Publication informationChild Abuse and Neglect, 34 (7): 477-489Publisher Elsevier Item record/more information

Three hundred male Irish alcoholics were selected from 508 consecutive alcoholic admissions to hospital. Using well defined diagnostic criteria, they were divided into three subgroups (1) primary alcoholics, (2) alcoholics with secondary affective disorder and (3) those with primary affective disorder and secondary alcoholism. Although the three groups reported differences in past history and family history of affective disorder and in time spent in hospital for both alcoholism and affective disorder, there was little to distinguish them in behaviour associated with alcoholism or in family history of alcoholism. The implications of these findings and their significance for the relationship of affective disorder and alcoholism are discussed.

Adult survivors of institutional abuse were interviewed with a comprehensive assessment protocol which included the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire, the Institutional Child Abuse Processes and Coping Inventory, the Structured Clinical Interviews for Disorders of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders IV axis I disorders and personality disorders, the Trauma Symptoms Inventory, a Life Problems Checklist, the Experiences in Close Relationships Inventory and the Kansas Marital Satisfaction Scale. Profiles were identified for subgroups that described severe sexual (N = 60), physical (N = 102), or emotional (N = 85) abuse as their worst forms of maltreatment. Survivors of severe sexual abuse had the most abnormal profile, which was characterised by higher rates of all forms of child maltreatment and higher rates of post‐traumatic stress disorder, alcohol and substance abuse, antisocial personality disorder, trauma symptoms and life problems. Survivors of severe emotional abuse were better adjusted than the other two groups. The profile of survivors of severe physical abuse occupied an intermediate position between the other two groups. A thorough assessment of abuse history and current functioning should be conducted when providing services to adult survivors of institutional abuse, since this may have important implications for the intensity of services required. Survivors of severe sexual abuse may require more intensive services. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Objective. To develop a psychometric instrument to evaluate psychological processes associated with institutional abuse and coping strategies used to deal with such abuse. Methods.As part of a comprehensive assessment protocol, an inventory containing theoretically derived multi-item rational scales which assessed institutional abuse-related psychological processes and coping strategies were administered to 247 Irish adult survivors of institutional child abuse. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were used to derive 6 factor scales, the reliability and validity of which were assessed.Results. Factor scales to assess the following constructs were developed (1) traumatization, (2) re-enactment, (3) spiritual disengagement, (4) positive coping, (5) coping by complying, and (6) avoidant coping. There were varying degrees of support for the validity of the scales with most support for the traumatization and re-enactment scales.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Advocacy services, for victims and survivors, are at the core of our response to Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). The survivor contact element of IPV perpetrator programs is recognized as a necessary safety measure for their operation. Within the context of equivocal evaluations of these programs, and the impetus to find opportunities to enhance their effectiveness, this study report explores the service user perspective on survivor contact work. In-depth semi-structured interviews were completed with 18 perpetrators and 18 survivors involved in three Irish-based programs, and findings were analyzed using grounded theory principles. Almost without exception, survivors were positive about their engagement with an outreach service. There was evidence to suggest that perpetrator program outreach services do reach survivors who may not ordinarily make contact with an advocacy service. In general terms, survivors felt validated as survivors, they felt supported, they learned about abusive behaviors and some saw the service as a monitor of what their partner was saying during group work. However, some survivors described their fear that any reports of ongoing abuse, which they offered, would attract reprisals from their partner or the attentions of child protection services. More determined application of criminal justice measures, and enhanced resourcing of the survivor contact element of these programs, should be considered.