This page consists of my research and papers relating to IPV, Pornography, Divorce and Abortion

An Overview of Domestic Violence from within the three perspectives of Behavioral Science

Reid Albee

Abstract

Domestic violence is a growing area of research and concern among the American public, psychologists and researchers. The three prospectives of Behavioral Science, Anthropological, Sociological and Psychological, are used to demonstrate past and current research and theories defining the problem and treatment of domestic violence.
 

General Overview of Domestic Violence

Domestic violence, often referred to as partner abuse, assault, or spouse abuse, is defined as violence between adults who are intimates, regardless of their marital status, living arrangements, or sexual orientations (ABA, 1996). This includes minor aggressive acts of throwing, shoving, and slapping; as well as major aggressive acts of beatings, forced sex, threats with a deadly weapon, and homicide (Straus and Gelles, 1986). Females are targets of domestic violence, sexual abuse, elder abuse, and adolescent physical abuse more often than males. (Earls et al., 1991).

Anthropological Perspective
History

Domestic violence has a long standing history in both American and other cultures (Walker, 1986). Being a target of spousal assault has been considered a woman's lot for thousands of years. Walker's research indicates that wives who were not beaten were considered fortunate. Women were taught how to behave in order to avoid being beaten. This tradition of domestic violence blended with religious beliefs and legal rights holding men responsible for the deeds of their wives and children, and making it their duty to discipline those who were viewed as disobedient. In fact the "rule of thumb" expression comes from an old common-law statute that imposed a limitation on men's disciplinary authority over 'their' women by enjoining husbands from hitting wives with a stick wider than their thumbs. Given the long traditions that legitimized male supremacy, it is not surprising that family violence has been closely linked with discrimination against women. The substantial achievements of women in obtaining social justice and equality over the last decade have prompted analyses of women's relationships both inside and outside the home. Women's groups have brought domestic violence to the attention of lawmakers, professional service workers, and the general public (ABA, 1996). They have identified spousal assault and rape as forms of family violence.

Existence and Prevalence in American Culture

Domestic violence exists in all social classes and ethnic and racial groups in the United States (Straus and Gelles, 1989). Although, both men and women are targets of domestic violence, women are far more likely to be injuredthan men during spousal assault (American Medical Association, 1992). There is a cycle involved wherein people who commit acts of violence toward their partners are often those who were themselves beaten or who witnessed violence against their mothers as children (Steinmetz et al., 1986).. There is also thought to be an intergenerational cycle of abuse. Those persons who were abused as children often abuse their own children, or their intimate partners.

Prevalence

As an academic topic of research, domestic violence has only been studied for about 20 years (ABA, 1996). Nonfatal spousal or partner assault occurs in about one out of six homes in the United States every year(Straus & Gelles, 1986).. Two million women are severally injured by their partners every year. Serious husband-to-wife violence, where the abused is severely injured or killed, occurs in about thirty of every 1000 married couples. Assaulted partners are at high risk for repeated injury from spousal assault (U.S. Department of Justice 1991). Between 1976 and 1985 there were 16,595 deaths resulted from partner abuse. More than half of the women who die as a result of homicide are killed by partners or ex-partners (Browne and Williams, 1989). Spousal homicides are responsible for nearly nine percent of homicides in the United States with Caucasian wives 1.3 times more likely to be killed than white husbands and with black husbands 1.3 times more likely to be killed than black wives, according to Straus and Gelles. Unmarried women during dating or cohabitation and separated or divorced women have been reported to be at even greater risk of severe injury by their current or, in the cases of separated or divorced women, their estranged partners, than remarried women (Ellis, 1989; Gaquin, 1978 Makepeace, 1986).
 

Sociological Perspective

A sociological conflict perspective views domestic violence as seen in terms of dominance and control (Quinn et al., 1984). It is a means by which men assert their power over women and adults reinforce their power over children. Often, despite the inequities in domestic violence cases, victims are often accused of 'asking for' or even provoking the abusive behavior, often referred to as "Blaming the victim". Conflict theorists emphasize that blaming victims is just another reflection of the power of men over women.

Domestic violence intervention may draw upon the interactionist approach of sociology by attempting to bolster the self-esteem of victims. Many intervention programs today avoid informing victims what to do. (Andersond and Rouse, 1988). Instead, they help victims to assess their internal strengths and provide them with information about resources and treatment programs. Typical counsellors and therapists believe that the victim should not blame themselves or excuse the offender. When working with perpetrators, councilors often encourage them to accept responsibility for their actions, and to learn about control and gender issues and non-abusive ways of communicating their feelings.

Straus (1989) estimates that at least eight million people in the United States are assaulted by family members each year. He suggests that people in this country are too tolerant of domestic violence because of a common feeling that what goes on behind closed doors is nobody's business. (Kantrowitz, 1988).
 

Psychological Perspective
Social Learning Theory and The Domestic Violence Cycle

Although there are many theories that attempt to explain violence and aggression, social learning theory holds that humans learn social behavior by imitating others. Bandura, (Bandura & others, 1961) who is the leading proponent of this theory, believes that humans learn aggression by experiencing its payoffs and by observing others. Children of abusive parents who either abuse each other, or their children use similar aggression when dealing with others. These children were often disciplined with swearing, slapping and beatings. The children model aggression as a means to dealing with others. (Patterson and others, 1982). Social Learning Theory may be applied to the earliest beginnings of the domestic violence cycle, in that children of abusive parents model this behavior through childhood and adult life. Judges are beginning to realize that children first seen as victims in domestic violence cases return to court years later as juvenile offenders and adult criminal defendants (American Bar Association Web Page, 1997). Law enforcement officials report that the largest number of calls they must respond to are domestic violence cases.

Epstien (1996) supports social learning theory in his report on the effects of children of abusive relationships. Many battered women believe that their children do not know about the violence that takes place in their homes according to Epstien. Children old enough to talk can usually describe the violence in graphic detail. They hear the violence, and see its effects. They often experience the stress of living in fear that one parent will be hurt or killed by the other.

Epstien (1996) states that90% percent of kids witness their father's acts of violence against their mothers. He believes that some fathers deliberately arrange for the children to witness the violence. Many children get caught in the struggle as they try to intervene and protect their mothers from the assault, and he supports social learning theory by saying that young children learn violence by mimicking the use or threat of violence themselves. They find that this is an effective, immediate way to get what they want. Epstien feels that domestic violence teaches boys that violence is the way they are supposed to deal with life. You discharge your frustration by hitting, and its okay if that someone is a woman. He goes even further by positing that young boys, as a result of their conditioning develop a sense that women are not worthy of respect. He says that boys who witness abuse exhibit more aggression as children, and are more likely to become domestic violence perpetrators when they become men.

Psychological Characteristics of Victims and Perpetrators

Both victims and perpetrators of domestic violence fit into profiles (Walker, 1979). Battered women often display the following psychological profile:
 
 

Same Sex Partner Violence

Domestic violence also occurs in same sex relationships. Bologna, Waterman, and Dawson (1987) discovered a high incidence of abuse in their survey of a self-selected sample of 174 lesbians. Twenty six percent of those surveyed reported having been subjected to at least one act of sexual violence: 59.8% had been victims of physical violence and 81% had experienced verbal or emotional abuse. At the same time, 68% of the respondents reported that they had used violence against their current or most recent partner and had been victimized by a partner. Similarly, in a survey of a nonrandom sample of 1,099 lesbians, Lie and Gentlewarrior (1997) found that 52% of the respondents had been abused by a female lover or partner and that 30% admitted having abused a female lover or partner. Of those who had been victims of abuse, more than half (51.5%) reported that they also had been abusive toward their partners.

Battered Men

The first reaction upon hearing about the topic of battered men, for many people, is that of incredulity. Battered husbands are a topic for jokes (such as the cartoon image of a woman chasing her husband with a rolling-pin). One researcher noted that wives were the perpetrators in 73% of the depictions of domestic violence in newspaper comics (Saenger 1963).

In 1974, a study was done which compared male and female domestic violence. In that study, it was found that 47% of husbands had used physical violence on their wives, and 33% of wives had used violence on their husbands (Gelles, 1974). Half of the respondents in this study were selected from either cases of domestic violence reported to the police, or those identified by the social service agency. Also in 1974, a study was released showing that the number of murders of women by men (17.5% of total homicides) was about the same as the number of murders of men by women (16.4% of total homicides). This study (Curtis 1974), however, showed that men were three times as likely to assault women as vice-versa. These statistics came from police records.

The Domestic Violence Cycle

Walker (1984) described a sequence of interactional events that lead to domestic violence. Although described in terms of battered women, this model is also pertinent for battered men.

Phase 1
At first minor battering incidents occur. The battered partner usually attempts to calm the batterer, often using techniques that have been successful in the past. victim believes that she is doing everything to prevent the perpetrators anger from escalating. More often than not, the batterer interprets his partner's behavior as an acceptance of the abuse. The battered partner is powerless to prevent the behavior from recurring and psychological humiliation continues and increases.

Phase 2
The batterer's rage is out of control. Severe injuries occur. The battered partner often senses the incontestability of this phase, cannot tolerate her terror and anxiety, and knows that Phase 3, calm, will follow. She provokes the batterer into exploding, "to get it over with." Police are usually called in this phase, but most partners report that acute battering increases after the police leave. Only the batterer can end Phase 2, which may last hours or days. At the end of this phase, women are relieved that it is over and grateful that it was not worse. They usually do not seek medical care, partly to deny the seriousness of their injuries, and partly to appease the batterer.

Phase 3
The batterer behaves in a charming and loving manner. He begs for forgiveness and promises never to batter again. The battered woman either believes or wants to believe that he is sincere. She is reinforced for staying in the relationship. The battered woman fantasizes that this is the "good man," the man she married, the man she loved. At this time it is usually very difficult for her to decide to leave him. It is in this phase that the family is usually referred for mental health intervention.

Conclusion

Behavioral Scientists are drawing on the three perspectives of the discipline in an effort to discover the nuts and bolts of why domestic violence is so prevalent in American society. More recently research is heading towards therapy models that deal with effective treatment of abusers. (Walker,1984) There is a vast array of services and treatment models for the abused, but now efforts are being directed toward prevention, which involves the direct treatment of the abuser. (See PsyMod paper: Basic and Applied Research: Therapy Models for Treatment of Male Abusers)
 
 

References:

     American Bar Association's Coalition On Domestic Violence American Medical Association (1992). American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Ed.). Washington, DC.

Anderson, C., & Rouse, L., (1988). Intervention in cases of woman battering: An application of symbolic interactionism and critical theory. Clinical Sociology Review, 6, 134-137.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A., (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582.

Bologna (et al). (1987). Violence in gay male an lesbian relationships: Implications for practitioners and policy makers. Paper presented at the Third National Conference for Family Violence Researchers, Durham, NH.

Browne, A., & Williams K. R. (1989). Exploring the effects of resource availability and the likelihood of female-perpetrated homicides. Law and Society Review. 23,75-94.

Curtis, L.A. (1974). Criminal violence: National patterns and behavior. Lexington MA: Lexington Books.

Earls, F., Slaby, R. G., & Spirito A. (1991). Draft of a position paper. Presented at the panel on violence prevention at the third national injury control conference, Denver, CO.

Epstien, B. A. (1997).Kids and violence

Gaquin, D. A. (1983).Spouse abuse: Data from the national crime survey.

Kantrowitz, B. (1988). And thousands more. Newsweek, 112, 58-59.

Lie & Gentlewarrior. (1997) Intimate violence in lesbian relationships. Journal of Social Science Research, 15, 41-59.

Makepeace J .M. (1986). Life events, stress, and courtship violence. Journal of Applied Family and Child Studies 32:101-109.

Patterson, G. R., Chamberlain, P., & Reid, J. B. (1982). A comparative evaluation of parent training procedures. Behavior Therapy, 13, 638-650.

Quinn, K, Roskin, P., Pruitt, & M. (1984). Cultural Violence: There are many causes. Springfield, Ill: Springfield Coalition against Sexual Assault and the Illinois Coalition against Domestic Violence.

Saenger, G. (1963).Male and female relation in the american comic strips" in the funnies: An american idiom (M. White & R.H. Abel, Eds.). Glencoe IL : The Free Press. Glencoe IL

Steinmetz, S. K. (1988). The battered husband syndrome. Victimology 2, (1977-1978), 499.

Steinmetz, S. K.(1988) Husband battering in handbook of family violence. V. Van Hasselt et al. Eds.). New York: Plenum Press, N.Y., p. 233-246

Steinmetz, S. (1981). Wifebeating-husband beating: A comparison of the use of physical violence between spouses to resolve marital fights. In Women: A Psychosociological Study of Domestic Violence. (M.M. Ray, Ed.). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1989). Physical violence in american families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence. Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

Walker, L. (1984) Battered women and learned helplessness. Victimology: An International Journal, 2, 525-534
 

Current and Past Findings in Domestic Violence Research and Therapy

Reid Albee

Abstract

Domestic Violence is in the forefront of social problems receiving grants and federal and private moneys for the development of new research and therapy. This widespread social problem has only been researched for the past twenty years, (APA, 1997) with most research and therapy development concentrating on the victims of domestic violence. Realizing that more work must be put into prevention, several leading organizations have begun to research ways of treating domestic violence perpetrators. Among these are the American Psychological Association's (APA) Commission on Domestic Violence, which is a Presidential Commission.  There are many theories abut why domestic violence occurs. This paper examines both basic research and theory, and the latest applied research currently ongoing.
 

Is Domestic Violence a Learned Behavior?

Many theorists have applied Bandura's Social Learning Theory to the problem of domestic violence, more specifically applying to the mechanics of the battering cycle. Social learning theory holds that humans learn behaviors by observing them in others (Bandura and others, 1961; Epstien, 1997). Parents who abuse each other, and/ or their children, are teaching these behaviors to their offspring according to one study (Patterson and others, 1982). Children who were disciplined with swearing and beatings modeled aggression as a coping mechanism when relating with others. Often, this pattern of abusive coping is carried into adulthood, thus perpetuating the cycle. The basic research of Bandura and others in the Behavioral and Social Sciences may have been the roots of much of past and current research devoted to the nurture side of the nature-nurture debate. Patterson and others certainly continued Bandura's research and applied it directly to the domestic violence learning cycle. Other research continues to investigate the social learning aspect.

Nature vs. nurture is a much debated topic, and one that receives much research in the social sciences. Is domestic violence "in the genes," or is it a result of environmental factors? Certainly, Bandura's social learning theory and Patterson's and others research showing the perpetuation of the domestic violence cycle, is environmental in nature.
 

Current Research

The APA has called for new research in domestic violence. In a position paper authored by Sara Martin of the APA's Monitor, the APA's finding is that psychologists feel that there is not enough behavioral and social science research being done on triggers for violence and how to treat it. The Human Capital Initiative (HCI) has identified questions considered key to the development of violence prevention and treatment. HCI is a coalition of dozens of organizations, including the APA, that informs policy-makers about contributions behavioral and social scientists can make in solving the nation's social problems.

HCI has worked for two years with more than 70 experts in violence. HCI has called its agenda Reducing Violence: A Research Agenda. This initiative calls for more basic research on the causes of violence. HCI has made the following research recommendations to the APA:

Research on four factor classes that are believed to influence a person's capacity to commit violence has been advised by HCI and the APA;

Genetic Research Recommendations;

The role that the neurotransmitter serotonin plays in aggression and violence;
The relationship between testosterone and aggression or dominance;
The role of 'arousability' in the development of aggression and violent behavior;
The role of neurotoxins and traumatic brain injury; and
The role of biological inheritance;
Environmental Research Proposals;
The role of inadequate parental discipline;
The specific elements of poverty that promote socialization to violence;
The kinds of protective factors that inoculate some children against being socialized to violence;
The process through which peers influence aggression in each other;
The mechanisms through which the media promote societal violence.
Cognitive Factors Proposals
How parents, peers, community and culture mold the scripts, beliefs and attitudes that influence violent behavior in youth;
How these scripts and beliefs interact with the experience of a particular moment to cause a person to behave violently;
The extent to which the kind of thinking characteristic of more aggressive youth is linked to early temperament or cognitive abilities.

Other areas of HCI's agenda call for research on how substance abuse, SES, and gangs may contribute to causes of domestic violence.

Types of Families at Risk

In 1997, the APA completed a study of domestic violence research that attempted to identify the kinds of families most at risk. The study, Violence and the Family, summarizes the state of research on domestic violence. Among the study's key findings is that intervention is needed to break patterns of family violence that are lifelong. Here again, the basic precept of social learning theory is brought into play as the study's findings demonstrate that being exposed to violence as a child, even as simply a witness, puts children at high risk of becoming a victim or perpetrator of abuse in adulthood.

The APA study identified families most at risk, and has recommended public policy changes. The study also suggested that communities coordinate efforts to stop family violence and create intervention programs. The study also recommends that presentence assessment be mandated for convicted abusers and that treatment of their victims be mandated. The proposal also recomends that schools make an effort to detect family violence and set up prevention programs. Other recommendations include routine screening for a history of victimization in standard medical and psychological examinations, and that research into family violence and training of therapists be expanded and better financed.
 

Current Therapy Problems

Many psychologists may not know how to assess an individual or situation for domestic violence and may cause the violence to become more brutal, if the therapists is using standard couples-therapy approaches (Harway, 1996). Harway's research found that many psychologists treat couples without ever determining whether or not there is violence in the relationship, indicating that 55 percent to 56 percent of couples in treatment for marital distress were violent, unknown to their therapist. Psychologists may use inappropriate treatments for couples that could further upset the power balance in a relationship and create new more serious violence.

Untrained therapists who don't know how to assess for domestic violence may use conjoint couples therapy, or other inappropriate therapy models according to Harway's (1996) research. These treatment approaches imply that there is equality of the couple, putting blame on the victim implying that each contributes to creating problems. in the relationship. Battering continues because the behavior isn't related to the woman's actions.
 

Theories of Treatment and Prevention
Intervention May Play a Large Part In Treating Perpetrators

A recent study (Tolman and Edeson (1995), Studies Of Existing Small Group Programs for Batterers Review, revealed a consistent finding that many men curtail abuse subsequent to interventions. These interventions can be of varying methods including arrest, incarceration, and therapy. Fifty-three pecent to 85% of interventions resulted in cessation of violence according to the study, but a lower percentage of success occurred in interventions with lengthier follow-ups. When success was based on reports of women victims rather than official arrest rates or men's self-reports, the success of intervention was also diminished. Another contributing factor is that many social service interventions experience high levels of attrition by offenders. This has the effect of diluting their overall effectiveness (Deschner, 1984). The scarcity of experimental research is a methodological shortcoming of the existing literature on group treatment methods. This shortcoming leaves open the question of whether or not intervention itself is responsible for men changing their abusive behaviors. The study suggests that a man's propensity to abuse his female partner and, therefore, his subsequent abusive behavior, may have several differant determinants
 

Theory of Planned Behavior

Ajzen's theory of Planned Behavior (Ajsen,1988; Ajsen, 1991) attempts to explain why men may change abusive patterns and behaviors. The perpetrator's own evaluations of outcomes of his abuse of his partner plays a role. The theory of Planned Behavior suggests that decisions to perform a behavior are determined by one's own intentions to carry out the behavior. Intentions are motivational factors that affect an individual's performance of any given behavior. These are in turn influenced by three factors.

One factor includes subjective norms, referring to an individual's perception of social pressure to perform or not to perform a behavior, and attitudes toward the behavior, which is the individual's evaluation of performing a specific behavior. A person's perception of how likely a given outcome will occur plays a major role here. A third factor is perceived behavioral control, or an individual's perceived ease or difficulty in performing a given behavior. This concept draws on Bandura's work on self-efficacy ( Bandura,1977; Bandura, 1982).
 

Does Being Abused As A Child Play A Part?

Many theorists believe that being abused as a child, plays a major role in the continuation of abuse patterns throughout the abuser's life. One study (Lisak, et al. ,1996) contradicts this belief. Lisak sampled a group of 595 men who were administered self-report assessments of childhood sexual and physical abuse, perpetration history, gender rigidity and emotional constriction. Including noncontact forms of sexual abuse, 11% of the men reported sexual abuse alone, 17% reported physical abuse alone, and 17% reported sexual and physical abuse. Of the 257 men in the sample who reported some form of childhood abuse, 38% reported some form of perpetration themselves, either sexual or physical; of the 126 perpetrators, 70% reported having been abused in childhood. Lisak concluded that most perpetrators had been abused, but most abused men did not perpetrate. Both sexually and physically abused men who perpetrated manifested significantly more gender rigidity and emotional constriction than abused perpetrators. Men who reported abuse, but did not perpetrate, demonstrated significantly less gender rigidity, less homophobia and less emotional constriction than nonabused men.
 

Abuse and Gender Rigidity

Finkelhor (1986) attempts to link gender rigidity with violence. The hypothesized relationships linking abuse, gender rigidity, empathy deficits and perpetration are not expected to apply equally to all perpetrators of interpersonal violence. The researcher's goal was to examine two relationships: that between abuse (physical and sexual), gender rigidity and perpetration; and that between abuse, emotional constriction and perpetration. Finkelhor's model predicts that abused men who perpetrate will score higher than abused men who do not perpetrate on measures of gender rigidity and emotional constriction. The study conceptualized two developmental pathways diverging from a history of childhood abuse. In one path, the male abuse victim may appear conflicted and preoccupied by gender identity issues. This preoccupation may indicate a lack of conformity to gender norms necessitated by his coping with the legacy of his abuse. In the other path, the male abuse victim strives to be stereotypically masculine, and must therefore suppress the high magnitude emotional states that are the legacy of his abuse. The suppression required to hold at bay the emotional legacy of abuse may also suppress his capacity to empathize with others. Having sealed himself off from his own pain, the perpetrator may also suppress his capacity to feel the pain of others, and thereby diminish a crucial inhibition against interpersonal violence. Simultaneously, his rigid gender conformity may accentuate his reliance on anger as a culturally acceptable outlet for his emotions, again increasing his propensity for aggressive interpersonal behavior.
 

Conclusion

There is much basic research in the literature of the Behavioral Sciences. The current trend of applied research into current, established theories, and the development of new theory and treatment models is ongoing. The emphasis of this new research is toward prevention of domestic abuse, and towards treatment of the perpetrator (APA, 1997). Past research and models of therapy have focused on intervention and treatment of the abused. Perpetrators were dealt with by the police and the judicial system, with little in the way of successful strategies for recovery. Current research is shifting towards a better understanding, and thus successful treatment models for perpetrators of domestic violence (ABA, 1997)..
 

References:

     Ajzen, I. (1988). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. Chicago, IL: Dorsey Press.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior: Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 50, 179-2.

American Bar Association's Coalition On Domestic Violence.

American Psychological Association. (1997). Apa releases study on family violence. APA Monitor.

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.

Bandura, A., (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-147.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A., (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582.

Deschner, J. (1984). The hitting habit: Anger control for battering couples. N.Y.: Free Press.

Epstien, B. A., (1997). Kids and violence, The doctor's office.

Finkelhor, D. (1986). A sourcebook on child sexual abuse. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Harway, M., (1996). Family therapy. Paper presented at the meeting of the family therapy mini convention. California Family Study Center, North Hollywood, Ca.

Lisak, D., Hopper, J., & Song, P. (1996). Factors in the cycle of violence: Gender rigidity and emotional constriction. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 9,721-743.

Martin, S. (1997). Apa among those calling for more domestic violence research. APA Monitor.

Patterson, G. R., Chamberlain, P., & Reid, J. B. (1982). A comparative evaluation of parent training procedures. Behavior Therapy, 13, 638-650.

Tolman, R.M. & Edleson, J.L. (1995). Intervention for men who batter: A review of research. In S. Stith & M.A. Straus (Eds.) Understanding partner violence: Prevalence, causes, consequences, and solutions (pp. 262-274). Minneapolis, MN: National Council on Family Relations.
 

Reid D. Albee

Intimate Partner Violence is prevalent in cultures of most of the world. What causes IPV? How long has it existed? Is it biological in nature, or is it more a matter of nurture and social learning? This paper examines sociocultural issues of IPV and examines biological, structural-funtionalist, and symbolic perspectives of the dynamics of IPV. Theories on the causes of domestic violence provide a framework for understanding and responding to this phenomenon. Early research on the causes of partner abuse (Gelles & Straus, 1978) identified fifteen theories, organized into three broad categories: intra-individual theory, social psychological theory, and sociocultural theory (Bersani & Chen, 1988). This paper will explore the existing sociocultural theories explaining IPV and explore the sociobiological, social-funtionalist and symbolic explanations of IPV.

Dynamics of abusive relationships

Before the various Sociocultural theories can be examined it is important to examine the dynamics of IPV. A cycle of violence is often discussed as a central component of battered woman syndrome and the dynamics of IPV. The cycle, first described by Walker (1979), includes a period of tension building usually followed by violence. The batterer expresses remorse, and afterward a relative calm may ensue. The cycle is reactivated after a period when tensions increase or stressors resurface. There is an assumption underlying the cycle theory that all partner violence increases in frequency and severity over time. Most evidence describing the cycle is clinical and anecdotal, or based on shelter populations.  IPV that is relentless, and cyclical resulting in often serious physical injury, or becoming progressively more severe over time may not be characteristic of the majority of intimate violence reported in general population surveys of families. (Johnson, 1995). Dutton and Starzomski (1993) suggested that borderline personality disorder may account for the intermittent abusive rage of batterers described by the cycle theory of abuse.

Based on his clinical observations, Douglas (1991), found that in the early stages of the violence cycle, periods still include good times and positive feelings between intimate partners. Over time the pattern of conflict becomes set, recurring issues between partners are unresolved and are frequently replayed, and then the intensity of conflict increases. The ongoing violence erodes the relationship and any positive aspects of the relationship diminish. Next according to Douglas is the severe stage in which violence is "deliberate, dangerous, premeditated" and there is no relief from punishing, dominating behaviors, extreme jealousy and criticisms. The husband may become increasingly possessive and controlling, and may isolate the woman from her family and friends (Douglas, 1991; Frieze & Browne, 1989; Walker, 1979). The forms and patterns of physical violence may not be the same in all families. A pattern of violence in which the severity escalates progressively over the course of the relationship may, in fact, represent one of the more severe and less common forms that IPV takes.

Social Funtionalist Perspective
Male dominance, control, family power and societal norms

The history of male aggression towards females is centuries old, and at various times has been sanctioned by the law of the land. Only in the last twenty years has research and awareness increased. The Centers for Disease Control have awarded millions of dollars in grants to researchers and community health centers to research, combat, and educate the population about IPV. Domestic violence has a long-standing history in both American and other cultures (Walker, 1986). Being a target of spousal assault has been considered a woman's lot for thousands of years. Walker's research indicates that wives who were not beaten were considered fortunate. Women were taught how to behave in order to avoid being beaten. This tradition of domestic violence blended with religious beliefs and legal rights holding men responsible for the deeds of their wives and children, and making it their duty to discipline those who were viewed as disobedient. In fact the "rule of thumb" expression comes from an old common-law statute that imposed a limitation on men's disciplinary authority over 'their' women by enjoining husbands from hitting wives with a stick wider than their thumbs

Evidence suggests that the way the family unit is organized, male dominated versus equality between partners, may play an important role in family functioning (Coleman & Straus, 1986; Straus, et al., 1980). Results from previous research suggest that wife beating is more common in households where power is concentrated in the hands of the husband or male partner (Coleman & Straus, 1990; Levinson, 1989; Straus, et al., 1980; Yllo & Straus, 1990). In these households, physical violence may be used to legitimize the dominant position of the male. At the societal level, cultural norms supporting unequal family power structures or traditional gender roles may help to explain variations in rates of spousal violence. A leading hypotheses is that males are socialized to use violence in order to maintain control. Aggression can also emerge from frustration over an inability to control the female partner (Fagan & Browne, 1994). Normative approval of violence is also suggested as a risk factor for spousal violence. The research literature has demonstrated a significant relationship between self reported approval of the use of violence toward a spouse and actually using violence (Kaufman Kantor, Jasinski, & Aldorondo, 1994).

Other research on  individualistic concepts of dominance and power found that higher levels of dominance were associated with higher levels of violence (DePuy, 1995; Hamby & Sugarman, 1996). Studies comparing wife batterers with non-assaultive men, found that abusive men demonstrated a higher need for power than non abusive men (Dutton & Strachan, 1987). One explanation for this phenomenon may be that men who feel powerless because of low self-esteem, or who feel little control over others, or life events have a high need for power. Another mechanism is suggested by Dutton and Strachan (Dutton & Strachan, 1987). They hypothesized that men who view intimacy with women as dangerous, threatening and uncontrollable can become highly anxious and angry. The research suggest that these feelings of psychological discomfort may then lead to behaviors such as violence against the partner to control women and to reduce men's anxiety and anger.

Another dynamic of power and control was provided by Prince and Arias (1994). They assessed the relationship between control and self esteem among abusive and non-abusive men and found two relationship patterns. In the first, men had high self-esteem, but a poor sense of control over their life, and used violence to gain control. In the second pattern, men had low self esteem and felt powerless, but became violent in response to frustration. The researchers concluded that when different dimensions of control are examined--interpersonal control, on the one hand, and control over life events, on the other hand, the latter is a more significant predictor of assault.
Intergenerational IPV A history of violence in the family of origin is one of the most widely accepted markers for the occurrence of partner violence (Arias, 1984; Kalmuss, 1984; Straus, et al., 1980). Based on their initial study of 2,000 American families, Straus and associates (1980) presented strong empirical evidence for the social learning of violence within families. This would also take merit from Bandura's Social Learning Theory. These theories presume that the family is a training ground for violence, and that even the use of ordinary physical punishment such as spanking is associated with child abuse and wife beating. The two National Family Violence Surveys found increased rates of physical punishment, child abuse, and wife abuse by male and female partners subjected to high rates of physical punishment as children. Thus, multiple forms of family violence relate both across generations and within generations. Additionally, witnessing interparental violence is significantly associated with adult marital assaults. Studies based on clinical populations, usually battered women in shelters, support the national survey data and report high proportions of cross-generational violence in 42% to 81% of the families of male batterers (Bowker, 1983; Fagan, Stewart, & Hansen, 1983; Walker, 1984).
The paradigm believed to be involved in intergenerational transmission of IPV is the modeling of parental behaviors observed by children. (Arias, 1984; O'Leary, 1988). Stith and Farley's (1993) analysis expands on the dynamics of this process. Their analysis of male spousal violence in a treatment sample of male batterers indicates that observation of parental violence in childhood diminishes men's self esteem. In turn, they suggest, lowered self esteem increases marital stress, alcoholism, and approval of marital violence.

Cultural approval of marital violence was also directly influenced by the process of social learning in the study findings. Alexander, Moore and Alexander (1991) suggest that the development of attitudes towards women is also affected by having witnessed parental marital violence. Abuse in childhood or exposure to marital violence in the family of origin may similarly increase women's risks of victimization. Women who have been assaulted by their partners are twice as likely to have grown up in a violent home when compared to other women (Kaufman Kantor & Straus, 1989). Where intergenerational IPV exists, the mechanism may be that repeated attacks by parents can lead to damaged self-esteem and suppression of rage. These effects may be different for men and women, and may be compounded by the current life situation. Women who were harshly punished in childhood or who witnessed parental violence are more likely to be victimized as adults because they have low self esteem, and have learned that assaults from a loved one are legitimate, or because they are more likely to engage in mutual assaults with their spouses (Straus & Kaufman Kantor, 1994).

Sociocultural theories focus on the influence of social class factors on IPV and have attempted to integrate social structural and family processes (Kaufman Kantor, et al., 1994; Straus, 1973). Feminist explanations of the victimization of women are related to sociocultural factors. In the feminist view, the central factors that foster partner assaults include the historically male-dominated patriarchal social structure and socialization practices teaching men and women gender-specific roles (Pagelow, 1984). The major constructs in a feminist analysis of wife abuse are the structure of relationships in a male dominated (patriarchal) culture, power, and gender (Bograd, 1988). Given these findings, the units of analysis in feminist research may also be at the societal level, rather than the intrapersonal level. Social-psychological approaches have stressed social-learning through experience and exposure to violence in the family (Kalmuss, 1984; O'Leary, 1988; Straus, et al., 1980. O'Leary's (1988) social learning model of partner violence suggests five major variables, or risk factors for physical partner violence: 1) Violence in the family of origin; 2) Aggressive personality style; 3) Stress; 4) Alcohol use and abuse; and 5) Marital dissatisfaction. A major focus of our discussion in this chapter is on risk factors at the individual level, while we also take into account risk markers reflecting the three broad categories of IPV theory.

Sociobiological theories

 The contributions of biology  to IPV have not been the subject of much research. Few studies attempt to integrate biological, social and psychological perspectives (McKenry, Julian, & Gavazzi, 1995). One treatment program for batterers incorporates a diet for hypoglycemia (low blood sugar). Deschner (cited in Shupe and associates (1987), suggests a link between blood sugar level, and neurochemical imbalance leading to depression, rage and other emotional disturbances. Shupe and associates (1987)) caution that male batterers provided such treatment tend to use the hypoglycemia notion to rationalize their violence. Research on the biochemical links to aggression have considered other physiological pathways.

Lindman and associates (1992) conducted blood analysis of ethanol (an alcohol by- product), testosterone (hormone), cortisol (a hormone elevated in stress), and glucose (blood sugar) in 16 men arrested by police after spousal assault incidents. They found elevated levels of ethanol and glucose, low serum testosterone, and high cortisol levels in the arrested men compared to their sober state later. However, the researchers cautioned that cortisol may have been temporarily elevated by hangover or withdrawal stress, or that economic hardship and frequent marital conflicts can pose chronic stressors that increase cortisol levels. The authors conclude that there is little effect of intoxication because no differences were found in ethanol levels in a non-aggressive control group of men drinking in a bar. They also did not find effects of testosterone, but believe that their findings do not preclude the possibility that high testosterone levels contributed to aggressive coping styles before the onset of alcohol abuse patterns. Moreover, they concluded that aspects of the conflict, drinking and arrest situation were most likely responsible for changes in blood chemistry.

Elliot (1988) has acknowledged that neuropsychological causes of wife assault are often overlooked. Organic deficits can affect cognition, perceptions, emotions, and behaviors, but rarely relate these factors to the occurrence of IPV. Elliot's review of this literature identified a wide range of causes of neuropsychological disorders associated with persistent criminal aggressive behavior including borderline syndromes, schizophrenia, antisocial personality disorders, and brain defects. He also identified other important potential organic causes of violence including temporal lobe epilepsy, and head injuries. He hypothesized that organically based minimal brain dysfunction might be related to violent behavior because the associated cognitive problems can interfere with communication patterns. Elliot's data on the prevalence of Minimal Brain Dysfunction among batterers suggests that it was present in 40% of cases of episodic dyscontrol in the family.

A recent laboratory study examined the relationship between physiological indicators, emotionally aggressive behavior and general violence in batterers. Gottman and associates (1995) used changes in the male batterer's heart rate reactivity to differentiate types of violent men. Men designated as Type I batterers decreased their heart rates during marital conflicts while Type II men increased their heart rates during laboratory conflict situations. Type I men were described as more verbally aggressive towards their wives, more belligerent and violent towards others, rated as high in antisocial behavior and sadistic aggression, more often drug dependent and were lower in dependency than Type II men. Type I men were also more likely to have witnessed violence between their parents. On two year follow-up, none of the Type I marriages had ended. Type II men were not less violent in their marriages compared to Type I men, but they were not likely to be violent towards others. Interestingly, the separation-divorce rate for Type II men at two years was 27% while none of the Type I men had gotten separated or divorced. Gottman and associates (1995) suggest that the reason for the greater stability of the Type I marriages, a seemingly paradoxical finding in light of the sadistic aggression and drug dependence, is that firstly women are more fearful of leaving such men, and are less likely to express anger towards them. Secondly, the authors indicated that women married to Type I men are themselves, more often antisocial and may be more conditioned to a violent relationship than other women.

Symbolic Perspective

IPV is a subject that is often swept under the table and/or denied by the majority of society.  The negative symbols of shame, oppression, disgust, and fear often come into play.  There are no positive symbols associated with Intimate Partner Violence, yet there are many subtle symbolic themes played out by the entertainment industry daily.  Americans are bombarded with negative symbols of violence in movies, television, art and literature.  These include men beating on women, women beating on women, rape,  and sexual innuendo in advertising.

Power is certainly symbolic to men who take power by controlling people in their lives.  Much of the symbolism of IPV can be seen by taking a deeper look at the socio-functionalist theories above.  Power and control certainly come to the front when viewing IPV in symbolic terms.  Some feminists see the Church and organized patriarchy as symbols of power, control and men's dominance of women (Walker, 1983).  They believe that because of the sanctioned view of the church that men have a place over women, that women find themselves dominated by power, control and often violence to maintain control.

Conclusion

Current research is focusing on prevention and intervention in the IPV arena. Past research has focused on victims of IPV, while the current focus has shifted to prevention, school curriculum and batterers intervention. There seems to be little support for a biological cause of IPV.  The evidence for the validity of sociocultural and socio-psychological causes is overwhelming.   There are many explanations for the occurrence of IPV that go well beyond the three perspectives examined here.  There is much research in cognitive, social, personality and pathological psychology that is ongoing.  Western Society is taking the shame of domestic violence out of the closet and attempting to address the problem with research and education. There has been a mass movement of research dollars toward prevention research. Intervention programs for batterers have been adopted, curriculum in early childhood education is addressing IPV in some jurisdictions. Society seems to be fed up with the destruction to lives and resources that are associated with violence in families. Of all the social problems faced by modern civilization, IPV has had a history of being denied and swept under the carpet more than any other. IPV seems to be finally getting out of the closet and into the conscience  of society.
 

References

    Alexander, P. C., Moore, S., & Alexander, E. R., III (1991). What is transmitted in the intergenerational transmission of violence? Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 657-668.

Arias, I. (1984) A social learning theory explication of the intergenerational transmission of physical aggression in intimate heterosexual relationships. Doctoral dissertation, State University of New York.

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A., (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582.

Bowker, L. H. (1983). Beating wife beating. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Coleman, D. H., & Straus, M. A. (1986). Marital power, conflict, and violence in a nationally representative sample of American couples. Violence and Victims, 1(2), 141-157.

Coleman, D. H., & Straus, M. A. (1990). Marital power, conflict, and violence in a nationally representative sample of American couples. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families (pp. 287-304). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

DePuy, J. (1995). Power, control, and abuse against women in Swiss families. Paper presented at the Fourth International Family Violence Research Conference, Durham, NH.

Douglas, H. (1991). Assessing violent couples. Families in Society, 525-535.

Dutton, D. G., & Starzomski, A. J. (1993). Borderline personality in perpetrators of psychological and physical abuse. Violence and Victims, 8(4), 327-337.

Dutton, D. G., & Strachan, C. E. (1987). Motivational needs for power and spouse-specific assertiveness in assaultive and non-assaultive men. Violence and Victims, 2(3), 145-156.

Elliott, F. A. (1988). Neurological factors. In V. B. Van Hasselt, R. L. Morrison, A. S. Bellack, & M. Hersen (Eds.), Handbook of family violence (pp. 359-382). New York: Plenum Press.

Fagan, J., & Browne, A. (1994). Violence between spouses and intimates: Physical aggression between women and men in intimate relationships. In A. J. Reiss & J. A. Roth (Eds.), Understanding and preventing violence Vol. 3 (pp. 115-292). Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences.

Fagan, J. A., Stewart, D. K., & Hansen, K. V. (1983). Violent men or violent husbands? Background factors and situational correlates. In D. Finkelhor, R. J. Gelles, G. T. Hotaling, & M. A. Straus (Eds.), The dark side of families (pp. 49-68). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Frieze, I. H., & Browne, A. (1989). Violence in marriage. In L. Ohlin & M. Tonry (Eds.), Family violence (pp. 163-218). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Gottman, J. M., Jacobson, N. S., Rushe, R. H., Shortt, J. W., Babcock, J., LaTaillade, J. J., & Waltz, J. (1995). The relationship between heart rate reactivity, emotionally aggressive behavior, and general violence in batterers. Journal of Family Psychology, 9(3), 227-248.

Hamby, S. L., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). Power and partner violence. Paper presented at the One Hundred Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, Canada.

Johnson, D. (1979). Abuse and neglect: Not for children only. Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 5(4), 11-13.

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.

Lindman, R., von der Pahlen, B., Ost, B., & Eriksson, C. J. P. (1992). Serum testosterone, cortisol, glucose, and ethanol in males arrested for spouse abuse. Aggressive Behavior, 18(6), 393-400.

McKenry, P. C., Julian, T. W., & Gavazzi, S. M. (1995). Toward a biopsychosocial model of domestic violence. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 307-320.

Pagelow, M. D. (1984). Family violence. New York: Praeger.

Prince, J. E., & Arias, I. (1994). The role of perceived control and the desirability of control among abusive and nonabusive husbands. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 22(2), 126-134.

Shupe, A., Stacey, W. A., & Hazlewood, L. R. (1987). Violent men, violent couples: The dynamics of domestic violence. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.

Stith, S. M., & Farley, S. C. (1993). A predictive model of male spousal violence. Journal of Family Violence, 8(2), 183-201.

Straus, M. A. (1973). A general systems theory approach to a theory of violence between family members. Social Science Information, 12, 105.

Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. (1980). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family. Garden City, NJ: Anchor Press.

Straus, M. A., & Kaufman Kantor, G. (1994). Corporal punishment of adolescents by parents: A risk factor in the epidemiology of depression, suicide, alcohol abuse, child abuse, and wife beating. Adolescence, 29(115), 543-562.

Walker, B.E. (1993). The Sceptical Feminist, New York: Harper & Row.

Walker, L. E. (1979). The battered woman. New York: Harper & Row.

Walker, L. E. (1984). The battered woman syndrome. New York: Springer.

Walker, L. E. A. (1995). Current perspectives on men who batter women--Implications for and treatment to stop violence against women: Comment of Gottman et al (1995). Journal of Family Psychology, 9(3), 264-271.

Yllo, K., & Straus, M. A. (1990). Patriarchy and violence against wives: The impact of structural and normative factors. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families. (pp. 383-399). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.

Zeichner, A., & Pihl, R. O. (1979). Effects of alcohol and behavior contingencies on human aggression. Journal of Abnormal Aggression, 88(2), 153-160.
 

What can men do to help stop Intimate Partner Violence?

By Reid D. Albee

 "Top athletes, doctors, lawyers, judges, police officials and advocates have joined the Family Violence Prevention Fund's THERE'S NO EXCUSE FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE campaign, but every American has a critical role to play. Whether we are athletes or accountants, teachers or technicians, business owners or bus drivers, we all have to be part of the solution."
 - Gene Upshaw, Executive Director of the NFL Players Association
 

Intimate Partner Violence is a serious problem that lies deep in the social fabric of our society.  Until recently IPV has been a subject which has mostly been addressed by women. Many men, however, are now joining the effort to help end IPV.  Intimate partner violence must no longer be viewed as a problem only affecting women -- increasingly, spouse abuse is a problem devastating every sector of society, overwhelming our courts and hospitals, spilling over into our streets, and filling our morgues. We must all be a part of the solution if we are to address the deadly toll this epidemic is taking, and men have a critical role to play in doing so.

Not all men batter women. But too many men do, and this must stop. That is the message that must be conveyed publicly not only by female advocates for battered women, but also by fathers of sons, CEOs of major companies, and guys in the proverbial locker room.  For far too long, wife beating has been a subject of laughter in locker rooms, at sporting events, and even in boardrooms. But that is beginning to change. You can help. If you hear a male friend make a joke about domestic violence, take a stand. Tell him it isn't funny. If you feel too uncomfortable to speak up, body language can communicate disapproval almost as loudly as words. Turn away from the person making the joke, or frown instead of laughing and don't respond. By letting him know that you will not participate in his joke, you are sending the powerful messages that domestic violence isn't a laughing matter, and that he should feel ashamed to treat it that way. If enough people send the same message, we can all  begin to change the way domestic violence is thought about and talked about - by both men and women.

Above all, if you know someone who is abusive, make it your responsibility to talk to him about it and tell him that his behavior is offensive to you. Remember that while confronting a man you know abuses his wife is difficult, it's more difficult and devistating to be the victim of abuse.

There are many things you can do to help.  Get involved in local men’s groups, or create one if there are none in your area. If you are a business owner, or a Rotary Club member, talk about IPV with you employees and members.  Call your local domestic violence shelter and find out if they have any programs, or volunteer activities that you can help them with.  Talk to your male friends and your sons about IPV.  Get vocal. Consider starting up your own local men’s issues group. Groups can share information and  resources, make a difference for the people in their communities.  If you're a graduate student or professor, consider doing research on this issue. Especially if you're in the psychology field, where there seems to be a dearth of information on this. If you're a male survivor of domestic violence, and you feel comfortable about it, be open with your experience to other people. A lot of people won't even think about this issue until it happens to someone they know or themselves. Vote carefully.

If you (or someone you know) are concerned about being abusive with an intimate partner, ask yourself these questions and consider them as the warning signs of a problem.  Have you ever:

 Given her/him angry, threatening stares or looks?
 Called her/him names, criticized, mocked or ridiculed your partner?
 Given her/him the "silent treatment," sulked, refused to talk or communicate?
 Put her/him down, embarrassed or humiliated your/their partner either in private or in public?
 Tried to control how she/he thinks, dresses, who she/he sees, how she/he spends time, how she/he spends money?
 Screamed, insulted or swore at your/their partner?
 Stopped her/him from doing things she/he wanted to do?
 Said or done things to make your partner think she/he is "crazy" or "stupid"?
 Intimidated your/their partner by blocking a doorway during an argument, used threatening gestures, or stood over her/him?
 Threatened your partner, broken things, punched walls, slammed doors or thrown or kicked things?

 Pushed, grabbed, shoved, wrestled, hit or slapped your partner?
 

Intimate Partner abuse is a serious issue.  Men must get involved in helping to end this scourge.  Get involved, get active, make a difference.
 
 

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE In Washington and Hancock Counties   (written Nov. 1985)
   By Reid Albee

 Domestic violence, a social problem, with far reaching implications, is a pervasive social problem in Hancock and Washington County, Maine.  It's  form  can be physical or  emotional in nature and usually consists of both of these behaviors.

 Domestic violence in these two counties requires the expenditure of many resources, including, police time, court time, and medical and professional counseling resources.

 Domestic Violence occurs throughout the United States and is prevalent in Hancock and Washington Counties.  I have read statistics that claim as many as one in four women are assaulted by their spouses, or significant other almost every day.  In the United States, a domestic assault takes place every 15 seconds.  This certainly is not limited to men assaulting women.  Children are viciously assaulted daily.  Women and children are beaten, crippled or killed daily in our society.  Women are also known to perpetrate domestic violence.
 
 According to Hancock/Washington County District Attorney Mike Povich, the incidence of violence in the two county area is devastating.  Povich claims that his office handles at least ten cases per week, but estimates unreported assaults number many more per week.  He said it is more prevalent in Washington county than anywhere else in the state.
 
 Domestic violence is any threat or show of  force to a man, woman or child that either intimidates or causes actual physical or emotional harm to the intended victim.  It can range from extreme criticism to extreme bodily and/or psychological harm.  If the abuse is emotional in nature, it usually destroys the self-esteem of the victim and empowers the perpetrator, giving him or her a strong sense of perceived, or in the majority of cases, actual control over the victim.  The effects of emotional and/or physical abuse on children are devastating, both on a physical and emotional level.

 Usually the battered child will become an abuser as an adult and almost always suffers deep emotional disturbances into late adulthood, if not treated with proper therapy.  The victim of abuse often leads a life of distrust of others and is in many cases, destined to become co-dependant and/or controlling of his/her relationships.  The tragedy here is that in many cases the victim goes through life rejecting potentially healthy partners and relationships, living in fear that anyone that treats them well, must certainly have ulterior motives.  The victim very often finds him or herself in repeated, destructive and violent relationships.  This usually continues until the victim is helped with therapy or 'accidently' comes to trust someone that is sincere, non controlling and non violent.

 Domestic violence has become a social cause in this country and strides are being made to combat it, but much needs to be done.  Education and intervention early in life is one key to solving this problem.  Men need to be taught, early in their socialization, about gender issues, violence of all kinds, and how to deal with anger.  As with rape, violence is not about sexual issues, It is about anger and control.

   How then do we deal with the early socialization of young men and women, who are growing up in battered homes and are learning these behaviors?  There is no easy solution to this problem.  Most attempts to stop the abuse cycle occur after the violence has been perpetrated.  The perp is arrested, booked, released, and will usually go back home to repeat the cycle, in as little as 48 hours.  Restraining orders prove to be a deterrent in only about 40 percent of cases.  The jail alternative, while keeping the perp out of the cycle for a while, does nothing to change the behavior.  Very little effective counseling takes place in the prisons and jails of Maine.

 More thinking and research needs to conducted on how to stop the violence cycle before it begins, not just simply intervene, after it begins.  One  way to implement this is thru the early socialization of young students. Gender, esteem and anger issues can be effectively taught in schools right along side sex and drug education.  It obviously cannot be done in the home, because that is where most of these behaviors are taught and learned.
 
 There are some programs where direct intervention and counseling of perps is having some positive effect.  Very much more needs to be done in this area.  These behaviors can be modified, and controlled if the perp has access to quality counseling and is willing to attempt  change.  Very few of the perps, I have interviewed, intentionally want to hurt their victims.  Research finds that many just lose control and many of them feel badly afterwards.     Those that are willing and want to change, need therapy which focuses on gender issues, self esteem - image and anger issues and more importantly, they need counseling in dealing with their internal anger and control issues, which I believe is at the root of most domestic violence assaults by men.

 In Hancock County a new organization, called The Next Step, provides shelters and education for battered women and children.   The state legislature voted recently to provide a substantial grant to the Next Step, because of the prevalence of domestic violence in Hancock/Washington counties. Other programs are being made available to perpetrators as well, such as the Mentonoya project in Hancock County which provides education to perpetrators concerning power, control, gender and anger issues.

 In Washington County, Womankind Inc. operates shelters and safehouses for battered women, but there are few services for perps, other than jail.   In both counties,  perps are immediately arrested, if physical abuse is determined by the intervening officer, regardless of whether or not the victim decides to press charges.  Protective restraining orders are also used, but with questionable results.

Residents of Verona and Bucksport, two small towns on the southwest coast of Hancock County are trying to come to grips with the recent murders of two of it's citzens, who fell as victims of domestic violence.

 Volunteers of Next Step began meeting at a Bucksport church last fall.  On April 20, in an effort to generate awareness about local domestic abuse, Next Step and Bucksport Police Chief Doug Gray gave a crash course in what they dubbed "Domestic Violence 101".  A red candle was lit in memory of violence victims, Sandra McCormick, a 32 year old Verona woman murdered in January.  John LaCara, her companion, awaits trial for murder, at the Hancock County Jail in Ellsworth.

 Gray noted that in the past three years, domestic violence assaults have remained at the same level, despite a 6.8 percent drop state wide.  "Over one year we had 16 reports of domestic violence assaults, 30 percent of which were alcohol related".  Chief Gray also noted that his department handled 36 family quarrels, and that an estimated 15 percent of those were alcohol related.

 Hancock county has no mandatory program for handling perpetrators.  Offenders can plea bargain and opt for counseling instead of jail.  According to Gray and Ronelda Whitmore, director of Next Step, most abusers would rather stay in jail for two or three days, than receive counseling.  This adds credence to the theory that intervention after the cycle has begun is ineffective.

 Thirty-two percent of the women who are beaten will be beaten again within six months.  Medical records report that the patterns, head, facial, and neck injuries make up 40 percent of injuries at a local hospital.  Injury to the abdomen, especially in pregnant women, is seen in many cases.  According to Gray, 26 percent of women will attempt suicide, before the cycle is stopped by intervention or death.

 $4.1 billion was spent nationwide on domestic violence related health care in 1989 according to Gray.  This does not include personal costs to families or lost production in the workplace.

 Domestic violence is a social problem that has risen to the top of awareness in this two county area.  It will continue, unabated, unless new and unique programs are developed to effective treat perpetrators, and to educate young people before they get into the cycle.  Domestic violence is a devastating social problem that has only recently begun to be dealt with.  Much, much more needs to be done.  Although much has been done in the past ten years to bring this social problem into the social arena, much still needs to be done.  We need to begin looking at this problem, as a problem that we deal with, only after the fact.  It is time to look at early socialization methods and treatments to effectively deal with this issue.

   Ethical Dimensions: Ethical Considerations of Pornography

Reid D. Albee

What is pornography? Does it use, degrade, and denigrate women? Is it harmful to society? Does it harm men? "Pornograhy" and erotic art has been around since people learned to draw on cave walls. Today it is widely avialible in print, video, text and on the internet. This paper examines the ethical debate on pornography. The definition of pornograhy, eroctica, eroctic art and ethical considerations will be explored.

What is the definition of pornography? Pornography stems from the Greek words for porno, meaning prostitutes, and the word graphos, meaning writing (Hunt, (1993).. Since the early Greek days the word has assumed various meanings. It has been difficult to define according to many historians (Kendrick, 1987). The Carnegie Mellon Pornography Study" study adopts the "definition" utilized currently by computer pornographers. "Pornography" is defined here to include the depiction of actual sexual contact ("hard-core") and depiction of mere nudity or lascivious exhibition ("soft-core"). The courts and numerous United States statutes concur with the distinction between "hard-core" and "soft-core pornography." By this definition, not all pornography meets the legal test for obscenity, nor are all depictions of sexual activity deemed pornographic material.

What about erotica? Is it the same as pornography?

Erotica refers to, sexually suggestive or arousing material that is free of sexism, racism, and homophobia, and respectful of all human beings and animals portrayed. It could also mean, "Overtly or explicitly sexual marterial." One notable feminist, scholor and author
 

The First Amendment ,to the Constitution of the United States is often used by the courts and promoters of pornography to define its meaning. In order to be obscene, and therefore outside the protection of the First Amendment, an image must meet the following criteria to be declared obscene under most statutes:

(1) appeal to a prurient (i.e., unhealthy or shameful) interest in sexual activity.

(2) depict real or simulated sexual conduct in a manner that, according to an average community member, offends contemporary community standards.

(3) according to a reasonable person, lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

When considered by the statutes and prosecuters, adult porongraphic material is initially presumed to be nonobscene in nature. ( Fort Wayne Books, Inc. v. Indiana), (requiring judicial determination of obscenity before material can be removed from circulation (requiring procedures for seizure of obscenity which give police adequate guidance regarding the definition of obscenity to ensure no infringement on dissemination of constitutionally protected speech). Law enforcerment officers and prosecutors attempting to pursue an obscenity investigation or prosecution face constitutionally mandated procedural obstacles not present in other criminal matters. (See New York v. P.J. Videos, Inc.) For instance, the "plain view" exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement, whereby contraband plainly visible to a law enforcement officer may be seized, does not apply to allegedly obscene material because, prior to a judicial determination, nothing is obscene and therefore, a fortiori, nothing can be considered contraband. (See Lo-Ji Sales, Inc. v. New York, 442 U.S. 319, 325 (1979)) (requiring that search warrants contain specific description of allegedly obscene items to be seized).
Child Pornography enjoys none of the constitutional protections cited above. In New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982), the Supreme Court explicitly removed pornography depicting minors from the protections of the First Amendment. Whether they are obscene or not, pictures of children engaged in sexualy explicit conduct are not constitutionally protected. "Because the government interest identified by the Supreme Court as justifying removing child pornography from the protection of the First Amendment is more urgent than the government interest which justifies denying protection to obscenity, and because the child pornography standard is far less vague than the obscenity standard, law enforcers and prosecutors are not bound by any unique procedural burdens here". (From United States v. Weigand, 812 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 856 (1987).

The Supreme Court rulings on pornography creates two distinct categories of sexually explicit imagery that are not protected by the First Amendment. While ascertaining whether a particular digital image contains a minor is not difficult for the average person to do, ascertaining whether a particular digital image is obscene in the abstract is nearly impossible.

Sexually-explicit materials: How much of a problem?
Sexually-Explicit Material On The Internet

Pornographic material is widely availible. It is availible in mom and pop, as well as large chain video stores, magazine counters and adult bookstores. These outlets are regulated and materials are not accesible to minors. But what about the internet? There is an abundance of sexually explicit material on the internet which is graphicly portrayed in this table at the Ethics Connection Website.

What are the percieved effects of pornography on women? Are they harmed, used, exploted? What about violence? Does pornography cause violence against women and children? What are some of the views the males feel about pornography?, Why don't women just stop posing nude if they feel so strongly about the dangers of pornography?, What do the American people think about pornography?, and What is the male's inclination to rape? The above questions are just some of the myriad of questions asked by many individuals. One view of pornography that was expressed by Diana Russell (1997) was that, "pornography does not include all the features that commonly characterize such material. For example, pornography frequently depicts females, particularly female sexuality, inaccurately." It has been shown that pornography consumers are more likely to believe that unusual sexual practices are more common than they really are (Zillmann, 1989). "Sexual objectification is another common characteristic of pornography. It refers to the portrayal of human beings-usually women-as depersonalized sexual things using derogatory names to describe them and their various body parts, not as multi-faceted human beings deserving equal rights with men(Zillman, 1989)." The sexual objectification of females is not confined to pornography. It is also a staple of mainstream movies, ads, record covers, songs, magazines, television, art, cartoons, literature, pin-ups, and so on, as well as being a way of conceptualizing how many men learn to see women and sometimes children." (Russell 1997)

The Ted Bundy Case
What was learned from Ted Bundy?

The case of Ted Bundy has become a classic tretise of evidence of the effects of pornography (Leilani 1989). Leilani's article, 'What we learned from Ted Bundy', explores the issue in detail. Bundy, who was once assistant director of the Seattle Crime Prevention Advisory Committee and wrote a pamphelt about rape prevention is responsible for raping and murdoring 50 young women. Bundy was a Boy Scout and was involved in Washington State politics. He was executed in January of 1997. Hours before his death Bundy told psychologist James Dobson about the effects of pornography on his life. Bundy claimed he began by reading soft-core pornography at the age of 12. He and his friends would often find pornographic books and magazines in garbage cans in his neighborhood. He soon graduated to hard-core pornography and claimed that pornography eventually became a "deadly habit" to him. "My experience with pornography is that once you become addicted to it, (and I look at this as a kind of addiction like other kinds of addiction), I would keep looking for more potent, more explicit, more graphic kinds of material. Like an addiction, you keep craving something that is harder, something which gives you a greater sense of excitement. Until you reach a point where the pornography only goes so far, you reach that jumping off point where you begin to wonder if maybe actually doing it would give you that which is beyond just reading or looking at it." Within a few years, those latent desires fueled by pornography were expressed through his first murder. Although Bundy said he did not blame pornography, he explained that pornographic materials shaped and molded his behavior. He also warned the nation that the most damaging kinds of pornography ... are those that involve violence and sexual violence. "Because the wedding of those two forces, as I know only too well, brings out the hatred that is just, just too terrible to describe."
Bundy said that pornography, "snatched me out of my home 20, or 30 years ago ... and pornography can reach out and snatch a kid out of any house today." His religious training and morality initially restrained him from acting out his fantasies, but he confessed that finally, "I couldn't hold back anymore." Bundy claimed that alchohol finaly broke the restraints for him to commit his first murder. "What alcohol did in conjunction with exposure to pornography is (sic) alcohol reduced my inhibitions at the same time the fantasy life that was fueled by pornography eroded them further.",claimed Bundy.
Bundy said he felt possessed by "something ... awful and alien" while he was in the act of commiting his 50 murdors. "There is just absolutely no way to describe first the brutal urge to do that kind of thing, and then what happens is once it has been more or less satisfied and recedes, you might say, or spent, that energy level recedes and basically I become myself again. But basically I was a normal person. I wasn't some guy hanging out at bars or a bum. I wasn't a pervert in the sense that people look at somebody and say, 'I know there is something wrong with him, you can just tell.' I was essentially a normal person," Bundy told Dobson. "The basic humanity and the basic spirit that God gave me was intact, but unfortunately became overwhelmed at times."

Bundy's last words of confession and warning about pornography are an echo of statistics, research, and reports conducted within the last decade about the link between pornography and sexually violent crime. According to a study conducted by a group of psychologists, Neil Malamuth of UCLA, Gene Abel of Columbia University, and William Marshall of Kingston Penitentiary, various forms of pornography can elicit fantasies which may lead to crime. Out of a test group of 18 rapists studied who used 'consenting pornography' to instigate a sexual offence, seven of them said that it provided a cue to elicit fantasies of forced sex.

Are there any positive benefits of pornography?

Arguments have been made that pornography has some positive benefits for both men and women. MacKinnon(1981),claims that if pornography is part of a person's sexuality, then that person has no right to their sexuality. Women who enjoy pornography claim that they are offended by these kinds of attitudes, and want it recognized that they get more out of pornography than oppression. As writer Sallie Tisdale writes, "pornography tells me the opposite [of what Dworkin and MacKinnon tell me]: that none of my thoughts are bad, that anything goes. The message of pornography is that our sexual selves are real." (Strossen 1995). The Meese Commission on Pornography found that two areas in which sexually explicity materials have been used for positive benefits: treatment of sexual dysfunctions and diagnosis and treatment of sexual addictions (Strossen 1995). The Commission also found that pornography has entertainment benefits, can improve marital relations and could relieve people of the impusle to commit crimes. Some argue that the recognition of alternative sex acts and preferences in pornography has liberated them from the prescriptive comprehension of sex or helped them feel more comfortable about their own sexuality. This could be construed as a positive function of pornography that would be difficult to attain in other ways that did not contain the same degree of sexual honesty and explicitness as pornography.
Strossen(1995)claims that gays, bisexuals and lesbians have used pornography as a resource when they were questioning the validity of ther sexuality. It became a means for them to test the validity of their personal feelings about sexuality. For many of these people it was the only way they could enjoy their sexuality without exposoure to other individuals.

Ethicical Considerations

Pornography and obscenity certainly raises a few moral questions. Olen & Bary, (1996) in their book, Applying Ethics, pose two important questions: Are pornographic materials morally objectionable or not?; Is it right for the state to regulate access to pornographic material to consenting adults? Olen & Barry assert that whether or not pornography is moral is a seperate and distinct question from whether or not the state should regulate access to pornography by consenting adults. Olen & Barry argue that often arguments for censorship assume that pornograpy is morally wrong and for this reason alone it should be suppressed. Should what is immoral then be suppressed? The issue remains academic untill it is finally established that pornorgraphy is indeed immoral.

Arguments Against Pornography.
Does Pornography degrade human beings?

Olen & Barry (1996) make several points and counterpoints in their treament of the ethics of pornography. Point: "Every piece of pornography shares at least one thing with every other piece of pornography, it degrades human beings. By seperating sex from love, by concentrating on impersonal lust at the expense of our more human emotions, by appealing to and arousing the lust of its readers and viewers, even the mildest pornography reduces humanity to the level of animals. And much of today's pornography goes even further, portraying the most disgusting and dehumanizing acts of secual sado-masochism imaginalbe."
In their counterpoint to the above quote Olan & Barry state that some people may find pornography degrading, but many people do not. Many enjoy it. They posit the consideration that there is no reason people should not enjoy pornography because lust is as human as any other emotion, and that there is not anything inherently immoral about being sexually aroused by erotic pictures and writing. Even if they consider sex with love the ideal, should everything we see and read portray ideal situations exclusively? The fact that one person may find pornography immoral and disgusting, does not mean that it actually is any more so than finding certain foods or styles of clothing disgusting makes them immoral or dehumanizing.

Pornography is anti-woman propaganda.

This point assumes that pornography portrays women as sex objects and playthings, exsisting for the pure pleasure of men. This is said to perpetuate the most demeaning stereotype of women. This view maintains that pornography is a form of propaganda against women, encouraging sexual violence against women. The counterpoint to this view is that anything that advocates violence against any group is certainly immoral. If certain types of pornography advocate rape it of course, cannot be condoned or defended however, according to Olen & Barry, this kind of pornography is extremely rare. They also claim that pornography that legitimately can be construed as anti-woman propaganda is also very rare. They state the main purpose of pornography is not to defame women as a group. Its primary function is to make profits by appealing to the sexual interests and fantasies of some men. They state that this is no more immoral than appealing to the sexual fantasies of women by portraying men as sexual objects.

Arguments for Pornography.
Pornography can be beneficial.

Olen & Barry state that pornography may have some beneficial effects. It can aid normal sexual development, help with dissactisfaction in sexual relationships, encourage couples to be more open about sex, and provide sexual gratification for people who do not have sexual partners. Pornography also has a history of being successfully used in sex therapy to treat a varitey of sexual disorders and disfunctions. It also provides pleasure which millions of people enjoy while using pornographic materials.

Conclusion:

There are certainly many arguments for and against pornography. It can be argued that both sides of the issue can present valid arguements for and against pornography. It is a subject that will continue to be debated, researched and argued by many different organizations and courts, and will most likely be debated for many years to come. The ethical considerations of pornography are diverse and offer many philosophical views for and against it. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution protects all forms of pornography as free speach, with the noted exception of chile pornography. Feminists continue to abhor pornography as demeaning to women and contributing to their being seen as objects of desire and control for men. Many men who use pornography say that they use it only for stimulation and it does not lower their appreciation or value of women. The religious right maintains that pornography ought to be banned because it is moraly wrong. Theorists, philosophers, religious leaders, the courts and common citizens will surely be caught up in the ethical considerations of pornography for some time to come. Meanwhile pornography continues to be a huge force in the social and personal context. Sexually explicit images and live strip shows are abundant on the internet. Pornographic movies are availible at almost all video outlets and the top shelf of most magazine and book stores continues to be well stocked with sexualy explicit material.

References:

    Assister, A. (1991). Pornography, feminism and the individual. London: Pluto Press.

Berger, R., Searles, P., & Cottle, C.  (1991). Feminism and pornography. New York: Praeger Publishers.

Carnegie/RIMM/Mellon University/TIME Cyberporn Study. (1996). The Georgetown Law  Review (GLJ),  83,  5.

Corpus, L.  (1989).  What we learned from Ted Bundy. Availible on-line at http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0332_Ted_Bundy.html

Dworkin, A.  (1981). Pornography: Men possessing women. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.
.
Fort Wayne Books, Inc. v. Indiana, 489 U.S. 46, 62 (1989). United States Supreme Court.

Garcia, L. (1986). Exposure to pornography and attitudes about women and rape: A correlational study.  Journal of Sex Research, 22, 378-85.

Hawkins, G., & Zimring, F. (1988). Pornography in a free society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hunt,L. (1993). The Invention of pornography : Obscenity and the origins of modernity, 1500-1800. Publisher : NY : Zone Books ; Cambridge, MA.  MIT Press, 1993.

Kendrick,W.  (1987). The secret museum: Pornography in modern culture. University of California,  Berkley Press.

Lo-Ji Sales, Inc. v. New York, 442 U.S. 319, 325 (1979). United States Supreme Court.

Longino, H. (1996). Pornography, oppression, and freedom: A closer look. In A. Jaggar (Ed.), Living with contradictions: Controversies in feminist social ethic. (p. 154-161). Boulder, CO.: Westview Press.

MacKinnon, C. (1993). Only words. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Malamuth, N. & Centiti, J.  (1986). Repeated exposure to violent and nonviolent pornography: Likelihood of raping ratings and laboratory aggression against women. Aggressive Behavior, 12, 129-37.

New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982). United States Supreme Court.

Olen, J., & Barry, V., (1997).  Applying Ethics. [ a text with readings]. 5th ed. California: Wadsworth Publishing Co.

Russell, D. (1996). From a speech given at The University of Maine at Machias, Maine.

Shiffrin, S. & Choper, J. (1996). The First amendment: Cases, comments, questions. St. Paul: West Publishing Co.

Stoller, R.  (1991).  Porn: Myths for the twentieth century. New Haven, CT.: Yale University Press.

Strossen,  N.  (1995).  Defending pornography. New York: Scribner.

United States v. Weigand, 812 F.2d 1239 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 856 (1987). United States Supreme Court.

Wekesser, C. (Ed.). (1997). Pornography: Opposing viewpoints. San Diego: Greenhaven Press. (Opposing Viewpoints Series, Vol. 15)
 
 

My Position on Abortion
 
My position on abortion is that of pro-choice tempered with stern ideals of responsibility on the part of both men and women.  The collaborative assignment made me look at many of the beliefs about abortion that I hold, but did not change them.  It was interesting to study the con group’s argument about the Client being the fetus and not the woman, but even that did not sway me.  The issue is much more complicated than that.

Ten years ago I was an advocate of the pro-life movement.  I would not listen to any argument that opposed the right to life.  But I remember having a closed mind.  I would occasionally listen to the pro-choice view, but I never really heard what they were saying.
I closed my mind to the possibility of the other point of view having any validity.  My mind was closed to many things back then.  I was the stereotypical fundamentalist whose mind was closed to anything that did not support my agenda.  Indeed I was full of arrogance.  How did I leave this behind?  I began to look at my arguments (with the guidance of a wise woman who changed many of my ideas) and to see they were more self serving and idealistic then valid.  After painful soul searching and questioning of many of the values I had held for forty years I came to the conclusion that we are born with certain rights that are sacred.  One of them is the right to prevent the intrusion by government, in our most sacred things, our minds and our bodies.  No one has that right.

I have walked this earth for 45 years.  I have seen pain, pleasure, evil and good.  I have learned many things, and discarded many things that I thought were valid.  But I cannot adopt a principle that says that a woman cannot have control over the fate of her own body.  It would seem to me, a fundamental right.  Abortion, however, does make me sad. Sad that it has to happen, sad for the pain that it causes, sad for the loss of a life.

Like Noonan, I believe that life begins at conception.  I have no doubts about that.  How then can I balance that belief with my belief that women should be allowed to abort?  It is a difficult thing for me to articulate, but I will attempt to explain it here.  Firstly I believe there are situations when abortion should not be questioned. These are; impending death of the mother if not performed; impending death of the fetus before term; incest when it is known that severe and profound birth defects will result.  What about the other reasons for abortion and how do I support them.   I DO NOT support abortion as a method of birth, or population control.  I instead support responsibility.  Men and women have to be responsible about birth control.  It is irresponsible and juvenile not to do so.  Men and women must consider the consequences of their sexual union.  But many don’t, and what about young teens?  Once the pregnancy occurs it is too late to talk about taking responsibility to prevent conception.  I still support the right of the woman to decide.  I would encourage her and her partner (if he were sharing responsibility for the pregnancy) to get counseling and make a decision based on all aspects of the consequences of getting an abortion.  An informed choice is better than no choice.  I would encourage her to consider adoption as an option, and I would encourage her to weigh her own rights against those she might feel belong to the fetus she is carrying.  But ultimately the decision belongs to her, no one else.  It is her body, her decision. To tell her otherwise is simply supreme arrogance.

Abortion is a topic that I will always rethink and examine. It will always be troubling to me, and I will often reexamine the tenants of my beliefs surrounding the issue.  But I cannot and will not ever presume that I or anyone else has a right to prevent a woman from making decisions regarding her own body.  To do so would be most arrogant.
 

  Co-Parenting After Divorce
     A Systems Approach

 Co-Parenting after divorce is a subject receiving wide attention in the
 1990's.  Courts no longer arbitrarily assign sole parenting rights to mothers and
many men now play an active role in parenting after divorce.  How well divorced
couples can manage and successfully foster the future development of the family
system after separation and divorce depends on several key criteria.
 Research has shown that no family event, short of death of a parent, is
more traumatic to a child then the divorce of the parents.  Establishing a healthy
co-parenting model after separation, is critical to the emotional well being of the
children of the divorce.

 The family, while strained emotionally, is no less of a system after divorce
and all members still play a key role in future family development.  Whether or not
this development is healthy, or unhealthy depends on the parents, their
interactions with each other, and with their children.

 Healthy, nurturing, co-parenting requires several important phases in
family development after divorce.  First the parents must work through the pain
and anger of the divorce, accept their differences and define their individual and
common roles and  goals as permanently separated parents.  To do this successfully requires an
understanding that they share a common bond and interest; the successful
raising and healthy development of their children.

 Key to successful family development  is how effectively the parents
handle their differences before and after separation.  Parents that fight and bicker
in front of their children only serve to increase the anger, frustration and self
blame of their offspring.  Successful family development cannot begin until the
parents settle, or at least agree on their differences.  They must get through the
denial and grieving phases of separation and come together to develop a
successful scheme for the development of themselves and their children.  This
can be accomplished with counseling of the couple as a unit, helping them to get
past their pain and anger issues.  After the accomplishment of this goal, the
parents can move on to develop a successful model for post divorce family
development.

 An overwhelming majority of children blame themselves for divorce.  They
continue to do so until parents and children begin to communicate and talk about
the reasons for the divorce.  Children need be assured that they are still important
and loved by both parents.

 Post divorce counseling is one model for achievement of this goal that has
worked successfully.  This approach regards the divorced family as a continuing
system.  All members; parents and children have a role in this system, and the
councilor works with them to recognize and foster the nurturing of the children, as
well as the parents.

 It is not enough for the non-custodial parent to see his children on a rigid
visitation schedule.  The best model for absentee parenting requires the absent
parent to play an active role in his child's nurturing.  This includes the traditional
responsibilities of child support and visitation, which are not, in themselves,
adequate for positive child  development after divorce.  The absentee parent
must also nurture his children emotionally.  The effective absentee parent will be active
in the child's education, recreation, and social development.  He or she will act as
a co-mentor and nurture the children.

 As they did in marriage, both parents must put the children first, after
separation and divorce.  Continuing relationships with grandparents and other
family members, on both sides of the family, is also important. This is especially
important where the child comes from a large extended family and has enjoyed
the emotional support of two sets of grandparents.

 After establishment of the bi-nuclear family system, the most difficult
aspect of coparenting must be resolved.  Parents have to remain cival enough to
make joint decisions regarding their children, but keep enough privacy so as their
private lives do not conflict.  Most importantly the parents must accept that the
marriage has ended.  This requires the couple to establish individual identities,
but recognize that they are still tied together as parents of their children.  This is a
difficult obstacle for many parents to overcome.  This problem can be overcome
with the aid of family counseling.

 Children of divorce are amazingly resilient if they are tuned into and aware
of the divorce process and are secure in the love of both parents. In observing a
ten year old boy,  (my son) I discovered that he seems to be happy and well
adjusted to the idea of his parents divorce.  He claims that he no longer lies
awake at night wishing his dad was home, because he knows his dad loves and
cares for him and helps to nurture him at every opportunity.

 I use the example of my son because his mother and I viewed the divorce
and life afterwards from a systems approach without  knowing it.  The model we
used involved the counseling of the whole family, after separation, and discussion
of each of our roles and how we would work together as a separated unit, for the benifet
of everyone in the family.  This required and continues to require strict parenting
responsibilities for the non-custodial parent, as well as with the custodial parent.
These responsibilities include helping the child with his homework, taking the
child to social events outside the home, bedside reading and talking at the child's
custodial residence, (by the visiting non-custodial parent) and many other
responsibilities that go way beyond the traditional child support and visitation
model.

 This child had many problems at home and socially after separation, but
improved with family counseling and nurturing from both parents.  Today he is a
healthy ten year old, formal operational, who is secure and thriving.  Although no
empirical data can be cited, I believe the above referenced co-parenting style is
responsible for this child's continued positive development.

 Many absentee men are not aware of their own emotional needs after
divorce, much less the needs of their children.  While stopping short of court
ordered counseling for the divorcing family, there should be in place, a system of
support and education for families coping with divorce.  A good place to begin this
approach could be at mediation, when many issues affecting the future
development of the family are brought up and resolved.

 How well children are educated about the divorce process, and the
reasons for the divorce, will certainly have an effect on positive family
development.  After the parents have worked out their differences they should
educate the children, in a manner appropriate to their age, the parent's reasons
for separation and divorce.  They should be given opportunity to express their
fears and pain and need to feel that they are being listened to by both parents.
They need to be assured that they
 

are not responsible for their parents separation, and need to deal with any
fantasies that their parents may reunite. (Anderson & Sabatelli, 1995)   Children
need to understand that even though the parents no longer love each other, they
still love the children.  This is one of the most difficult aspects of divorce for young
children to accept and understand.   Many young children also believe that loving
one parent, will alienate the love and affections of the other parent. (Nichols,
1985; Sutton & Sprenkle, 1985)

 Children who are developing well after divorce show evidence of good
behavior in school, and do well with schoolwork and peer relationships.  Those
who are having trouble coping with divorce will most likely display anger,
aggressiveness, hostility to one or both parents, and do poorly in school.
 Successful family development after divorce requires  the establishment of
a new family identity as either a single-parent or binuclear system.  A cooperative
and non conflicted environment between ex spouses is needed for a secure
emotional environment for the children.  Good strategies for managing internal
boundaries are required, as well as mutually accepted child rearing strategies.
(Anderson & Sabatelli, 1985)

 For the divorced family to remain a viable and healthy system, requires
that all family members accept the divorce as final and a metacognitive realization
of the factors that led to the divorce.  Parents who develop  non blaming,
non critical, and a non conflicting relationship after divorce will best aid the future
development of their children after divorce. (Anderson & Sabatelli, 1985).
 Even in this age where more than fifty percent of children come from
divorced homes, it is possible to maintain positive family development after
divorce.  For those parents who can work through their differences and recognize that they
each are bonded to their children just as much as if they were still married,
transition thorough divorce to positive development of the children can be achieved.

References:

    Stephen Anderson & Ronald Sabatelli; Family Interaction, 1985 Allyn & Beacon.
Nichols, W.C. (1985). Family therapy with children of divorce. Journal Psychotherapy and
the Family.

Sutten, P.M. & Sprenkle, D.H. (1985) Criteria for a constructive divorce: Theory and
research to guide the practitioner.  Journal of Psychotherapy and the Family.