Considering Child to Parent Violence

Ged McElhone

Recent decades have seen marked changes in societies attitudes towards violence that occurs within families. It would not be considered unusual if the words familial violence were to illicit images of domestic violence (where violence is directed from a male to female partner), and child abuse (wherein physical and/or sexual violence is directed from an adult towards a child). However, familial violence and aggression manifest themselves in many forms that are largely underrepresented; one such violent phenomenon that has, to this time, received little academic research is Child to Parent Violence (CPV). 

Harbin & Madden (1979) challenged established views of family violence, identifying ‘battered parents syndrome’ as a unique phenomenon. Unlike research regarding male perpetrated partner violence, and the abuses of children within the family setting, further research regarding CPV stalled. Research during the 1980’s and 1990’s did identify CPV, however this occurred, generally, as an unexpected, or secondary finding in many cases (Charles, 1986). Since Cottrell (2001), published an article entitled ‘Parent Abuse: The Abuse of Parents by Their Teenage Children’, there has been an increase in academic interest. However, given that this research is still very much in its infancy; much focus of contemporary study can be viewed very much through a lens that attempts to define demographic characteristics relative to those who may perpetrate, or be victims of, CPV. 

Academic debate shall doubtless continue over these matters for some time yet, arguably until such times as a definitive definition of CPV is arrived at, alongside a comprehensive legal and support framework within which to provide appropriate support to both victims and perpetrators of this form of familial violence. Consideration of these factors led to the early development of what would become my MSc dissertation – Child to Parent Violence: Analysing the Complexities of the Manifestations of Child to Parent Violence. 

Much of the currently published body of CPV research finds itself in direct contradiction, therefore the aim of the study was to consider some of the most common contradictions relative to the phenomena. This would be achieved through an examination of the origins of CPV. It was felt that by studying the complexities of family power relations that some insight may be gained when attempting to identify what may be considered as behaviours that are ‘normal’, or acceptable within the family setting, and when these ‘norms’ may spill into behaviour that, in its very nature, could only be considered as violent.

To achieve this the study considered three measures of aggression that are commonly agreed upon as being prevalent in CPV: Psychological, Physical and Financial aggression. Further to these factors of aggression, the perception of severity and acceptability of the violent act would be measured across gender and age range of the potential perpetrator of CPV; 7 to 10 years, 11 to 14 years and, 15 up to 18 years of age. In doing so this allowed for comparative exploration of perceptions regarding the severity, and adult acceptability of behaviours displayed across gender and age.

Results from the study would show that there is room to challenge established ideology within this field of research. Across each measure of violence, it was found that there was no significant effect of gender upon the participatory groups perceptions of the severity of violence. This contrasts with much established research that would argue CPV could be defined by the gender of the perpetrator (Gallagher, 2008; Routt & Anderson, 2011). Additionally, it was determined that as a child ages then the violent or aggressive act, across each of the three considered measures, is viewed as being more serious, that there is a need for some form of support and intervention.

Whilst not unexpected, these results go some way to supporting a further idea included in the study, that would suggest that there is potential for parents to inadvertently allow violent behaviours to develop through childhood as a ‘norm’, only reaching out for assistance when potentially the acts of aggression are too much for them to be able to manage within the family unit. This should in no way be considered some type of ‘fault’ of the parents, or the child.

It could be suggested that further answers could be found in societal constructs of familial power and design.  It can be generally assumed that given their role as a parent that they can manage, that they, within the context of their family, maintain control, ergo management, of all behaviours (Miller, 2005).  However, this study suggests that, when aligned with experiences similar to those of, for example, male victims of intimate partner violence (IPV), when it comes to the ability to continue to experience and ultimately then report CPV, there are simply too few services to turn to. Support and intervention resources are limited across the UK, however associated stigma and victim blaming are not (Stanko, 2003), all of which lends itself to the ongoing development of a phenomena that will remain very much pervasive, damaging and hidden across society until such times as legal definition allows for appropriate resources to be designed and implemented for all those whom CPV affects daily.

References

Charles, A. (1986). Physically Abused parents. Journal of Family Violence, 1(4), 343-355 

Cottrell, B. (2001). Parent abuse: The abuse of parents by their teenage children. Ottowa, Canada: Family Violence Prevention Unit, Health Canada 

Gallagher, E. (2008). Children's violence to parents: A critical literature review (Master's thesis). Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. 

Harbin, H., & Madden J. (1979). Battered parents: A new syndrome. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 136(10), 1288-91 

Miller, T. (2005). Making sense of motherhood: A narrative approach. Cambridge University Press. 

Routt, G., & Anderson, L. (2011). Adolescent violence towards parents. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 20(1), 1-19. 

Stanko, E. A. (Ed.). (2005). The meanings of violence. Routledge.


Ged is one of our PhD students. If you would like to contact him then please email him on: s1311793@uni.cumbria.ac.uk