|
Abstract
|
The relationship between childhood victimization and violent offending is examined using a prospective cohorts design. Official criminal histories for a large sample of substantiated and validated cases of physical and sexual abuse and neglect (N = 908) from the years 1967 through 1971 were compared to those of a matched control group (N = 667) of individuals with no official record of abuse or neglect. Sex-specific and race-specific effects of childhood victimization and other characteristics of violent offending (chronicity, age of onset, temporal patterns, and continuity) are assessed. Childhood victimization increased overall risk for violet offending and particularly increased risk for males and blacks. In comparison to controls, abused and neglected children began delinquent careers earlier. Temporal patterns of violet offending were examined and childhood victims did not differ in age of arrest for first violent offense, nor were they more likely to continue offending. The findings and their limitations are discussed, as well as directions for future research.
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The purpose of this article by Rivera and Widom was to examine the relationship between childhood victimization and violent offending to see if physical and sexual abuse and neglect in childhood were positively related to violent criminality in later juvenile and adult years.
METHODOLOGY:
A quasi-experimental design was employed using a specialized cohorts experimental design. The experimental group consisted of subjects who had officially been recognized as abused or neglected as children through county juvenile court or adult criminal court during the years 1967-1971 in the midwest area in which this study took place. After review of 2,623 abuse petitions, 908 were selected for this study. Matched cohorts to these subjects were selected from the population of children that were of the subjects' ages. Two control children were selected for each subject from children of the same sex, race, date of birth (+/- l week), and hospital of birth if the subject had been abused before elementary school age; 229 matches for the 319 children under school age were found. For those of elementary school age, controls were selected from elementary school classmates who were the same sex, race, and date of birth (+/- 6 months). The researchers state that SES was controlled for in that the schools were homogeneous; bussing had not yet been instated. For the 589 school age children, 458 matches were found. Overall, there were 667 matches. The two groups did not differ greatly by gender (49% male, 51% female), race (experimental: 67% white, 31% black; control: 65% white, 35% black), and current age (experimental: 25.69; control 25.76).
Physical abuse referred to cases in which an individual had "knowingly and willfully inflicted unnecessary corporal punishment...or unnecessary physical suffering upon a child or children (22)." Sexual abuse referred to a variety of charges ranging from "assault and battery with intent to gratify sexual desires" to more severe sexual charges. Neglect was defined as situations in which the court found a child to have inadequate care, to be homeless, to live in a physically dangerous environment, or otherwise suffer from a serious parental omission(s). Violent offenses included arrests for murder/attempted murder, manslaughter/involuntary manslaughter/reckless homicide, rape/sodomy, robbery/robbery with injury, assault/assault and battery/aggravated assault, and battery/battery with injury. Juvenile violent referred to arrest for a violent offense committed while subject was less than eighteen years of age; adult violent referred to such an arrest over eighteen years of age; and any violent referred to any arrest for violent acts.
The data collection for this study was part of a larger National Institute of Justice project to use improved methods of studying child abuse/neglect and violent behavior. Data for abuse or neglect incident came from juvenile court and probation files. Incident information included age of victim at the time of incident, type and extent of physical injuries, characteristics of the perpetrator, and disposition of the case or placement information. Juvenile delinquency data were collected from juvenile probation department files with driving records and marriage license records being used to assist in tracking of the subjects. Adult criminal data were collected from local, state, and federal agency searches. A series of different statistical techniques were used to analyze these data including chi-square, t-tests, analysis of variance, and multiple and logistic regression.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
A chi-square analysis of percentage of violent offenders by age (juvenile or adult), gender, and race revealed that significant statistical differences existed between the experimental group and the control group in percentage of violent offenders for the following groups. Neglected/abused females and blacks were more likely than the control group to be violent offenders as juveniles (p=<.10). Neglected/abused males and blacks were more likely than the control group to be violent offenders as adults (p=<.05). Overall, neglected/abused subjects were more likely than the control group to be violent offenders as adults (p=<.10). Analysis of any violent offense reveals that males (p=<.05) and blacks (p=<.01) who had been abused were more likely than the control group to be violent offenders. Overall, in the any violent category abused/neglected subjects were more likely to be violent offenders (p=<.05). Logistic regression revealed that males and blacks had greater odds for a violent arrest than females and whites (at twice their standard error). For adult arrests for violence and any arrest for violence all four predictor variables (gender, race, age, and abuse/neglect status). ANOVA was done to look at age of onset of criminal behavior in abuse/neglect groups. The abuse group and violent (versus nonviolent) offenders were significantly more likely to be arrested at an earlier age (p=<.02). In an ANOVA examining age differences and pathways to becoming a violent offender, there were no significant differences between violent to violent, violent to non-violent, violent to no arrest, and non-violent to violent in age at first arrest. No arrest to violent was significantly more likely to become an offender as an adult and then be arrested for a violent crime. The majority of violent offenders (63%) became violent as adults. Those subjects who were neglected had the earliest age of onset for any arrest. In ANOVA testing of chronicity of violence, juveniles who had been abused/neglected were more likely to be chronic violent offenders. Juveniles who had been arrested were more likely to be arrested as adults (around 50%), and this did not differ by abuse/neglect status.
AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS:
The authors, in light of findings that the relationship between early childhood victimization and later violent behavior, called for more research to understand what accounts for differences in victimized children who become violent and those who do not. Intervention programs would be best focused on the early onset violent offender, but they cautioned that there needs to be more understanding of this group as well as of those who do not go on to be violent adults.
EVALUATION:
There were several strengths to this article. First, the use of prospective cohorts design clearly shows a temporal ordering; i.e. abuse/neglect precedes examination of violent behavior. Operational definitions are clear, and analysis is extensive. Three features of this study stand out as potential areas for close scrutiny. First, their study takes place in the Midwest. It is questionable how generalizable this area of the country is to other areas of the country--for example, the South, which has a significant propensity toward higher rates of violence than the North. Second, the controls used for SES could have been more precise. It may be possible to assume that hospitals and schools would be homogeneous, but some other measure would make the assurance of similarity between experimental and control groups more sound. Third, the analysis is quite ambitious. This is so much so that the reader is easily lost in the numbers because the rationale for the data analysis techniques is unclear. This article could easily have been two. Overall, the advances in this study are important. (CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado)
KW - Childhood Victimization
KW - Child Physical Abuse Effects
KW - Child Physical Abuse Victim
KW - Child Abuse Victim
KW - Violence Predictors
KW - Violence Risk Factors
KW - Child Abuse-Violence Link
KW - Victim Turned Offender
KW - Domestic Violence Victim
KW - Juvenile Offender
KW - Sexual Assault Victim
KW - Child Abuse Effects
KW - Domestic Violence Effects
KW - Sexual Assault Effects
KW - Child Sexual Abuse Effects
KW - Child Sexual Abuse Victim
KW - Child Victim
KW - Violence Causes
KW - Juvenile Violence
KW - Adult Offender
KW - Adult Violence
KW - Age of Onset
KW - Chronic Offender
KW - Late Adolescence
KW - Offense Continuity
Language: en |