Heterogeneity Within Domestic Violence Exposure: Young Adults’ Retrospective Experiences

Abstract

Using Holden's taxonomy of domestic violence (DV) exposure as a guiding framework, the current study examined young adults' diverse DV exposure experiences. Twenty-five young adults (ages 19-25) exposed to father-perpetrated DV during their childhood and adolescence were interviewed using a qualitative descriptive design. Data analyses focused on coercive control exposure through reports of non-physical abuse tactics, types of exposure (e.g., direct, indirect), physical violence exposure (e.g., severity, frequency), and child abuse and harsh parenting practices. DV-exposed young adults were directly and indirectly exposed to physical violence and an array of non-physical abuse tactics toward their mothers. Young adults categorized as having been exposed to coercive controlling violence reported exposure to ongoing, non-physical abuse tactics and more frequent and severe physical violence. These young adults were also more likely to intervene and become victimized during physical violence and reported repeated episodes of child abuse and harsh parenting. Although coercive control appeared to be associated with physical violence and child abuse, generalizations should be made with caution as a few participants exposed to situational conflict were exposed to frequent and severe DV. The findings suggest that DV exposure should be measured in methodologically sophisticated ways to capture the heterogeneity in experiences, with the goal of promoting empirically driven intervention and prevention initiatives that are tailored to individual and family needs.

The Impact of Physical Abuse & Exposure to Parental IPV on Young Adolescents in Poland: a Clinical Assessment and Comparison of Psychological Outcomes

“…Such violence may include: IPV, exposure to parental IPV, and child abuse as well as neglect (Holden 2003;Haselschwerdt et al 2016). The type of violence and the nature of specific acts are important factors to consider (Holden 2003;Haselschwerdt et al 2016). Yet research notes that when victimization experiences are conceptualized broadly (e.g.…”

The Management of Disclosure in Children’s Accounts of Domestic Violence: Practices of Telling and Not Telling

“…However, because of it methodological approach, such research has also been criticised for obscuring children and young people’s own voice (Øverlien 2009 ). It has been suggested that the failure to talk to children and young people about their lived experiences of domestic violence underestimates their capacity for agency (Callaghan and Alexander 2015 ; Callaghan et al 2016b , c ; Haselschwerdt et al 2016 ; Katz 2015 ; Mullender et al 2003 ; Øverlien 2009 ) and reproduces a dominant representation of children who experience domestic violence as silent “witnesses”, damaged and damaging because of their “exposure’ to violence” (Callaghan 2015 ; Eriksson and Näsman 2012 ; Mullender et al 2003 ; Øverlien 2009 ).…”

Young Adult Women's Perceptions of Their Maritally Violent Fathers

“…These descriptions were categorized according to the father's warmth and responsiveness, engagement and accessibility, abuse and control over time, and how the young adults managed or coped with their fathers' maritally violent behavior. To give context to these findings, we first provide a brief description of the young adults' DV exposure experiences (see Table ; for thorough description, see Haselschwerdt et al, ).…”

“…According to Johnson's (2008) typology and Stark's (2007) definition of coercive control, CCV is rooted in an overarching pattern of manipulation and control whereby one partner deliberately and strategically restricts a partner's liberties and freedoms, whereas SCV escalates from situationally based couple conflict and disagreements that are not rooted in one partner's general desire to control and dominate the other. Only a few studies to date have examined the role of coercive control exposure (Jouriles & McDonald, 2014;Øverlien, 2013 or differentiated between exposure to CCV versus SCV (Haselschwerdt et al, 2019). These distinctions have not been applied to literature on fathering by maritally violent men, but they may provide additional nuance for understanding these fathers.…”

“…However, there are a few studies of fathering and father–child relationships from the perspective of the children exposed to domestic violence (DV) in Israel (Peled, , ) depicting these fathers with more nuance (e.g., hostile and caring). The broader perspective that maritally violent men are poor fathers may also be explained by an implicit assumption that men who perpetrate DV are homogenous, a perspective that is inconsistent with the empirical literature on male perpetrators (Holtzworth‐Munroe & Stuart, ), DV at a dyadic level (Johnson, ), and youth exposure literature (Haselschwerdt et al, ; Holden, 2003; Jouriles & McDonald, ). For example, a growing body of literature has documented that different types of DV—specifically, whether the physical violence is rooted in coercive control versus in the context of situational couple conflict—differentially impact youth's adjustment outcomes (e.g., Jouriles & McDonald, ) and overall family dynamics (Haselschwerdt et al, ; Johnson, ).…”