the examination of partner violence in specific populations. Chapter 6, Partner violence in military families, considers both the stressors and advantages associated with military life. In addition, it looks at the incidence and characteristics of military partner violence as well as characteristics that contribute to abuse in this population.
Chapter 7, Partner violence in ethnic minority families, focuses on the incidence and prevalence of intimate violence in the four largest ethnic groups in the United States; African Americans, Latinos, Asian Americans, and American Indians. This chapter also discusses historical circumstances, and social and cultural factors that put these populations at an increased risk for partner violence.
Although each chapter addresses prevention and treatment issues that are suggested by the literature, Chapter 8, Prevention and intervention of partner violence, is focused specifically on the literature that addresses these issues. This chapter examines the literature on primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention and treatment and how successfully we can deal with and respond to the relevant dynamics, risk factors, and outcomes of partner violence. This chapter focuses specifically on several important prevention and intervention issues as well as current controversies regarding the use of some types of intervention and treatment. Primary prevention, community and legal interventions, and mental health treatments are all discussed.
Summary of findings: What do we know about partner violence?
What are the dynamics of violent relationships among intimate partners? (Chapter 1)
There is little doubt that physical violence between spouses and intimate partners is a serious social problem. Questions about how much violence occurs in families, the severity of the violence, and the nature of the victim-offender relationships in families as well as risk factors for partner violence are primary concerns of those engaged in efforts to reduce and control this behavior. Our review of the literature found that the forms and patterns of family violence are not the same for all families experiencing violent conflict. Patterns of common couple violence are more prevalent among general population samples and patterns of severe, "terroristic" violence are more typical of clinical samples. Research on partner violence suggests common interaction dynamics include violence as a response to loss of control, unmet dependency needs, fears, anxiety, frustrations, and threats to self esteem. The literature also suggests that aggression by women differs from male aggression. There is a higher incidence of physical and psychological injuries when the abuse is perpetrated by a man and the woman is the victim. Women also appear at greater risk for victimization that encompasses physical, sexual, emotional, and economic forms of abuse. Our review of the research on partner violence pointed to several major risk markers for intimate violence including: violence in the family of origin; socioeconomic factors; personality variables such as low self esteem; substance abuse, biology and situational factors related to the life course.
The major implications for practice that arise from our review of the literature on dynamics of partner violence are for assessment of risk, and where the abuse falls on the common couple violence to terrorist violence continuum. The same issues of assessment hold true for both military and non-military families. However, certain patterns of risk may be more prevalent among the military. For example, it is possible that those with certain violence- prone personality styles may be more attracted to the military. By violence prone , we mean those who grew up witnessing or experiencing their parents violence. When such individuals are also trained to use violence in their professional careers, there are greater risks that the violence will spill over into family life. Secondly, because both violence and problem drinking are often linked, and because both run in families, substance abuse related intimate violence may be a particular problem in military families. Careful assessment of both substance abuse and marital violence are important at intake, throughout treatment, and post-treatment, as well.
Our review of the literature on life course events as risk factors suggested that life stressors can increase frustration and anger levels, and thus may increase the risks that violence will be used to resolve intimate conflicts. These stressors need to be assessed at intake and taken into account in clinical interventions.
Finally, to assess risk for intimate violence, the literature suggests that many factors should be weighed. These include the severity of maltreatment or the potential for severity as measured by the acts committed by the offender, along with the number and degree of risk factors, and the potential for lethality.
What is the impact of partner violence? (Chapter 2)
Our review of the literature reveals that case studies, clinical assessments, surveys of nationally representative populations, and calculations of community service costs together present a consistent picture of negative psychological and social consequences of partner violence. The psychological impacts include increased levels of: anxiety, depression, anger and rage, nightmares, dissociation, shame, somatic problems, sexual problems, addictive behaviors, suicide ideation, other impaired functioning and lowered self-esteem. The best research indicates that approximately 80% of battered women experience at least some of these negative outcomes, and most report 3-7 symptoms. Clinical depression is found in approximately 20% of samples of battered women.
Evidence from national surveys shows that both male and female victims of severe violence suffer psychological problems, however, rates are much higher for women than for men. The literature also suggests that victims of partner violence often share common social and demographic characteristics that are correlated with psychological problems absent a violent partner. However the research reveals that violence contributes to higher symptom levels even after all other related factors are taken into consideration.
We also found that higher levels and severity of psychological symptoms are associated with: more frequent and severe abuse, violence that is intermittent, low levels of social support, low self-esteem, powerlessness, emotionally controlling abuse, self-blame and substance abuse. Partner violence also often leads to marital disruption, and the initial separation period is a high risk time for continued and severe abuse. Our review indicated that direct social costs of partner violence include: medical costs, lost work time, and criminal justice costs. Other social consequences include the intergenerational transmission of violence.
Based upon our review of the literature for this chapter, we suggest the following responses for the military: policies and practice that will identify and diagnose the problems of partner violence without threat of loss of status, ensuring protection for the victims, provisions of professional counseling that is easily accessible and structured to offer the most optimum environment to change behavior, and social policy recommendations that help prevent partner violence.
Is partner violence a public health problem? (Chapter 3)
Research suggests that across all health care settings, between 40-54% of patients have experienced partner violence at some point within their lifetimes. However, when clinicians are left "to their own devices," they tend to detect only 5% of all the individuals within their practice who are currently experiencing partner violence. The meta-analysis presented in this chapter demonstrates that partner violence has a small to medium but important impact on victim's physical health and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms. Victims who experience the most severe types of partner violence (for example, women in shelter settings) experience the most devastating impact of violence on their health and PTSD symptoms. The literature also reveals that partner violence impacts physical health and PTSD, regardless of the victim's age, race, education, minority representation, and income. Therefore, these personal characteristics should not be used to determine whether to ask about partner violence as a cause of physical health complaints. Research on military vs. civilian samples suggests that overall they do not differ from each other in their reported types of physical health problems or PTSD symptoms.
This review indicated that injuries from partner violence are more often found in central areas of the body, including the head, face, neck, breast, or abdomen compared with accidental injuries, which are more likely to involve the periphery of the body (for example, the arms or legs). The literature also suggests that stress-related health problems (such as sleep problems, problems with concentration, or difficulties with sexual functioning) may be even more commonly seen in victims of partner violence than physical injuries. Symptoms of PTSD, including recurring thoughts or nightmares about the violence, difficulty with sleeping or concentration, irritability, and feeling emotionally numb, are also symptoms with which the victim of partner violence may present to the clinician. It is recommended that health care settings use standardized assessments of partner violence with all of their patients. Coordinated efforts between emergency departments, health clinics, mental health teams, legal advisory personnel, and law enforcement can be a very powerful mode of intervention and prevention for victims of partner violence.
What is the effect on children who witness partner violence? (Chapter 4)
Our review of the literature indicates that between 11% to 20% of children are exposed to physical assaults between their parents, or between a parent and another intimate partner. The violence which children witness ranges from occasional, relatively mild assaults such as slaps and shoves to chronic, terroristic physical, and even sexual, violence. While not all children are negatively affected by exposure to partner violence, many children exhibit impaired behavioral, emotional, social, cognitive and/or physical functioning as a result. Researchers theorize that exposure to partner violence affects children directly by endangering them physically, teaching them to behave aggressively, and creating anxiety, anger, depression and other similar responses. Witnessing violence also affects children indirectly because the violence impairs parents' abilities to respond and attend to children in healthy ways. Researchers are still trying to determine how many of the problems exhibited by children who witness partner violence are attributable to the exposure to violence, and how many to other related difficulties prevalent in violent homes. The age and developmental level of the child, the severity of the abuse, the family context of the violence, the nature of social interventions, and the cumulative quality of the possible multiple stress factors acting on the child all appear to be factors determining the extent of the impact of witnessing partner violence.
On the basis of this research, we recommend that practitioners question all children in their practices about possible exposure to partner violence, and that all children exposed to partner violence be given a detailed assessment to determine the nature and impact of their exposure. Since these children are at risk for physical and emotional child abuse and neglect, practitioners should be prepared to make reports to appropriate agencies when necessary. Agencies and professionals should develop and be trained in protocols for providing crisis intervention with child witnesses that take into consideration their needs for safety, confidentiality and post-traumatic counseling. Work with child witnesses should take into account developmental level and cultural differences in parenting and family practices. Professionals working with child witnesses need to energetically coordinate and collaborate with a variety of other professionals involved these cases, such as shelter workers, police, prosecutors, attorneys, judges, and parents' therapists. Because partner violence implies some disruption of or compromise to parenting abilities and resources, work with adult victims and perpetrators of partner violence needs to focus on developing and maintaining healthy parenting practices.
What is the prevalence of wife rape? What are the consequences and how do we treat it? (Chapter 5)
While research and policy have developed considerably in the domestic violence and rape fields over the past 20 years, little attention has been paid to wife rape, and issue which has "fallen into the cracks" between these two fields. The small amount of recent research which has been done on this topic shows that among married women, rape by a husband is more common than rape by a stranger. The belief that the consequences of husband-perpetrated rape are less severe than those of stranger-perpetrated rape has not been supported. Victims of wife rape typically endure multiple rapes throughout their relationships and many women endure brutal physical assaults before and/or during the sexual assault. Physical symptoms as well as psychiatric symptoms are typically severe and long-lasting. So little research has been done on this issue that at this time any strategies for practitioners are based on speculation and conclusions drawn from other fields. The research reveals that wife rape, is a problem that touches the lives of approximately 10% of all married women but good population surveys of marital rape are needed. This type of violence must no longer be neglected by researchers and by those concerned with preventing domestic violence.
Our review of the literature indicates that professionals, including those providing domestic violence services, should receive education about wife rape, and training in how to respond to disclosures of spousal sexual assaults and to assure the women's future safety. This includes education regarding the prevalence, dynamics, and consequences of wife rape for: emergency room personnel, family practitioners, OB-GYN's, pediatricians, psychiatrists, family lawyers, therapists and counselors, police, and religious service providers.
Practitioners must attend to the need of survivors of wife rape for a safe, private environment and a sympathetic person in order to feel comfortable discussing a part of their lives that they may not have discussed with anyone. Practitioners must learn to facilitate disclosure and to respond in a supportive manner, letting the woman know that she is not alone, and that it is all right to feel hurt, angry, betrayed, or confused. Domestic violence services providers should expand their programs. Shelter and counseling should be available to women who have experienced sexual assaults in marriage and all batterer treatment programs should include units on sexual issues.
The literature suggests that health care providers should routinely include sexual histories in the intake process, and be trained to identify health problems that may result from sexual assaults by an intimate. Mental health providers should also routinely ask for sexual histories during the intake process. Health education should include a sexual health component, in which force, pressure, and manipulation in order to obtain sex is specifically addressed as both wrong and unhealthy. Pamphlets and posters about intimate sexual assaults should be available in all health care waiting rooms.
What do we know about partner violence in the military? (Chapter 6)
In 1995 the incidence rate of partner violence in all branches of the military was 19 per 1,000 couples. Mild forms of physical violence were most frequently reported, followed by emotional abuse and sexual assault. These large, military sponsored studies suggest a lower rate of violence in military families than civilian families in national probability studies. However, research using smaller clinical samples reported that military families were more violent than their civilian counterparts. Our review of the literature indicates that higher rates of partner violence among military couples in these studies may be partially explained by the demographic makeup of the military. That is, groups that are at greater risk for violence, such as young adults and ethnic minorities, are overrepresented in the military. Unique challenges faced by military families may also contribute to partner violence. For example, the research indicates that family stressors, such as long work hours; characteristics associated with the military environment, including acceptance of violence and male dominance; and war related trauma have been linked to increased risk of partner violence. Despite these risk factors, the military also offers many opportunities and resources, including job security and social support, that act as buffers against partner violence.
Based on the research, we recommend that both primary and secondary prevention efforts should be expanded in the military. Self-disclosure of violent behavior in families should also be encouraged. Victims and aggressors may be reluctant to come forward due to lack of confidentiality and fear of negative consequences career. These concerns can be alleviated by educating service members and their families about the purpose of Family Advocacy Programs (FAP). It is important to dispel the misconception that negative consequences will unilaterally result from reporting partner violence. To assure appropriate response, commanders and medical personnel could also benefit from more information about the FAP. Treatment services can be expanded and improved by putting greater emphasis on victim assistance (e.g., legal aid, job training) and providing services during evening and off-duty hours. Finally, research on military partner violence can be expanded. Future studies need to address the problems of disclosure, treatment, recidivism and the association between substance abuse and maltreatment.
What do we know about partner violence among ethnic minorities? (Chapter 7)
Although ethnic minorities are a growing percentage of the U.S. population, family violence researchers have historically neglected these groups. In national probability studies, African Americans, Latinos, and American Indians reported significantly higher rates of partner violence than Anglo Americans. However, these findings do not mean that ethnic minorities are not inherently more violent than Anglo Americans. Rather, structural inequalities, such as poverty and discrimination, cause ethnic minorities to be overrepresented in demographic categories that are at greater risk for physical violence. Research on partner violence among ethnic minorities suggests that when these demographic characteristics, such as youthfulness, lower social class, and occupational status, are taken into account, racial differences in partner violence often disappear. The remaining ethnic differences can often be explained by level of acculturation, alcohol abuse, and normative approval of violence. Furthermore, when assistance is sought for partner violence, cultural and institutional barriers may impede help seeking efforts.
It is recommended that practitioners educate themselves about the history and cultural strengths of ethnic minorities families. This will enable them to conduct a culturally appropriate assessment. This entails gathering information about race/ethnicity, economic status, family structure, level of acculturation, prior exposure to violence, and cultural coping strategies. "Culturally competent" services should also be provided. At an institutional level, this could be accomplished by networking with the minority community, utilizing outside consultants with expertise in ethnic issues, and employing bilingual counselors. When working with victims and aggressors, rapport can be established by demonstrating the willingness to discuss stereotypes and discrimination. Creating a welcoming therapeutic environment, by using books and art work that depicts racially diverse populations, and when appropriate consulting with extended family members and community leaders can also facilitate rapport. Finally, efforts should also be made to provide culturally appropriate education. Information about partner violence can be disseminated through word of mouth, community leaders, religious institutions, and ethnic events.
What can we do to stop partner violence? (Chapter 8)
Prevention and intervention are both growing areas in the field of partner violence and both are developing rapidly. Our review indicated that one of the most important recent changes is an increased focus on protective factors in addition to risk factors. Protective factors are elements such as problem solving skills or strong domestic violence laws that help insure that fewer people are involved in domestic violence situations. Risk factors, on the other hand, are problems such as alcohol abuse and community indifference that help perpetuate the problem of partner violence. In the area of prevention, in particular, there is growing evidence that developing protective factors does more to decrease the occurrence of violence than does education about violence and related problems.
One conclusion is clear from the work that has been done in prevention and intervention: There is no one solution to the problem of partner violence. Our review indicated that many intervention efforts, including stiffening domestic violence laws, developing specialized programs for batterers, and providing support and advocacy for victims, all help address the problem. The effects of any one individual approach, however, can be small. This has spurred the development of what are known as Coordinated Community Action Models. These models are intended to make certain that all services are available in a single community and that these services share common goals and communicate regularly with each other. There is some evidence that each service, from police intervention to shelters, makes an incremental contribution to reducing domestic violence. It is likely that only such coordinated efforts will be able to fully address the problem.
The future of both prevention and intervention efforts is likely to focus on increased specialization of services. Currently, few programs match their approach to the characteristics of either the perpetrator or the victim. Research identifying different classes of batterers and patterns of violence is growing, however (see Chapter 1), and it is likely that this knowledge will soon be incorporated more explicitly into planning interventions. More attention to differing patterns of violence may help resolve some of the current controversies surrounding what is the most appropriate treatment, especially for perpetrators. It is likely that different perpetrators will benefit from different forms of treatment. Developments such as these have the potential to significantly improve our ability to address the problem of partner violence.
Implications for the future
After more than twenty years of empirical research on partner violence, there are still many questions that remain unanswered. However, based on what we do know from the existing research, we are able to discuss the implications of this knowledge. Our recommendations fall into the three broad domains of prevention, treatment, and research.
Prevention
Although our research found evidence of an extensive and varied history of local, state, and federal prevention programs for partner violence, the effectiveness of these programs remains essentially unknown. We need to evaluate these programs so that those that work can be maintained and new programs can be developed to replace those that do not work. The research does suggest that prevention programs for partner violence may need to begin earlier than high school. One of the most consistent risk factors for partner violence was experiencing or witnessing violence in the family of origin. Identifying these children and adults and providing support for them may be one way to prevent violence from continuing into the next generation.
Our review demonstrated that the impact of partner violence reaches beyond the individual and into the community. Efforts to stop family violence should, therefore, be undertaken at the community level as well as the individual level. These efforts could take the form of public education and promotion of awareness that violence is not an acceptable form of conflict resolution. Non-violent skills for conflict resolution should be taught. The establishment of an integrated task force comprised of community members, practitioners, and researchers would make a coordinated effort to stop partner violence a realistic goal.
To summarize, the area of prevention needs:
Treatment
We also need to invest additional resources in the evaluation of treatment programs. In order to successfully conduct these evaluations, however, practitioners and researchers must come to an agreement about the definition of treatment success. Treatments should be designed that recognize that the range of violent behaviors may require a range of treatment options. Treatments may need to be tailored to the individual, family, and community. There is no such thing as the one size fits all treatment. Culturally appropriate assessments and treatment programs are needed. Programs that were developed for upper class white individuals may not work for others. In addition, although one individual may present with the offending behavior, in any treatment program it is important to consider all members of the family, as there are important consequences for witnesses of violence as well as the direct victims and perpetrators. Treatment should also take into account stages in the life cycle and impact and risks for re-offense.
We also find it important at this juncture to recommend that more attention be paid to the negative impacts of partner violence on women and children and that treatment programs focused on reducing these negative consequences and promoting strengths and resiliency be designed and evaluated.
To summarize, the following are issues for the area of treatment:
Research
Although we have the accumulated knowledge of more than twenty years of research, there are still many questions that remain unanswered. Future research efforts should be aimed at answering today's questions. In particular, there is very little longitudinal research even though violence differs in its dynamics and impact for individuals and families in different stages of the life cycle. Longitudinal studies would also offer insight into patterns of escalation or cessation of partner violence. Research on partner violence among ethnic minorities is also in its infancy. We need research that focuses on minority families. Program evaluations are needed to aid practitioners and policy makers by learning what programs or policies work to stop violence and to keep it from reoccurring. We also need research that follows-up victims and perpetrators of partner violence to document the impact of treatment on the pattern and course of the violent behavior over time. Existing research currently focuses on characteristics of the perpetrator that increase the risk for violent behavior. Future research should also consider characteristics of the victim and victim strengths that may point the way to important interventions for victims and children who witness violence. Finally, more research efforts are needed to identify and understand the social and community impact of partner violence.
To summarize, future research should consider:
While the research conducted over the past 20 years has added much to our understanding of partner violence and especially documented its incidence and prevalence, as this review indicates, there are many unanswered questions that will require the attention of researchers and practitioners from a diverse array of disciplines and backgrounds.
References
Kaufman Kantor, G., Jasinski, J., & Aldorondo, E. (1994). Sociocultural status and incidence of marital violence in Hispanic families. Violence and Victims, 9(3), 207-222.
Steinmetz, S.K., & Straus, M.A. (Ed.). (1974). Violence in the family. New York: Harper & Row.
Straus, M.A., & Gelles, R.J. (1990). Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Straus, M.A., Gelles, R.J., & Steinmetz, S. (1980). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family. Garden City, NJ: Anchor Press.
Return to
NNFR/USAF Partner Violence page
Return
to NNFR homepage