Coping resources of maltreated children in the family: a salutogenic approach
Introduction
Research on family violence and maltreatment of children focuses mainly on pathogenic questions and, for this reason, on the harm caused to maltreated children (MC). In the past few decades, copious empirical data has accrued on these issues. MC in the family were found to suffer from behavioral problems and poor self-image (Kendall-Tackett, Williams, & Finkelhor, 1993); self-destructive tendencies, detriment to ego functions, and difficulty in controlling impulses (Allen & Tranowsky, 1989); and aggression and difficulties in interaction with others Green 1981, Kinard 1982, Sternberg et al 1993, Vissing and Straus 1991. MC perceive the world as a lethal place and regard themselves as exogenously controlled (Galambus, 1984). In the cognitive domain, these children were found to have lower scholastic achievements than others (Perez & Widom, 1994), and their cognitive and linguistic abilities were at high risk of damage (Green, 1981).
Notwithstanding the accumulation of research knowledge that stresses harm, many maltreated children manage to survive and function successfully despite maltreatment. However, pathogenic research questions, which concern the ravages of maltreatment, neither consider the children who survive nor probe their coping resources. Over the past decade, research questions in studies of children at risk have changed perceptibly—away from damage caused and toward detection of resilient children and exploration of the sources of their resiliency (Rak & Patterson, 1996). This direction of research corresponds with Antonovsky’s salutogenic model (Antonovsky, 1987), which seeks factors that contribute to health and well-being. Salutogenic research on family violence and maltreatment may lead, in the main, to an effort to identify the coping resources of children or teens maltreated by their families—factors that contribute to the MC’s resilience and effective adjustment notwithstanding maltreatment. Studies based on this approach found that battered children may function soundly in a range of motor and cognitive abilities (Kurtz, Gaudin, Howing, & Wodarsky, 1993) and achieve high scores in social-adjustment indicators (Gergory & Beveridge, 1984).
Studies that probe protective factors in states of maltreatment in the family indicate that such factors correspond most strongly to support systems. “Survivor” children are found to be adept in selecting and finding sources of support in the family and the community (Rutter, 1987). Zimrin (1986), attempting to draw up a “survivor profile,” found that the main factor in survivability, apart from personal variables such as strong cognitive skills, is the availability of outside support.
The present study attempts to apply the salutogenic approach to the field of family violence and maltreatment of children. It aims to assess resources in children’s surroundings that enable them to cope with the family maltreatment experiences and develop resiliency. It discusses family, school, and community resources that enable MC to cope with family violence and maltreatment experiences.
Section snippets
Definition of maltreatment
Research on maltreated children has had little success in phrasing a uniform definition of maltreatment. Maltreatment of a child is usually typified in one or more of four characteristics: physical maltreatment, neglect, psychological maltreatment, and sexual maltreatment. Most studies on abuse focus on one type only, even though actual child maltreatment is complex and intricate, the most common combination being physical abuse and neglect (Kinard, 1984). This study defines maltreatment in
Moderating variables: family, school, community
The purpose of this study, as stated, is to examine resources that may help children cope with the experience of maltreatment in their family. The regnant approach in stress studies today is that which examines the effect of moderating or buffering variables in coping with stress factors (Luthar & Zigler, 1991). These variables may distinguish between children who develop resiliency to risk and those who fail to survive. The moderating variables may have a decisive impact on a child’s ability
Resilience measurers: perceived competence and psychological distress
This study asks about the coping resources or moderating factors that help resilient children cope effectively with maltreatment in their families. However, who are the resilient children? What distinguishes them from others?
Resilience is defined in the literature as the ability to adjust successfully, to function positively, or to feel competent even though one is seriously at risk (Garmezy, 1993). However, research in this field often uses the absence of psychopathology as an indicator of
Sample
Two hundred twenty-six 8th graders in a junior high school in central Israel participated in the study. Of these, 81 pupils (35.6%) reported having experienced maltreatment in the family setting. These pupils made up the research group (MC); the other 145 pupils (64.4%) were the comparison group (NMC). Table 1 categorizes the reporting of children in the research group by the types of maltreatment they reported.
The demographic indicators of the two groups, as shown in Table 2 , indicate that
Results
Table 3 presents the means and standard deviations of the research variables and the results of the t-tests between the two research groups, MC and NMC. MC were found to have lower perceived competence and greater psychological distress than NMC. MC also scored lower than NMC in sense of family coherence level but not in the two additional variables examined: school membership and social support. Levene’s test for equality of variance was found insignificant (at p ≤ .01), meaning homogenity of
Discussion
The study was an exploratory attempt to examine the phenomenon of maltreated children from a salutogenic perspective, which differs both conceptually and methodologically from the convention in this field. First, MC were defined not in specific caregiving settings (hospital, welfare services, etc.), pursuant to the custom in this kind of research, but in a community setting (school) and on the basis of the children’s own reports. According to the salutogenic model (which addresses itself
References (50)
- et al.
The school and educational adjustment of abused children
Child Abuse & Neglect
(1984) - et al.
Child abusea study of the child perspective
Child Abuse & Neglect
(1986) How teachers define the respond to child abusethe distinction between theoretical and reportable cases
Child Abuse & Neglect
(1993)A profile of survival
Child Abuse & Neglect
(1986)- et al.
Verbal aggression by parents and psychological problems of children
Child Abuse & Neglect
(1991) - et al.
Depressive characteristics of physically abused children
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology
(1989) Unraveling the mystery of health
(1987)- et al.
The social cognitive development of abused children
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology
(1981) The scale of psychological distress (SPD)crosspopulation invariance and validity
Research Communications in Psychology, Psychiatry and Behavior
(1982)The ecology of human development
(1979)
Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis
Psychological Bulletin
The effects of maltreatment on the development of young children
The dark side of families
Adolescent abuse and development of personal sense of control
Child Abuse & Neglect
Characteristics of high risk familiespaternal and adolescent perspectives
The human ecology of child maltreatmenta conceptual model for research
Journal of Marriage and the Family
Stress resistant childrenthe research for protective factors
Vulnerability and resilience
Family violence
Definitional issues in child maltreatment
The psychological sense of school membership among adolescentsscale development and educational correlates
Psychology in the Schools
Core affective disturbance in abused children
Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis
The mixed roles of social support and social obstruction in recovery from child abuse
Cited by (76)
Factors that inhibit and promote resilience following childhood maltreatment: A qualitative exploration of practitioner perspectives
2021, Children and Youth Services ReviewPrinciple-driven program design versus manualized programming in humanitarian settings
2021, Child Abuse and NeglectCoping resources and stress reactions among Bedouin Arab adolescents during three military operations
2019, Psychiatry ResearchCitation Excerpt :Items referring to frequency of occurrence of familiar psychological symptoms were rated on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 4 (frequently). This scale was adapted by Sagy and Dotan (2001) for use in a population of children, with some of the symptoms modified (e.g., stomachache instead of sore hands) and one item (nervous breakdown) deleted. The Arabic version of the instrument was used, as it has been used previously and is considered acceptable (Abu-Kaf et al., 2017; Al-Said et al., 2018; Braun-Lewensohn and Sagy, 2011).
The health promoting conversations intervention for families with a critically ill relative: A pilot study
2019, Intensive and Critical Care NursingCitation Excerpt :The scale scores range from 12 to 84, with higher scores indicating a greater sense of coherence. The F-SOC has sound psychometric properties (Sagy and Dotan, 2001). The scale was recently translated into Swedish and was pilot-tested (Möllerberg, in process.)
Testing Assisted Resilience Approach Therapy (ARAT) with children victims of violence
2019, Children and Youth Services ReviewCitation Excerpt :While emotional reactivity (Prince-Embury, 2007) may have an adverse effect on the child's development, strong evidence suggests that emotional regulation can act as a moderator between resilience and stress (Troy & Mauss, 2011). Reinforcing family system through: establishing a trust relationship with parents/caregivers, avoiding fears of prejudices or negative intentions, especially for intra-familiar violence cases, creating/reinforcing family supporting network (Afifi & MacMillan, 2011; Sagy & Dotan, 2001), reinforcing parenting (Howell, Graham-Bermann, Czyz, & Lilly, 2010; Spaccarelli & Kim, 1995). The action aims were not predetermined, but they were defined along the first training together with the participants.