Psychoanalysis and Domestic Violence: Exploring the Application of Object Relations Theory in Social Work Field Placement

Abstract

Psychoanalytic theories are steadily falling out of favor within many American schools of social work. This lack of emphasis on psychodynamic perspectives deprives students of the rich developmental insight that can be of particular value in field placement settings like domestic violence shelters in which mother/child dyads are typically of clinical significance. However, existing examples object relations theory applied to contexts of domestic violence often fail to interrupt the replication of a hegemonic misogyny that has historically permeated domestic violence literature. In order to avoid unduly blaming women in contexts of domestic violence, clinical social work students interested in utilizing the theory of object relations in their work must employ an array of additional analyses that focus on issues such as race, financial status, and the psychological effects of trauma.

Perceived Psychological Implications of Family Violence During Childhood on Young Adults’ Relationships with Other People (The Case of Inlga Ijebu Igbo Ogun State, Nigeria)

“…The implication of this is that FV during childhood has significant psychological implications on adult relationships with others in INLGA Ijebu Igbo. This result is in line with the position ofHellman, Johnson & Dobson (2010), Bellis et al(2013)andAdelman & Taylor (2015) that FV leads to loss of victims' health, dignity, security and freedom of self-determination.This also corroboratesRichards (2011) andMcCluskey (2010) who report that children witnessing FV are likely to possess insecure, avoidance attachment style later in the future. This is also supported bySousa et al, (2011) finding that witnessing FV at childhood leads to avoidance of close relationships, keeping friends at emotional distance, hiding emotions, secrecy, shutting down when others show emotions, desiring relationship strongly and feeling lonely.…”

“…There is always a close relationship between victims and the perpetrator of family violence. The victims  Olabisi Onabanjo University, Ago iwoye, Nigeria E-mail: akinyemi.adenuga@oouagiwoye.edu.ng are immediate family members like spouses, parents, brothers, sisters, sons and / or daughters; extended family member such as grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, nephews, nieces and siblings-in-law (McCluskey, 2010). The victimization in this case is based on the socio-cultural relations in the family (marital, parental, collateral).…”

“…Because family violence experience has disrupted gaining the needed trust at the early age of the child, this would make the child grow up in anticipation that the world is dangerous and people are not to be trusted. This also makes most children possess false self and victimhood thinking personality (McCluskey, 2010).…”

“…At these stages, the effect in males is hyper aggression; therefore, male victims are more aggressive than female ones and may likely perpetrate abuse on their spouses and/or children. This justifies the use of violence or causes the males to carry violence-tolerant roles in their adult relationships with other people (Yamawaki, Ochoa-Shipp, Pulsipher, Harlos &Swindler, 2012 andMcCluskey, 2010).…”

“…Exposure to family violence during childhood has been associated with a higher likelihood of the following problems among adults: issues related to cognitive, emotional and social functioning and development which can lead to behavioural and learning difficulties, an increase in the risk of mental health issues, including depression and anxiety disorders and issues related to education and employment prospects. More acceptance of or willingness to excuse the use of violence against women, involvement in violent relationships with peers, conflict with adults and other forms of authority, increased risk of becoming perpetrators or victims themselves and a detrimental impact on their future parenting capacities (Laing, 2010;McCluskey, 2010;Richards, 2011;Eberstadt, 2015).…”