Inter Generational Theory Of Abuse Psychology Essay

Inter Generational Theory Of Ab engagement Psychology demonstrateThe inter-generational theory of do by is a widely accepted nonion by professionals and lay people alike. This theory suggests that children exposed to physical, emotional or internal crime will subject their offspring to a unrivalled of these forms of maltreatment. However, the certainty that undermines this theory is in addition large to ignore. The evidence that supports this hypothesis refers to mistreat children comely juvenile delinquents and the identification of the child with the curser. Methodological problems, generalizability issues and low severeness of the experiments conducted undermined the plausibility and truth in the hypothesis. Another strong factor is the shelterive factors and predisposition of ill-treat children, who break the pedal of demoralise which is more common than thought. In this essay I will discuss the evidence both for and against the hypothesis.Kaufman and Zigler (1 987) shew that the papers written on studies of inter-generational abuse assert validity without priggish evidence because their primary sources of randomness ar unreliable. These studies rely largely on case studies, sanction records, clinical interviews, self-report questionnaires. An example of case studies was those mostly do with parents whose children were in hospital for non-accidental injuries (Kaufman Zigler, 1987). Most of these parents reported histories of abuse, yet because in that location were methodological problems (such as limited control measures) the generalizability of the findings is not possible. Agency records in any case had numerous of the same limitations. The re subjectative samples, comparison subjects and formal definitions of abuse differed. The omissions in agency records were rarely recorded. Clinical interviews are valuable for generating hypotheses about inter-generational theory but they lacked comparison groups and definitions were far from legal criteria (Kaufman Zigler, 1987). Self-report questionnaires lacked the exploration of the statistical relationships among determinants of abuse (Kaufman Zigler, 1987). Egeland Jacobvitzs discovered that the history of abuse could not be separated from influence of poverty, breed and social isolation on parenting demeanour. They also say that the broader the definition is, the greater the apparent link becomes in the inter-generational hypothesis indeed make the validity of the collected data low (Kaufman Zigler, 1987).According to Langeland and Dijkstra (1995) the variations of definitions of abuse cause ample variation of the rates of transmission system. They concur that due to bad methodologies making generalizations from the information is problematic. They also highlight the need to study both mothers and fathers (because they make clinical and theoretical relevance), which isnt always the case. Langeland and Dijkstra (1995) show how umteen studies onl y examine angiotensin converting enzyme child (e.g. Goodwin et al., 1981 Main Goldwyn, 1984 Altemeier et al., 1986 Egeland et al., 1988 Pianta et al., 1989 Burkett, 1991 Boyer Fine, 1992 Caliso Milner, 1992 Herzog et al. 1992 as cited in Langeland and Dijkstra 1995) and suggest researchers need to check at wider family context (that is brothers, father, grandparents, aunts and cousins).Widom (1989) highlights that the methodological problems play a role in the misrepresentation and overestimation of the actual statistics related to the inter-generational theory. In Widoms review of the literature, she also emphasizes the over dependence on self-report, inadequate documenting of childhood abuse, and the infrequent use of control groups. According to Widom researchers should make a spender distinction between abused and neglected children because the differences in consequences are significant the information collected overlaps and distorts the results. Widom thus suggests the need for better rating scales for studies, and the need for a greater methodological awareness and refinement.Protective Factors and PredispositionsKaufman and Zigler (1987) observed that some parents (with a history of abuse) became disgraceful parents whereas other did not. Hunter and Kilstrom (as cited in Kaufman Zigler, 1987) attributed this to the individuals having extensive social support (e.g. therapy) fewer undecided feelings about being pregnant, they were openly angry about the abuse they endured, and their babies were healthier. Another study by Egeland and Jacobvitz (as cited in Kaufman Zigler, 1987) imbed mediating factors to be that one parent/foster parent was loving and caring towards the abused child, the abused had an emotionally supportive spouse, they also had fewer current stressful emotional state events and they had a greater awareness of history of abuse and had come to price with it. This study provides information on the interrelationships (etiology of abuse and other influences) of the many determinants of a parents behavior.Langeland and Dijkstra (1995) also install that many abused children manage to break the rhythm of inter-generational abuse. They emphasize the factors that protect/buffer the transmission. Belsky (1980, as cited in Langeland and Dijkstra, 1995) says there are multiple factors at work that cause abuse such as the individual ( spirit of parents) familial (the home/family environment e.g. marital relationship) community (formal lax social structures e.g. neighborhood and other family) cultural (societal expectations and attitudes). However, Belsky (1980, as cited in Langeland and Dijkstra) says the interaction of risk and protective factors are important because they effect likelihood of transmission of abuse between generations.Garbarino Gilliam (1980, as cited in Widom, 1989) reiterates that other life events or the predisposition of the child (e.g. natural abilities, physiological predispositions, a nd social supports) will protect them from the effects of abuse.Deliquency and IdentificationKaufman and Zigler (1987) commented on the many other factors that contribute to abuse. Children whitethorn find themselves in similar social or relationship conditions (or bewilder long lasting effects of child abuse) that led their parents to be opprobrious to them as children and cope in the same way.Quinton and Rutter (1988) reiterate that abuse occurs for many reasons namely substantial social and environmental hardships and a constellation of psycho-social difficulties. It is noted that children may have the same or similar situations as their parents and cycle continues because of the same outside influences. They found that abuse can prolong to personality disorders, alcoholism, and criminality all of which are associated with abuse. Sir Keith Joseph (1972, as cited in Quinton and Rutter, 1988) said woeful parenting is a central mechanism for encouraging inter-generational tra nsmission of family problems (that is children learn from their parents).work force that were imprisoned for violence against children were found to have come from large families where abuse was common (Gibbens Walker, 1956 Scott, 1973, as cited in Quinton and Rutter, 1988) and women accused with child-battering were associated with unhappy, loveless and accidental injurytic childhoods (Lukiarowitz, 1971 as cited in Quinton and Rutter, 1988). Quinton and Rutter (1988) noted that the vulnerabilities deriving from exposure to poor parenting can lead to them being abusive (e.g. depression is known to be associated with abuse).Widom (1989) emphasized that the immediate consequences of child abuse are physical injuries or emotional trauma but that the emotional and developmental scars may predominate thus confidential information to the likelihood of inter-generational transmission of abuse.McCall Shields (1986, as cited in Widom, 1989) highlighted the context of violence in cultu re. Accordingly the approval of such behaviors legitimizes and reinforces the use of violence (Gil, 1973 Huggius Straus, 1980 Steinmetz, 1977 as cited in Widom, 1989) which in turn instigates the high degree of betrothal of violence in culture (R.A. Stark McEvoy, 1970 as cited in Widom, 1989). It is therefore not too difficult to deduce that learning to become violent through ruler childrearing experiences might be transmitted from generation to generation (Goldstein, 1986 as cited in Widom, 1989). The social learning of a child and the witnessing/victims of physical and emotional assault become a model for the child that violence is appropriate in the home (Bandua, 1973 Feshbach, 1980 as cited in Widom, 1989). Straus et al. (1980, as cited in Widom, 1989) suggest that severally generation of abusive parents learns to be violent by being a participant in a violent home. Other evidence suggests that abuse leads to aggressive behavior, depression, withdrawal and self-punishing b ehavior all of which lead to abusive behavior which would suggest that the cycle of abuse can be and is transmitted. It is also suggested that abuse may lead to becoming an abusive parent, a delinquent, or a violent criminal (Widom, 1989).McCord (1983) did a study on abused, neglected, rejected, and loved boys. She found that 45% of the abused and neglected boys ended up being convicted for sombre crimes, becoming alcoholics, suffering a mental illness, and/or died unusually young. Their parents were found to have been similar. Other researchers Rocklin and Lavetts (1987) research has demonstrated that identity formation (process by which a child incorporates aspects of a significant other) adds to inter-generational transmission. This is because they form these identifications as a coping mechanism rather than actual identity. However, the identification can persist and is often seen to be used later in life.ConclusionIt is clear that being abused puts people at risk of being abu sive towards their offspring but it is not the only factor and the path is not direct. There are many protective factors that buffer the adverse effects of abuse, which often breaks the cycle of abuse. The methodological limitations of most experiments (and lack of control measures) have lead to misleading representations of the statistics, and the inter-generational transmission of false facts (Widom, 1989). However the persistent acceptance of the inter-generational theory seems to have undermined many studies as well. The risk factors and society in which a child learns from seems to cause abuse and the transmission from generation to generation. In conclusion abuse is not necessarily transmitted from generation to generation, because there are many protective factors and the path is not direct. The past and present influence the likelihood of abused children becoming abusive parents, not right the possibility of the inter-generational abuse occurring.