IIHFD
Human Factor Academy Papers
A Human Factor Perspective on Spousal Violence: Causes and Solutions
Senyo Adjibolosoo, PhD
Fermanian School of Business
Point Loma Nazarene University
San Diego, CA
Abstract
Men, women, and children alike suffer from various types of violence in their own homes. People who are subjected to such abuses experience certain destructive personal trauma. In an attempt to deal with excessive spousal abuse, public authorities impose stringent restraining orders and long incarceration terms on the perpetrators. In addition, other interventionist policy measures and programs are used to assist victims. Unfortunately, however, these problem-solving techniques fail to get at the root of the problem. In light of this, this paper argues that since the primary source of spousal abuse is severe human factor (HF) decay, the most effective way to minimize the problem is long-term preventative HF engineering programs.
1. INTRODUCTION
In general, various scholars define violence in terms of physical aggression aimed at causing bodily harm or intentionally killing. In the literature on violence, the most commonly discussed types of physical assault include rape, lashing, slapping, dragging, and so on. Rude (1999) lists slapping, pushing, shoving, kneeling to serve one’s husband, harassment, threat of divorce, and other similar practices as constituting gender violence.
For the purposes of this paper, I view spousal abuse as the habitual practice of an equal partner to a marital agreement who, unilaterally suspending the human and civil rights of the other partner, unleashes subsequent and repeated inhumane treatments on that partner. Chronic spousal abuse engenders long-term emotional trauma, anxiety, low self-esteem, hopelessness, self-blame, guilt, and other negative feelings in the victim. It destroys previously established levels of personal confidence and trust between the batterer and the battered. As an act of intimidation and public ridicule, it totally degrades the victim’s personhood—especially when it persists over protracted periods.
This delineation of spousal abuse does not treat hurtfully inadvertent or non-premeditated attitudes, behaviors, and actions for which one is truly remorseful and works hand-in-hand with one’s spouse to guard against as spousal abuse. In a good marriage people do not necessarily start out perfect. By working together in the context of goodwill and facilitated by good communication, latent abuse is redirected and non-violent balance is achieved. Similarly, the expression of honest emotions, opinions, and criticisms to one’s spouse and also the public acknowledgment of the existence of marital or relational difficulties do not necessarily constitute spousal abuse.
It is, however, important to be aware that though these actions in themselves do not constitute spousal abuse by our definition, the manner in which they are communicated could constitute spousal abuse. For example, when one expresses these emotional feelings in a gentle, caring, and loving way with the intent and hope of harmoniously dialoguing with one’s spouse to work out peaceful solutions to the problem, one cannot be accused of being abusive. However, communication that leads to problem solving can be paralyzed when one partner presents felt emotions and opinions or even criticisms in derogatory or sarcastic and demeaning ways; it is then admissible that one is guilty of spousal abuse. That is, when any of these feelings are presented in inappropriate manners, they could constitute spousal abuse by our definition. In matters relating to situations that could create conflict, it is imperative that husbands and wives be very articulate and precise in their expressions—be they either verbal or nonverbal. Personal sloppiness could turn a non-conflict inducing situation into a long-drawn relational feud that can degenerate into spousal abuse in the long-term.
Those who engage in acts of spousal abuse take unfair advantage of their position, authority, and power. Rather than recognizing themselves as equal partners to the marriage contract, they perceive themselves as being senior signatories to the agreement. By doing so, they deliberately subject their spouses to physical, emotional, mental, verbal, and other forms of abuse. These kinds of inhumane treatments do not only lead to all kinds of psychological disorientation, anxiety, and fear in the long-term, but also destroy the personal confidence, self-esteem, and emotional stability of those subjected to them. In most cases, these acts of violence commence with rude, offensive, sarcastic, and verbally insulting remarks about one’s spouse (see Evans, 1996; and Susan, 1996). When it is habitual, acts of spousal abuse constitute a virus that originates solely from personal experiences and learning taken in from the external environment that has contributed to the depreciation of the quality of the individual’s HF.
Like a vicious computer virus that replicates itself and destroys files of stored information, the urge to indulge in the practice of spousal abuse is a hidden code inscribed in the person’s HF. Such inscriptions are produced through stimuli in the form of knowledge and experiences the individual has accumulated in the course of his or her personal development (Adjibolosoo, 2001). The virus of spousal abuse reveals itself in the individual’s attitudinal, behavioral, and action patterns. By distorting emotions, this virus causes severe errors in personal thinking, judgment, and the tactful expression of thoughts and feelings. The abuser, therefore, concocts, initiates, carries out, and perpetuates acts of spousal abuse.
Once spousal abuse commences, it does not only snowball, but also engulfs and overwhelms the victim if nothing is done immediately to stop it. Though batterers suffer from profound inferiority complexes, they are, however, empowered by this virus to apply excessive physical force or verbally or nonverbally abusive expressions that are aimed at hurting or even killing the abused. Since the act of battering is underscored by severe HF decay, it is often loaded with strong negative emotional energy that is not easily controlled. Like a double-barreled gun, when it finally goes off, it either maims permanently or kills its victims. In most cases, when the abuser relapses into a state of fury against his or her spouse, the batterer enters into a realm of passionate hatred where he or she becomes a captive to and also controlled by what I refer to as the quick madness syndrome (QMS). This syndrome blinds and clouds the abuser’s sense of feeling and the ability to listen attentively, hear clearly, reason methodically, and make precise principle-centered judgment. In its infancy, the QMS occurs sporadically and dissipates as quickly as it begins. However, in its mature stage, it leads to long-term debilitating acts of demoralizing spousal abuse. When acted on, the individual controlled by the QMS unclothes the abused of his or her dignity, honor, respect, civil, and human rights.
Though there is absolutely no justification for spousal abuse under any circumstances, centuries of historical records of human experience have revealed and also confirm that spousal abuse is a practice that is deeply rooted in the humanity of its perpetrators. Acts of spousal abuse take the form of physical, emotional, psychological, substance/chemical, financial, spiritual, mental, sexual, verbal, and other types of abuse. Browne (1993) observed that: “Abuse in couple relationships may include intense criticisms and put-downs, verbal harassment, sexual coercion and assault, physical attacks and intimidation, restraint of normal activities and freedoms, and denial of access to resources” (see also Pagelow, 1984 and Walker, 1979). When such acts of spousal abuse occur, the couple and their children suffer different forms of trauma (Coffey, 1998 and Engel, 1992). In the long-term, the impact of a single household’s experience of spousal abuse may trickle down to others in the community. That is, the morally unacceptable actions or wicked acts of the fathers are visited unto the third and fourth generation.
I must also add that spousal violence as practiced by the worst offenders is as criminal as, indeed the same as, murder, rape, and so on. It is, therefore, easy to demonize offenders, but in so doing we may create the impression that the problem is one having to do with deviants—people out there that are different from us in kind. The reality, however, is that the attitudes and behaviors that make spousal violence possible are all around us. People who seem trustworthy and diligent at their jobs sometimes have a darker side. In light of this, the working definition for spousal abuse presented earlier in this paper is aimed at prompting and encouraging each one of us to look at ourselves more critically and with renewed insight. In fact, from the HF perspective, in certain ways, every one of us is guilty in one way or the other of spousal abuse. Thus, the thoughts presented in this paper are expected to lead us on paths of personal constructive, self-generated, steps to change our attitudes and behaviors toward our spouses for the betterment of our marital relationships. We must also be ready for self-scrutiny as we work together with others to find workable solutions to spousal abuse. Problems are not only “out there,” they are also “in here.” There are too many cases where people put impenetrable walls around their inner lives because the burden of expectations they feel around them do not allow them to face their own realities at home. Such hypocritical attitudes and behaviors will only make the problem of spousal abuse grow rather worse. We must, therefore, be more open rather than secretive and defensive about it and genuinely ask for help when we need it.
Until people are assisted to acquire and develop further the appropriate HF, the neglect of HF education ensures that spousal abuse will only escalate. To understand why this is, it is imperative that one gains deeper insights into the HF concept. The HF refers to the:
Spectrum of personality characteristics and other dimensions of human performance that enable social, economic, and political institutions to function, and remain functional, over time. Such dimensions sustain the workings and application of the rule of law, political harmony, disciplined labor force, just legal systems, respect for human dignity and the sanctity of life, social welfare, and so on. As is often the case, no social, economic, or political institutions can function effectively without being upheld by a network of committed persons who stand firmly by them. Such persons must strongly believe in, and continually affirm, the ideals of society (Adjibolosoo, 1995, p. 33).
Given this definition, therefore, to successfully deal with the widespread problem of spousal abuse, it is critical to identify the specific HF of the people who indulge in it and then assist them to positively transform their HF.
In light of these observations, the primary objective of this paper is three-fold. First, the reality and pervasiveness of spousal abuse is highlighted. Second, the underlying reasons for the impotence of traditional interventionist measures aimed at dealing with spousal abuse are outlined and discussed. Third, it is argued that since the primary source of spousal abuse is severe HF decay, one of the most effective and efficient ways to deal with it is a long-term preventative program of action aimed at HF engineering (Adjibolosoo, 2001, 1999, 1998, and 1996). It is argued that when children are educated from their infancy through teenage years from the HF perspective, they stand a much greater chance of minimizing the frequency and the degree of intensity of spousal abuse.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 focuses on the meaning of spousal abuse and its types. In this section, real life experiences of different people who have either suffered spousal abuse in the past or are currently going through it are presented to support the arguments made in the paper. In section 3, traditional views about the primary sources, frequency, and intensity of spousal abuse are presented and discussed. Section 4 focuses on orthodox interventionist procedures and techniques aimed at overcoming the frequency and degree of severity of spousal abuse. It is argued in section 5 that unless the positive HF is developed, orthodox attempts aimed at solving the problem of spousal abuse will always fail.
Drawing clues from the arguments presented in this section, specific human factor-based suggestions and recommendations are made for minimizing the frequency and degree of intensity of spousal abuse. The thorough formulation and effective implementation of an appropriate human factor-centered public policy will lead to significant breakthroughs in successfully minimizing the instances of spousal abuse. The conclusion is presented in section 6.
2. REAL LIFE CASES OF SPOUSAL ABUSE
Spousal abuse can take various forms as listed earlier (see also O’Leary and Maiuro, 2001; Susan, 1996; and Walker, 1984). When thoroughly dissected and carefully studied, specific elements of such forms of spousal abuse include those types listed in Table 1. For example, an abusive spouse indulges in hitting, slapping, punching, using verbally abusive words, kicking, grabbing, dragging, pulling, twisting the arms and legs of the spouse, whipping, and so on (see Table 1 and also details in Stets and Straus, 1990 and Straus et al, 1980). Such acts unleash different types of trauma against the person being abused. Resulting from these kinds of abusive treatments are the types of physical injuries listed in Table 2. Examples include bleeding nose, dislocation, bone fractures, cuts, bruises, black eyes, miscarriages—in the case of women, alcoholism, drug addiction, and so no (see Table 2). In general, such injuries leave long-term indelible imprints on their victims (see Dutton, 1988 a and b; and 1992 a and b).
In every marriage, however, struggles of different types, degrees, and nature pertain. In certain cases, the nature and quality of relationship between a husband and wife are easily displayed in their countenance. Though they may be under the delusion that no one else knows about the problems they are going through as a couple, their countenance and expressions reveal almost everything after their masks of concealment unknowingly have fallen off. During such moments, since the husband and his wife are unaware, they glaringly but unconsciously display the quality of their marital relationship to others. By meticulously observing such couples in certain circumstances, an astute individual is able to successfully pick up the nature and type of abuse that prevails in the relationship.
I recently had a vivid experience regarding this phenomenon in Japan in October 2001. While I waited in a restaurant for my breakfast, a husband and wife walked into the restaurant and took a table close to mine. As they sat down and began to eat their breakfast, they never engaged in any conversations. The husband was seriously engrossed with reading a newspaper and occasionally sipping his coffee. The woman also solely focused on drinking her juice. She tried a few times to get a conversation going but failed. As such, for a period of approximately an hour and a half in the restaurant, they never talked to each other. Whatever the matter might be, I just wondered whether there were some serious problems in their marriage. And if there were, it seemed to me that throughout the whole time they were together in the restaurant, each received the silent treatment or voiceless abuse from the other. If this inference were true, it is arguable that this is one of the most subtle and dangerous forms of spousal abuse one could experience. Voiceless treatment of one’s spouse or silent abuse is insidious, heart wrenching, excessively paralyzing, annoying, and severely exhausting in all directions. It is one of the quickest routes to emotional breakdown, torment, and separation or divorce.
Conversations, interviews, and focus group discussions with various women confirm the experience of this couple and also the knowledge we already have about the variegated colors of spousal abuse—it exists in every society and flows like a never-ending river.
2.1. Real Life Encounters: Spousal Abuse
In what follows, I present some information from personal interviews and focus group discussions. These interviews and discussions were aimed at discovering the experiences of different people in their relationships with their spouses. Though it is not easy to classify abusive spousal types, I have, however, assigned certain titles to each case reported. In reality, it is easy to recognize that, in each abusive case, the abuser fits almost all categories. In light of this fact, the classifications used here should be viewed as exploratory rather than conclusive.
2.1.1. The Controlling Spouse
One interviewee reveals the story of a married friend of hers who is being dominated by her husband. This woman works for a different company than that of her husband’s. Unfortunately, the husband always controls his wife’s daily movements and activities. Whatever the wife wishes to do, when he says no, it means there can be no negotiations. For example, there was one time when management planned a field trip for the office staff. This activity was aimed at enhancing long-term employee productivity. When she told the husband about it, he refused to grant her permission to participate in the trip. She, therefore, did not go on the trip. This man does not only control his wife, but also prescribes for her what she may or may not do. He has complete control over her. She is very unhappy because she feels like a prisoner who can’t get out. She hardly shares her experiences with others. She hopes that things would change for the better over time.
2.1.2. The Angry Non-Confrontational Spouse
During one of our focus group discussions, another woman tells about the condition of her friend’s marriage. In this marriage, the husband of this woman is described as not being a terrible person on the surface. In general, he has been very nice to her since they got married. He does a lot of things to make her feel accepted, wanted, happy, and satisfied. He neither verbally nor physically abuses her. He used to give her sufficient allowance for her personal needs. This is an amount of money far and above what he gives her for the day-to-day running of their home. They rarely discuss money and other issues related to their marriage. It is, however, an unspoken conclusion that while he makes the money, the wife sits home and does nothing.
Unfortunately, however, in recent years, she began to feel distraught and lonely. This was because he began to ostracize her. Unlike previous years, they hardly have quality time together. His withdrawal from her was at first gentle and hard to notice. But it is now clearly obvious that he wishes to keep to himself. He is always on the road for business purposes. On most weekends, he is never home. He has all kinds of business related obligations to fulfill during the weekends. Her personal inkling is that since he dreads her presence and face-to-face interactions, his escape is to be away from home as often as possible and for long hours.
He has now unilaterally and completely withdrawn her allowance without having either said anything about it or discussed it with her. Not desiring to engage in any spousal battles, she decided to silently bear her plight in this regard and refrain from talking about it. To her, it is painfully humiliating to feel like a rejected wife who has been banished into marital hell. She has already been judged in his court of reason in absentia, found guilty, and sentenced to an isolation prison where she is expected to silently burn and suffer for sins against her husband that she knows nothing about. Yet she continues to perform her duties as a loving, caring, and faithful wife. But all her kindheartedness and lavish of love and care do not seem to be achieving any positive results. The gap of verbal silence and friendly interactions grows wider and deeper day-by-day. At the moment, she is running out of steam and things to do to keep her sanity and also sustain the marriage. She feels hopelessly helpless because she has no money of her own. She has, however, decided to remain in her marriage, doing her best to make it work.
In this case, this housewife continues to suffer emotional, financial, and silent abuse. Whether the husband is aware of the situation or not, she carries a tremendous weight of marital hurt, disappointments, hopelessness, helplessness, fear of the unknown, frustrations, and so on.
2.1.3. The Intimidating and Fear-Inducing Spouse
Another housewife related the nature of the relationship between her and the husband. She points out that her nice and loving husband sometimes becomes transformed into an intimidating and emotionally abusive person when he is under stress or does not seem to approve of some of her decisions and corresponding actions. Though he never physically abuses her, he fails to understand that some of his actions kill something in her inner person each time he behaves in a strange and emotionally disturbing manner. Though the husband never abuses her in the physical sense, his actions and words are tantamount to verbal and emotional abuse. There was one time she was doing the groceries and she came across an inexpensive handbag that she liked. After having bought the groceries they needed for the week she had some amount of money left over and bought it. When the husband returned home from work, she told him about the handbag and showed it to him. His initial response was about where she got the money to acquire the handbag. When she told him the truth, he grew angry and wild. Her attempt to calm him down only poured gasoline on a burning wood. Before she could do anything else to relax him, he took the handbag and hacked it into pieces with a kitchen knife in her presence. She was so shocked that she could not hold back her tears and feelings of sadness. That evening was one of the most emotionally intense moments she had ever experienced in her life. In this terrible state, however, she laid the table for him. When he finished eating, she gave him a drink and did the dishes. She was just trying hard to help him to overcome his unreasonable anger. Over the years they have, however, risen above their initially scary and trying moments.
Today, they have been married for approximately twenty years and are doing quite well. The man has changed tremendously. At the beginning the foundation of their marriage was not only laid on a shaky ground, but was also weak. Surprisingly, however, time has been the greatest healer for this marriage. She never ceased serving, caring, and loving. He has learned to appreciate and respect his wife. It suddenly dawned on him over the years that without the tremendous assistance from his wife, he could not have made the great achievements in his career.
2.1.4. The Substance and Physically Abusive Spouse
Another woman who has been abused for over a decade and yet stayed with her husband noted:
Spousal abuse, domestic violence; those two phrases were never heard of (at least by me) in the mid-sixties. As a matter of fact, I don't recall ever hearing about them until the early eighties. And even then, I seldom heard it mentioned anywhere. Another big one was alcoholism, I had no idea what an alcoholic was supposed to look like or act like. Today, I can tell you that spousal abuse and alcoholism go hand in hand. In my case, I was sure they were related, except for after years of drinking, he sobered up for a few months and still abused me and the kids again, and again . . . I used to think that if I was real sweet and got his dinner ready when he came home from work, lay out his clothes in the morning, even warmed up his truck in the winter, he wouldn't beat me up anymore. Well, I got news for you, it did NOT make a bit of difference. After many years of putting up with it, I started calling the police. Since most of his drinking was done on weekends, they'd tell me to go to the prosecutor's office on Monday, and press charges against him. By then he was back to work and very "sorry", so I wouldn't do nothing. In the early to mid eighties, I found out that I could have pressed charges on him at anytime by requesting that the cops bring the papers with them, the day it happened. So, I finally did it. He swore revenge as they loaded him up in the police car. Of course, he got out the next morning, after he was found not guilty. The last time I pressed charges, he spent 2 weeks in the County jail. He was soooo "sorry", he was crying. Well I'm sure you guessed it, he did it again. He never stopped beating me up, until the day he died; that is after going to 3 different alcoholic treatment centers, and [a] psychiatric ward. Today, I am reliving it through my daughter. It's a vicious circle that has to be stopped. I hope this helps some of you that are being abused, and believe that you did something wrong to deserve that kind of abuse from a spouse, and think he or she will change if you are a nicer person. The chance is it will only get worse. [The emphases are in the original]
Drawing from this experience, it is intuitively sensible to point out that once spousal abuse commences, it may not stop. The abuser will continue to batter for as long as he or she is not stopped from doing so. In most cases, however, the abused wrongly believes that when he or she behaves in certain ways to please his or her spouse, the battering will cease. Unfortunately, real life evidence does not confirm this belief. In light of this, it is arguable that when one experiences battering from the hands of one’s spouse for the first time, one must immediately take appropriate actions to ensure that it is neither repeated nor becomes a norm of the marital relationship.
Another respondent, speaking to the marital woes of a colleague of hers writes:
I think that abuse may almost always lead to a break-up of a marriage, or at least a separation of some kind. Whether the abuse is physical, emotional, mental, or chemical, it makes no difference in the context of a marriage. This could be a very delicate issue and may not be repairable in some cases. I know a younger woman that was scared to go home every day, in fear that her husband would already be home and already be very drunk. He would be angry if she wasn’t there, angry if she was, and kept a very tight leash on every other action she made. It was a very sad situation and she tried to get away many times. They eventually tried counseling, and for a short time it appeared to make a difference. I could tell that she was even a little happier with her life and the situation. But of course he would run into another problem at work or just anything that he didn’t have patience for. This in turn would result in a very scary drunken night for her. To make a long story short, she did end up “escaping” and filing for divorce. For a long time she felt that she didn’t put enough effort into working things out. In her case, there were all forms of abuse and repair was far from possible. I think that any abuse case is going to be difficult to work through. But in my mind, forgiveness, repair, and starting over may be a very hard step, and then is it going to be worth it?
All the real life cases presented so far speak to the phenomenon of husbands abusing their wives. However, as real life evidence reveals, domestic violence is not necessarily one way—husbands maltreating their wives. In certain cases, some wives are also perpetrators of violence against their spouses. Speaking to the issue of how wives abuse their husbands in marital relationships, one male informant notes:
The blanket pathologizing of men, while possibly wholesome from the point of view of keeping us humble, leaves out satisfactory discussion of the damage that women do in the home. In my own family, it is my mother, who for about twenty-five years when we were adolescents and young adults, did the most damage. While my father was a controller in the fashion of his generation, he was also a man of unusual discipline, fairness and without violent tendencies. My mother was not as strong, however, and spent her middle years hopelessly alcoholic and crushingly verbally abusive. She is not a bad woman, but the scars she left run deep. The role modeling of our childhood has made of all my brothers and myself concerned and fair fathers, if a little cold as husbands, but my sister has opted out of parenting altogether, and for many years was unable to sustain a lasting personal relationship (with a man). She was the youngest during my mother’s bad years and she has the least to go on, in terms of parental role modeling, for her own life. She, like our mother, is also alcoholic, as one of my brothers and I may also be considered . . . For at least ten years I have been profoundly dissatisfied with my marriage, but I have remained . . . My wife shows the same patterns of emotional imbalance that my mother showed, but without the need of alcohol to trigger it. The result of this is that we are consistently unable to solve problems that arise. Any discussion of substantial issues (such as money or the education of the children or discipline) breaks down as disagreement is seen as threatening, and difficult communication, for cultural and language reasons, then becomes impossible . . . I am quite uncomfortable about having my participation in a very difficult marriage seen as abusive in character.
Discussions with other men corroborate this account in that there are many men out there who have also been abused or currently being abused by their wives. Most of these men do not respond with physical violence against their wives. The main hope they have is that their unpleasant situation would change for the better and hence lead to a long-term improvement in their marital relationship with their wives and life at home. Yoshioka and Dang (2000) noted, however, that the percentage of wives that abuse their husbands is smaller than that of husbands who batter their wives. In their study of Asian communities of Massachusetts, Yoshioka and Dang (2000) showed that in Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Cambodian, and South Asian communities, 9%, 3%, 22%, 37%, and 5% of the respondents respectively reported having seen a man being beaten by his wife. Browne (1993) noted that seventeen years of empirical research findings and conclusions have led experts to suggest that at the national level in the United States, four million women are badly battered by their male partners on average over a twelve-month period (see details in Straus and Gelles, 1990 and Straus et al, 1980).
Truly, the evidence on spousal abuse is overwhelming. Most of it is not even reported at all. Many people are ignorant about the pervasive nature of spousal abuse. If we are to fully comprehend the intensity and nature of this problem, it is imperative that we acquire deeper insight into its main causes. In what follows, therefore, our focus is turned to traditional views about why spousal abuse happens.
3. SOURCES OF SPOUSAL ABUSE: SOME TRADITIONAL VIEWS
In the literature on the sources of domestic violence, the factors listed as being the main causes of spousal abuse are countless. The literature on domestic violence places the problem into four distinct categories as:
1. Psychological theories that focus on the deficits of the abuser and the vulnerabilities or characteristics of the victim.
2. Sociological theories that stress the extent to which men in patriarchal and oppressive societies exert destructive impact on women.
3. Social learning theories that concentrate on the significant impact domestic violence exerts on children and the extent to which it shapes their behavior in adult life.
4. Biological explanations that point out that hormones, drugs, and alcohol affect behavior and, therefore, impact domestic violence.
From these studies, various variables have been identified as causes of and explanations for domestic violence in most societies. Listed in Table 3 are factors that are deemed to initiate, fuel, and perpetuate long-term spousal abuse. Examples of such factors include a sense of isolation caused by being discriminated against (see Table 3). In multicultural settings, where there are large immigrant populations, the inability to access available services for victims of family violence is also said to produce further spousal abuse (Yoshioka and Dang, 2000).
Table 4 presents data on explanations for family violence among Asian communities of Massachusetts. These explanatory factors are grouped into six categories as (1) Something is wrong with the husband as a person [182]; (2) Something is wrong with the husband at the time [122]; (3) It was the wife’s fault [36]; (4) The problem is their relationship [18]; (5) He had a bad childhood [17]; and (6) Social and/or cultural beliefs that oppress women [3] (the numbers in the square brackets represent the total number of respondents who listed each of these categories as explanatory factors).
Cheating on one’s spouse is also put forward as being a major cause of domestic violence and possible divorce. For example, when one of the spouses cheats on the other the attitudes, behaviors, and actions of each partner drastically change in the process. In most cases, acts of infidelity have unorthodox ways of indirectly revealing the pretence of the culprit. Once it comes into the knowledge of the other partner, intense conflicts emerge. While some husbands immediately respond with physical violence against their wives, some wives respond by either retreating into themselves or instantaneously fighting back. Few wives would physically and verbally respond when they learn that their husbands have been unfaithful. In most cases, they use the time to collect sufficient evidence to prove that their husbands are actually guilty of infidelity. It is after the information gathering process is completed that a new era of separation and divorce or violent abuses begins. In certain cases of marital infidelity, the trigger mechanism, though not the actual reason, is the feeling of certain things missing in one’s marital life. The power of infidelity is its capacity to create long-term antagonism and violence between spouses—except in cases where divorce follows immediately after the act of infidelity becomes public. Infidelity produces paralyzing feelings of betrayal, insecurity, emotional trauma, hatred, sadness, loss, revenge, and so on. Writing on this issue, Ivory (2001) observed:
There is a reason why people cheat: Something's missing. Not usually at home, though. More often than not, the void lies within the cheater. Men and women can have what almost everyone dreams of—a mate willing to have and/or raise their children, suffer bad breath and nasty in-laws, stick through thin and thinner—and still roam. In the cheater there exists an insecurity that is hard to tame, a vast, empty feeling of inadequacy that is difficult to fill.
Most spouses grow furious and abuse their partners who engage in marital infidelity. The act of infidelity is considered to be a serious offense, indicating betrayal and disrespect. Those who feel seriously violated through the act of marital infidelity do everything possible to punish the spouse who falls prey to this problem.
As noted above, social and cultural beliefs are also viewed as strong contributing factors to spousal abuse. For example, the Japanese have delayed the establishment of laws against domestic violence because in the past people thought and believed that others should not interfere with the domestic affairs of husbands and wives. They are to be left on their own to deal with their marital problems. Above all some Japanese people lack the understanding that domestic violence constitutes a criminal offense. In Canada recently, a high-ranking Japanese Consular Official abused his wife. When the case came to the attention of the police and he was questioned, his response was that his wife deserved to be battered. He concluded that the practice of battering one’s wife is part of Japanese culture and as such he did nothing wrong for having physically abused his wife in the manner he did. Tsunoda (2001, p. 2) observed:
In Japan, domestic violence is so pervasive that it is considered a normal part of marriage, never recognized as a serious social problem, and lacking even an appropriate term in the Japanese language. Moreover, battered women have been deprived of any social institution where they can confront domestic violence.
When people grow up with certain cultural beliefs and practices, they live and act accordingly. They do exactly as they saw their parents, grandparents, and other adults in the community do when they were children. While growing up, they saw their fathers abuse their mothers without any dire consequences to them. Similarly, when they grow up and get married, there is hardly anything in their psyche that educates and insulates them against battering their spouses. They only practice what they learned from their childhood experiences. Parents who provide excellent models to their children about how to humanely treat one’s spouse also exert similar positive impact on them when the children too grow up and get married.
3.1. Reporting Spousal Abuse: The Actual Practice
While in countries like Canada and the US where people freely talk about spousal abuse and also seek workable solutions, this is not the general practice in Japan, South Korea, African, and other Asian societies. In Japan, for example, spousal abuse in it various forms is hardly ever reported. While some married women suffer terrible abuses from the hands of their own husbands, they feel obligated to protect them from public loss of face and humiliation. They stay in the relationship and quietly take extensive loads of additional spousal abuse. In Japan, for example, to report to others about spousal abuse is to bring a bad reputation to oneself, children, and spouse—the sole perpetrator. Since the husband is the wife’s shujin, she is supposed to respect and obey him since he is her sole master—protecting the reputation of an abusive husband in order to hold the marriage together regardless of the frequency and degree of severity of spousal abuse in the relationship.
Battered wives hardly ever share their sordid plight with others. A physically exhausted and emotionally drained wife could be blamed for her husband’s failures, abusive acts, and life’s problems if she were to make reports to others about the abusive husband. If she reports the husband’s violence against her the police may not do anything about it. In this regard, spousal abuse, for a long time, has neither been perceived as being a pervasive nor serious social problem in most male dominated societies. It is, however, clearly obvious today that it occurs in every country.
In cases of abuse, either the abused individual does not have any knowledge about the availability of help services or refuses to seek the service for fear of losing face before one’s peers and other community members (see Tables 3 and 4). This attitude is also a result of cultural beliefs and practices. For example, in countries such as Japan and South Korea, it is bad to discuss one’s marital problems with others—washing one’s dirty linen in public places. By doing so, one is accused of having slighted, slandered, and betrayed the family. Once this information goes out, it is the victim’s belief that other people would use the information to ridicule his or her family members—especially the children when they are either at school or play with their peers or elsewhere in town. If it is the woman who is being subjugated and subjected to spousal abuse, she is usually fearful of the repercussions when the abusive husband hears that she had told others about how he batters his wife at home. To avoid further abuses and humiliation the wife neither tells others about her plight nor reaches out for help. To protect their husbands and themselves, it is much better not to let others know about violence at home. Others refuse to report spousal abuse or reject assistance for the fear of losing what they already have. Commenting on this issue, an informant observes:
One Taiwanese woman, a former student of mine in Canada, disclosed to me that she herself was the victim of physical abuse by her Taiwanese common-law husband. I contacted a shelter for her and tried to get her to make use of support services available. She refused this, however, because her husband was rich and she had lived in great material comfort, frequently without him.
Clearly, some abused spouses decide to not press charges for reasons known to them. In most cases, such reasons are based on fears—either real or fantasized.
In 1999, the total number of people arrested for domestic violence in Japan was 580. In 2000, this number increased to 1096. It is estimated that a ratio of 1 out of 20 married women experienced the feeling of endangerment through the violence of their spouses in 2000. When asked whether they ever told their story to anybody else, 40% responded in the negative. Prominent among the general reasons given for not reporting spousal abuse include the following: (a) It's too shameful; (b) I can bear the burden for the sake of my children and our aging parents; (c) I don't want to recall the matter; and (d) I think nothing will change even when I report the abuse.
4. DEALING WITH SPOUSAL ABUSE: THE CASE OF ORTHODOXY
Since the occurrence of spousal abuse is pervasive, community leaders and government officials do their best to either prevent or minimize its frequency and degree of intensity. The most frequent interventionist solutions include extensive law enforcement programs, arrests, incarceration, restraining orders, the strengthening of existing laws and the creation of new ones, psychological counseling and therapy, and taking seasonal shelter elsewhere, separation, and divorce. As spousal abuse escalates into a crisis situation, some children deal with it by running away from home. Similarly, while some spouses separate for a period of time and get back together again when the root causes of the problem have been correctly identified and effectively dealt with, others file divorce papers and go through with the termination of the marriage. Such separations or successful divorces do not necessarily terminate the antagonism and hostilities between those involved. In the final analysis, death does result in certain cases—either one party to the contract commits suicide or kills the other or both die—sometimes even including the children.
For generations, we have accumulated volumes of information regarding what must be done to either avoid or overcome spousal abuse and its associated negative implications for children and other community members in the long-term. Among the most frequently prescribed and applied interventionist solutions to deal with spousal abuse are:
1. Strengthening old laws and making new ones as required;
2. Prescribing professional counseling and psychological therapy;
3. Educating people about available community services and other forms of help;
4. Informing the general public about the pervasive nature of spousal abuse;
5. Helping victims of domestic violence to know their rights;
6. Incarcerating repeat offenders for significantly long prison terms;
7. Creating, funding, and running many more shelters for abused spouses;
8. Increasing funding to existing shelters;
9. Accepting realities and separating for a while from each other;
10. Taking self-defense classes and applying the knowledge for self-protection;
11. Managing emotions and dealing with personal anger;
12. Doing more research to discover the actual causes of domestic violence;
13. Divorcing and deciding on custody arrangements; and
14. Others
Since the general belief is that financial difficulties and lack of job opportunities also lead to continuing domestic violence, it is suggested that if the problem is to be successfully dealt with, it is important to find ways whereby the financial needs of the family in an abusive situation can be adequately met. Women who have no other sources of income except what their abusive spouses provide them with remain in violent relationships and suffer from exacerbated rates of spousal abuse. In both cases, it is critical to provide people with assistance in the areas of education, job training, and job placement (Raphael, 1999).
In most countries the authorities make laws aimed at helping people to understand the seriousness and criminal nature of spousal abuse. In Japan, for example, a new law aimed at the prevention of domestic violence was approved on April 6, 2001. The law comes into force in October 2001. Based on its stipulations, a district court has the power and backing of the law to prohibit an assailant or violator from meeting or having any other contact with the victim of spousal abuse for six months. In addition, depending on the nature and severity of the abuse, the perpetrator could be asked to evacuate and leave the family residence for two weeks. Abusers who refuse to comply with these stipulations are in violation of the law. In such cases, the perpetrator could either be sentenced to prison for one year with hard labor or be fined for a maximum of one million yen. The law also calls for the setting up of appropriate mechanisms and facilities aimed at providing adequate counseling, advice, and therapy to those who experience domestic abuse. Such facilities are also to be equipped to provide safe shelters when the need arises (Schechter, 1982).
In Canada and the US, for example, stringent restraining orders are imposed on the perpetrators of spousal abuses. These offenders are discouraged from getting closer to the residences or workplaces of their estranged spouses. If they are found loitering within the radius of the prohibited areas, they can be arrested, tried, and imprisoned when found guilty of having contravened the order of the judge. However, spousal abusers who are aware that the long-arms of the law may not reach them continue on with their violent acts against their spouses.
Counselors and therapists also encourage spouses to engage in certain practices to avoid serious conflicts that could lead to spousal abuse. For example, to prevent conflicts in marital relationships, Gary and Betsy Ricucci (1992) suggest that couples must:
1. Learn to express their feelings and frustrations honestly without accusing or attacking each other.
2. Choose words, expressions, and a tone of voice that are kind and gentle. Don’t use speech that could easily offend or spark an argument.
3. [Not] exaggerate, distort or stretch the truth. Avoid extreme words like never and always.
4. Avoid generalities; give specific examples. If necessary, make notes before you talk.
5. Commit yourself to seeking solutions rather than merely airing your grievances. Getting even isn’t the goal—you want to get things resolved.
6. Listen to what your mate is saying, feeling and needing. Try to detect his or her underlying concerns.
7. Refuse to indulge bitterness, anger, withdrawal or argument.
8. Be quick to acknowledge your own failures, and don’t hesitate to forgive your spouse. Then make sure you aren’t holding a grudge.
9. Keep talking and asking questions until you are sure you understand what your partner is saying and feeling. Encourage each other as you press toward a solution.
The habitual practice of these recommendations is expected to prevent conflicts and, therefore, spousal abuse.
Browne (1993) also suggests that to deal effectively with violence against women, further efforts are required to:
Make legal protections and options available to all women.
Provide for economic and other necessities related to the adequate care of children.
Coordinate legal proceedings related to assault and threat with proceedings related to child custody and other matters.
Enhance the knowledge of judges, court masters, attorneys, and other legal professionals regarding the prevalence, severity, and persistence of male violence against female intimates.
Regardless of the good intentions and accomplishments of these interventionist policies and/or activities aimed at dealing with spousal abuse, it is quite possible that their performance effectiveness could be improved in the long-term. The reason is that most orthodox approaches to dealing with spousal abuse are interventionist programs in that they are implemented after the fact (i.e., after the abuse has occurred). The inherent flaw in such policy suggestions and programs is their inability to prevent the abuse from happening.
Many researchers have conducted studies that have revealed that intervention programs implemented to assist men who batter their wives to overcome this problem hardly achieve any significant long-term results. For example, Dunford (2000) showed through a detailed process of controlled experimentation that interventions for (Navy) service men known to physically assault their wives did not minimize the problem. Eight hundred sixty one couples participated in this study that lasted for a period of eighteen months. Similarly, Crowell and Burgess (1996), Healey, Smith, and O’Sullivan (1998) also showed that intervention programs for men who batter their wives hardly ever yield any significant and sustainable positive results. Fairbank and Nelson (1987) and Solomon, Gerrity, and Muff (1992) have also shown that drug treatments never work as effectively as expected. Palmer, Brown, and Barrera (1992) showed that men who were involved in treatment still continued to abuse their wives—implying that the types of treatments they received had minimal impact on their battering behaviors.
These results reveal that there is room for further improvement on the traditional interventionist problem-solving techniques being applied to resolving spousal abuse. If, therefore, those in charge of the justice system and law enforcement programs are to effectively minimize the frequency and degree of intensity of spousal abuse, it is imperative that they do their best possible to discover its real root causes. Once they are successful in this discovery process, they can proceed confidently to craft and implement appropriate preventative public policies to minimize the problem.
In light of this, human factor-based approaches that focus on prevention would bring new and powerful dimensions to the ineffective interventionist solutions. Preventative programs that aim at educating people from an early age so as to prepare them for a principle-centered lifestyle could lead to tremendous reductions in the episodes of spousal abuse. This program would assist them to develop the necessary personality characteristics they require to appreciate and respect the humanity, rights, and dignity of others—especially their spouses. This is the intent of the HF approach.
Any successes achieved in doing so would lead to significant diminution of the frequency and degree of intensity of spousal abuse. This being the case, it is important that those involved in finding solutions to the problem rethink certain aspects of their interventionist solutions set. To be successful in the rethinking process, the significance of the HF must be brought to the center of the education program. We now turn to discuss some human factor-centered recommendations for effective public policy aimed at minimizing the phenomenon of spousal abuse.
5. HF-CENTERED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PUBLIC POLICY
The traditional interventionist cafeteria approach to dealing with the problem of spousal abuse is not that efficient in minimizing spousal abuse. Its ineffectiveness is a result of its focus on dealing with symptoms rather than the root causes. In this approach, a plethora of procedures and techniques are created and made available to the abused person to select from and apply to his or her unique situation at will. The expectation is that as the abused people sample the buffet of solution techniques, they must concentrate on those they believe would work better and stick to them until their problem is either resolved or minimized. Though the idea of choice is an excellent one, it does not work very well in this case for many reasons. Among these are:
1. This approach, in its attempt to offer a diversity of choices to emotionally hurting people, fails to recognize that these people may not be in the best frame of mind to make the best choices without the professional guidance and encouragement of knowledgeable and seasoned counselors or therapists. Without having received adequate professional assistance, some victims could make the wrong judgments and choices. It seems to me, therefore, that at the initial stages of counseling or therapy, the victim must be gently led or directed as to how to achieve and sustain full recovery. Over time, he or she could then be directed to other available and useful resources and opportunities.
2. The cafeteria approach may not produce personal commitment (i.e., from the victim’s perspective) required to make certain solution techniques go through their full courses as counselors or therapists may suggest. In this case the victim, if not wanting to directly face and deal with tough issues, can easily abandon the healing process. When this happens, it is not necessarily the case that the technique in question is wrong. Instead, it is likely that the victim finds it too detailed and demanding. Yet it is quite possible that this is necessary for long-term healing to occur. Since the individual may not be willing to carry through with the technique, he or she could terminate it in mid-stream and turn to another less effective one. Like prescription drugs that must be taken for a certain period of time to make them work as effectively as expected, so also is the practice of counseling and therapy in relation to spousal abuse.
In view of these and many other factors, the cafeteria approach, therefore, is unable to establish effective and efficient programs for minimizing spousal abuse in the long-term. Spousal abuse may not be diminished via methods of trial and error. If this were possible we would now be experiencing encouraging signs of diminution in the frequency of episodes and severity of spousal abuse. Given the magnitude of resources that have gone into and continue to be channeled into the provision of services to the abused and expenditure on civil and criminal justice, it is apparent the deficiencies of the cafeteria approach point to the need for another, hopefully more effective direction.
In the presence of severe HF decay, continuing legislation to curtail spousal and child abuse will do little to positively minimize the various forms of abuse (Adjibolosoo, 1997). Regardless of the extensiveness and intent of such legislation, people will always engage in acts of violence against their spouses, given the poor quality of their HF. In the first place, certain respectable businessmen, women, professionals, bureaucrats, young men, and women are themselves involved in acts of domestic violence. As long as the quality of their HF is not transformed in the positive direction, they will always indulge in acts of violence against their spouses. Similarly, legislation aimed at minimizing violence against women and children—spousal and child abuse—will also make little impact when the root cause of severe HF decay is not effectively addressed.
Though attempts aimed at the accommodation of and coping with the problem of spousal abuse may be great gestures, the main problem is they do not minimize the problem. In light of this conclusion, if all our programs are aimed at problem accommodation alone, then we are in serious danger of getting ourselves into many more episodes of spousal abuse of epidemic proportions. To date, almost all programs we support, finance, and implement through governmental agencies, ministry personnel, leaders of civil society, and personnel of other interest groups are nothing more than coping mechanisms—problem accommodating techniques. While the root cause of the six categories of explanations for family violence listed in Table 4 is HF decay, interventionist policies and programs aimed at precisely tackling the problem do little to improve the quality of the HF. In designing such programs, architects of public policy and social activism fail to recognize that the factors listed in Table 3 as causes of spousal abuse are nothing more than trigger mechanisms (i.e., remote factors) for domestic violence. Specifically, the actual root cause of any form of spousal abuse is severe HF decay.
The statistics presented in Table 4 reveal that members of the Asian communities of Massachusetts correctly place more emphasis on the actual variables that cause spousal abuse—the quality of the husband’s personality characteristics (see also Moskovitz, 2001; and Santoro, 1997). That is, members of these communities are aware that spousal abuse is mostly caused when the elements of the abuser’s negative HF take over and control him or her—leading to the perpetration of spousal abuse. This conclusion is insightful in that it precisely brings out the significance of the HF to spousal abuse. The remaining four variables listed in Table 4 have not been rated very highly as initiating causes of spousal abuse. However, community members do consider them as factors that contribute to spousal abuse. While only 17 respondents believed that the quality of a person’s childhood experiences exert significant impact on violence at home, only 3 respondents agreed that social and/or cultural beliefs also lead to the continuing oppression of women (see details in Table 4). Many more community members believe that childhood experiences exert stronger impact on spousal abuse than social and cultural beliefs.
Though certain orthodox policies and programs do achieve short-term results, they are ineffective in the long-term. They fail to reduce the number of instances of separations, divorces, and ultimate family breakups. In certain severe cases, spousal abuse results in the death of one or both people involved in the spousal feud. Innocent and helpless children also suffer similar plights in some cases. As long as those involved in finding solutions continue in directions that focus on palliative and problem accommodating techniques, any monies channeled into these programs would only accommodate the problem. The problem is, therefore, not minimized. Like an improperly treated wound, it keeps coming back again and again. In light of this conclusion, the pertinent question is: “Where then do we go from here since the tools and programs of orthodoxy do not work as effectively as expected?”
Though the answer to this question is simple—pursuing an extensive preventative HF engineering program right from the cradle through all of a person’s lifespan—it is not an easy task to carry out. In the first place, social scientists in designing their research agenda show little knowledge about the HF and its relevance to spousal abuse. In the second place, politicians, lawyers, law enforcers, community leaders, members of interest groups, and everyone else involved in the domestic violence industry (DVI) do not only emphasize palliative measures, but also are satisfied with their outcomes to date. Thirdly, it will take more than a fierce academic battle with words and scholarly debates to get those involved in the DVI to re-orientate their thinking and presuppositions as to the root causes of spousal abuse. Finally, few people believe that the human quality can be successfully transformed in the positive sense.
Unfortunately, however, the final challenge is to get these people to the discussion table with open minds to gain deeper insights into the HF concept and its relevance so they can gain new information to assist them to alter their existing beliefs and perceptions. Yet they require thorough education in the HF concept and its significance to minimizing the crises of domestic violence.
Since spousal abuse is a real world problem, it requires long-term workable preventative solutions that are human factor-centered. In my view, however, most people currently working in the DVI have few clues about the extent to which excessive HF decay contributes to the causes of the problem they purport to deal with. Until such people fully comprehend what the HF is and its centrality to the abuse problem, they will always have few contributions to make toward the provision of workable and effective solutions.
It is important to know that any local, national, and global entrepreneurs operating in the DVI that are more concerned with their own survival rather than actually dealing with the problem of domestic violence will fail in the long-term. However, those that focus primarily on successfully solving the problem would not only survive, but also make tremendous contributions toward the search for procedures through which the incidence and degree of severity of domestic violence could be minimized. In light of this, those that are actually concerned with the minimization of the problem must start right now and from the beginning—the cradle—working harder and digging deeper each time to get at the root system of domestic violence.
As far as dealing effectively with spousal abuse is concerned, prevention through HF development is one of the best ways to go about doing it. This program requires tremendous human energy and financial commitments to the design and implementation of efficient and effective preventative human factor-centered educational programs. Bain (2001) could not have been any more accurate by observing that investment in violence prevention is bound to have long-term yields. It is like saving money in one’s long-term bank account to yield higher returns at compounded daily interest rates. Today, medical research has revealed that brain development and functions are often jeopardized and damaged when children are exposed to too much violence in their earlier years of life. If nothing is done to protect them from such experiences, they grow without knowing how to effectively deal with stress and other forms of stimuli. They may grow up as angry, aggressive, and destructive adults.
Bain (2000) observes:
We might think we could spend the money better elsewhere. But by the time our investments mature they will have grown exponentially. If we are to prevent a man from murdering his wife—or parents from murdering their children, or teenagers from murdering each other—we must get to him long before he marries her, before he meets her, even before hormones create in him a sexual attraction to other human beings. We must get to him in infancy . . . By the age of five, a little boy with the right combination of volatile personality and aggressive environment can already be on path to becoming an abusive spouse and parent, and even a murderer . . . Interventions with today’s children should be viewed not only as attempts to save them from the immediate effects of violence, but as protection for the next generation . . . Every time we identify and help at-risk children, we increase the possibility that they will one day do better with their children. Every time we get through to a teenager about being prepared for parenthood before they have sex, we increase the likelihood that children will be born to people who are ready to parent them.
Children exposed to violence at a very early age in their development process may grow up to be abusers themselves. At such an early age, their experience of abuse and emotional trauma contributes toward the development of their brain and neural networks.
Similarly, children who experience serious malnutrition could also suffer devastating impact on the development of their brain (Lewin, 1975 and Wurtman, 1978). Scientific evidence supports the view that malnutrition diminishes the number of brain cells in the cerebellum. Malnutrition exerts negative impact on children’s development of motor control and coordination and also reduces the quality of nerve cells. In a home where spousal abuse is a routine, it is quite possible that malnutrition and its negative impact could bring undesirable results. Any damages caused to the development of children’s brains will definitely affect the way they react to stress and other stimuli in their adulthood (Adjibolosoo, 2001).
In light of the dangers spousal abuse poses to the impressionable minds of young children, it is imperative that we begin the preventative human factor-centered development programs right from the cradle. This program requires that we provide children with the requisite socio-economic environment within which they can be mentored to grow and mature into responsible adults who are committed to the pursuit of principle-centered lifestyles. The success of this program requires everyone’s participation—especially parents, siblings, and other immediate relations. Teachers, administrators, peers, and everyone with whom the children interact outside the home must take up the challenge and effectively play their assigned role. They must mentor these children and also model integrity, love, caring, responsibility, accountability, and such like to them. In addition, children must be encouraged to do likewise to others—using the appropriate rewards and punishments procedures with much care and caution—always doing so in great love and caring. It is important that parents be trained and educated to comprehend the significance of the quality of the child’s environment on his or her future attitudes, behaviors, and actions. The intervention process could even begin right at the time of conception.
The education program must assist parents and educators to recognize that if they are to be effective in dealing with domestic violence, it is imperative that they gain deeper insight into the primary characteristics of the abuser. In this regard, Raphael’s (1999) view is right on. That is:
We need to look more closely at the abuser. By measuring the characteristics of the abuser we can learn more about possible safe interventions and the needs of battered women on welfare. It is also important to determine the length of time or duration of these intimate abusive relationships. The length of the relationship, and whether there have been children born as a result, will determine whether women can easily escape these relationships and whether they will even want to do so. It is a very different thing to end a dating relationship than a long-standing, live-in relationship.
The kinds of people who perpetuate domestic violence seem to know no boundaries in that such people can be found in all professions, cultures, and religions. In some cases, certain leaders and bureaucrats are themselves abusers in their own homes (see Tyrangiel, p. 64). These individuals are highly qualified and financially successful business people and professionals. They are slaves to the urge of the virus of spousal abuse (i.e., the QMS). This is a problem of excessive HF decay from which they are unable to free themselves. As such, they cannot help others. Using information collected from battered Japanese women, Tsunoda (2001, p. 3) noted:
With respect to their job situations, almost all the abusers were employed when they acted violently. Only 13 percent were blue-collar workers, the rest working in clerical, sales, management or the professions. Almost all the professions were represented in the batterer class, from national university professors, to doctors, lawyers, executives and even a religious minister. These results refute the myth that domestic violence in Japan exists solely in a working-class environment.
The results Tsunoda (2001, p. 3) reported reveal that the most common forms of violence against women in Japan include physical, emotional, and sexual abuse. These problems are deeply rooted and established in their very being—what they actually are in their inner person.
It is important to know and acknowledge that gun control laws and the prohibition of the possession of other lethal weapons will not necessarily lead to any significant reductions in the rate and degree of severity of spousal abuse—killing spouses and children and subsequently oneself. Any legislation that fails to bring positive transformations in the personality traits of people who engage in the act of violence against their spouses will not alter the problem situation for the better.
In light of these facts, we must cease from deceiving ourselves by spending huge sums of money on designing, tendering, and presenting bills to be passed into laws, hoping that by chance, the problem of spousal abuse will go away by itself. It is well known that though significant financial resources and human energy continue to be channeled into activities aimed at dealing with the problem of domestic violence, at best, they have little long-term impact. From the HF perspective, therefore, the primary task of community and national leaders is to model the positive HF to the citizens. Once this process is in motion, the minimization of violence against spouses will be but a matter of time. In the presence of well-developed HF, dehumanizing acts of spousal violence would diminish over time.
Rather than focusing on quick fix solution mechanisms that always fail in the long-term, we must alter course and engage in effective HF engineering programs. This transformation process will, however, never occur through new legislation and by toughening old laws. If the HF were something to be miraculously pulled out of a hat, we could easily legislate those involved in spousal abuse to shape up to personal responsibility and accountability or ship out. Unfortunately, however, this is not the case. If we continue to fail to tackle the heart of the spousal abuse problem (i.e., excessive HF decay), the functionality of any techniques and systems we put in place to ensure spousal care and love would only be as effective and efficient as the quality of the HF of those involved permits. Since systems are inanimate, they assume the quality of those who design, implement, and run them. In light of this, until we address the issue of how to develop the positive HF, every quick fix measure and accommodation technique we design and implement to guarantee that spousal abuse is minimized will fail.
When a garbage can is dirty, its foul smell cannot be made to go away by merely coating it with new paint and then lavishing it with a sweet-scented pot-pourri. It can, therefore, be argued conclusively that if our primary desire is to minimize the total number of spousal abuses in the year, it is imperative we recognize first that the development of the positive HF is a non-negotiable prerequisite to a healthy marital relationship. How much longer would we continue to avoid acknowledging the actual root cause of the problem in the DVI? Abused spouses have suffered for far too long and we need to rethink orthodoxy. Let's think people. Let's think the quality of the HF of the people involved on both sides—abuser and the abused. People with more positive than negative HF make great things happen—a healthy and vibrant spousal relationship and family life. Such people would be more responsible, accountable, committed, loving, and caring than those who suffer from severe HF decay. We are in a new century. It is time to rethink the old ways and their misleading presuppositions. We have focused on ineffective systems, techniques, and programs for far too long. Is it not just about time to focus on HF development to avoid repeating similar results as in the past—miserable failures?
The necessary and sufficient condition for engaging oneself in principle-centered attitudes, behaviors, and actions is to acquire and develop further the positive HF. The primary task, therefore, is to assist children to grow up into adults who would pursue principle-centered living (Adjibolosoo, 1998). By assisting young people to learn about and also pursue principles based on loving, caring, and respect that would guide their attitudes, behaviors, and actions, they would be better prepared to start and foster excellence in relationships and rich family lives. As long as people are assisted to become aware of and also do their best to adhere to the precepts of these principles, their habits would reflect ethically sound and morally excellent behavior most of the time—especially when they find themselves in various types of relationships, spousal, and parental roles.
Unfortunately, however, when people neglect to channel sufficient resources into HF development in early childhood, they unsuspectingly open the floodgates to domestic violence as these children grow up into adults and begin to get into love and marital relationships. In the long-term, such relationships would turn into violent and destructive nightmares as the participants engage in acts of spousal abuse. To avoid such a plight, it is imperative that children as well as young adults be trained, educated, and mentored through intensive HF engineering programs to learn, develop, and practice personal integrity, responsibility, accountability, tolerance, and commitment in every type of relationship they find themselves.
Through personal affinity and respect for principles, children as well as young people would be placed in better positions to exercise tremendous control over their personal thoughts, attitudes, behaviors, and inclinations as reflected in their expectations, emotions, and desires. By being successful in this regard, the individual would work harder and long enough on his or her attitudes, behaviors, and actions to get them aligned with principle-centered living over the course of his or her lifespan. Just like an automobile that does not drive well because its alignment is off balance, so also it is the case with the individual who suffers from severe HF decay. He or she cannot be a good spouse. For the car to perform properly, its alignment must be brought into balance. Similarly, with successful HF engineering programs, however, spousal abuse would be minimized in the long-term.
Though the issue of personal integrity is important to the success or failure of love and marital relationships, its development has been one of the most neglected areas in educational programs. As such, most people enter into relationships with few clues about the relevance of personal respect, integrity, love, trust, responsibility, accountability, tolerance, and commitment (Adjibolosoo, 1999). The failure to increase and also exercise higher levels of integrity among community members destroys love, trust, and fidelity. In the long-term, this neglect would translate itself into violent acts of spousal and child abuse. To avoid all these spousal abuse problems, it is important to know that:
If she’s gentler than a flower
More beautiful than a star
Spread your arms and protect her
It’s worth throwing yourself away
All that a person can think
Should be just for the one you love
If I have something to tell you
That might be it
This is the foundation of the human factor-centered route we must relentlessly pursue in order to move forward. We must never lose sight of it.
6. CONCLUSION
Marriages and other forms of relationships fail to function as desired because of severe HF decay. The absence of personal trust, integrity, tolerance, commitment, love, caring, responsibility, honesty, and accountability destroys families and damages the lives of spouses and children in the long-term. The focus on human development has unfortunately shifted from principle-centeredness to the ethics of personal wealth acquisition and the avid desire to attain self-esteem. Covey, Merrill, and Merrill (1994) noted that this shift places strong emphasis on quick-fix solutions. Many activities and actions of people are concentrated on personal financial success and other types of self-interest. The focus on personal wealth acquisition seems to deny people the opportunity to think and evaluate the means. People are misled to engage in acts of selfishness and violence against others.
As crises of personal integrity flare up, relationships tremendously suffer from rift, hatred, and never-ending quarrelling. Whether the destruction of such relationships either begins between parents and children or spouses, the long-term implications are vicious abuses in both cases—either parents abusing their children or children abusing their parents or spouses abusing each other or all of these occurring simultaneously. A home in which these kinds of abusive relationships happen as part of the daily routine of household members offers neither joy nor security to anyone. There would always exist dark clouds of depression, intimidation, fear, suspicion, lack of trust, and so on.
To overcome these problems, the primary task of the HF engineer is to focus on HF engineering programs whose foundational principle is how to give and also receive unconditional love, caring, and respect. Through such programs children and young people would learn the true meaning and significance of sincerity, fidelity, and tolerance in loving family relationships. Successes achieved in running such programs would not only improve the human quality, but also humanize humanity in the long-term. This would lead to the most effective functioning of human relationships in their own communities. Marital relationships would also function and remain functional over time. By nurturing, nursing, and developing sincere love, caring, and respect, great and wonderful loving relationships would develop and become sustained in the long-term. This achievement would also lead to the minimization of the intensity and severity of domestic violence in our communities.
In conclusion, note that the HF agenda is neither a quick-fix solution nor does it momentarily yield the expected results. Instead, it is a long-term agenda and will begin to bear excellent fruits over a period of one generation—between twenty to thirty years. For this is the amount of time required to facilitate the positive transformation of our humanity if we commit to and also work harder at the change process.
NOTES
1. See detailed listing in Table 1 and also discussions on physical violence in Browne (1993), Walker (1984), Bowker (1983), and Shields and Hanneke (1983).
2. The sources of this psychological profile - the quick madness syndrome (QMS) - include focus group discussions involving women who either described in detail the experiences of their friends who were involved in excessively abusive marriages or related their own experiences regarding the emotional states or conditions of their spouses prior to the time of the actual acts of physical abuse; newspaper and magazine reports about custody and divorce hearings during which men and women alike describe the moody episodes of their spouses just before, during, and after certain forms of abuse occur; and the accounts of certain college students regarding their personal observations of their abusive parents. See also the cases reported in Victor Muzvidziwa’s paper on spousal abuse and homicide published in this issue of the journal. Muzvidziwa’s actual sources include Rude (1999, p. 7), Armstrong (1998, pp. 21 and 31), Munalula (1998, pp. 255-256), and Times of Zambia (March 24, 1987 and December 28, 1992). From an empirical standpoint, this delineation of the abusive spouse is powerfully authoritative in that it is a direct description of observed real life behavior of habitual abusers. It is empirically verifiable.
3. In this issues, see, for example, Exodus 20: 5; Exodus 34: 7; Numbers 14:18; and Deuteronomy 5: 9 from the Holy Bible.
4. I owe these thoughts to my colleague, Mr. Chris Whitney, whose comments on the first draft of this paper pushed me further to think more critically and reflect intensively on the issue of spousal abuse and its multifaceted dimensions.
5. The falling off of masks happens in many different ways. For example, those involved may lash at each other and exchange a few abusive words between them while they are in a gathering. Such episodes can happen in a flash. By the time those involved perceive it, they quickly realize that they have exposed themselves. In other cases, one of the spouses unconsciously tells the whole story of the abuse going on at home to a friend or a total stranger. Soon after the whole story has been told, the individual “wakes up” and then says: "oops! I have told you too much. I am sorry".
6. I must also mention that two weeks later, I went back to the same restaurant and had a totally different observation of couples’ behavior. On this day, I observed two sets of couples' probably between the ages of fifty to sixty years old. These couples were very happy and excited. These conclusions came through to me as I observed them interact with each other. They engaged in friendly conversations and talked amicably most of the time. The only reading material they had with them was the menu. My careful observation of these couples suggested to me that they were perhaps doing well in their marriages. Mutual respect and cordiality seemed to be present in their relationship. It seems to me that it is important to bring this additional observation to the attention of the reader so as not to make him or her think that all marriages in Japan are like the kind described in the foregoing paragraphs of this paper.
7. These comments do not suggest that a constantly abused person should stay in the relationship hoping that things would improve in the future. Each case of spousal abuse is unique in itself. Those involved must objectively evaluate the situation and take decisions that are life preserving. In this regard, conversations with trustworthy and respectable family members, colleagues, and professional counselors could help a great deal.
8. See details on-line at www.angelfire.com/il3/frenchnic2/index.html. See also Yoshioka and Dang (2000, p. 5) for similar stories.
9. Through extensive research work and real life experiences, we have acquired a tremendous amount of information on family violence attitudes. Scholars that have discussed such attitudes and causes of family violence include Min (1998); Tjaden and Thoennes (1998); Campbell and Lewandowski (1997); Abraham (1995); Carden (1994); Chin (1994); Dutton (1994); Tang (1994); Barnett and Hamburger (1992); Smith (1990); Yllo and Straus (1990); Levinson (1989); Koski and Mangold (1988); Caplan (1987); Saunders, Lynch, Grayson, and Linz (1987); Finn (1986); Hotaling and Sugarman (1986); Singh (1986); Barnes (1985); Genteman (1984); and Straus, Steinmetz, and Gelles (1980).
10. See Yoshioka and Dang (2000, p. 14).
11. The groups studied include the Cambodian, Chinese, Korean, South Asian, and Vietnamese Communities in Massachusetts. Consult Yoshioka and Dang (2000, pp. 1-52) for details.
12. See detailed discussions in Steven Ivory’s (2001) article entitled: "Cheatin’ Heart" at www.imdiversity.com.
13. Tsunoda (2001) observed that in Japan most abused women neither report the violence against them nor see a doctor for treatment. In most cases, some perpetrators ban their wives from seeing the doctor. Approximately 25 percent of abused women in the survey never mentioned their abuse to anyone else.
14. It is reported in Newsletter No. 7 of the Yokohama Women’s Association that since the Beijing Conference, the Japanese are becoming more aware of and also more willing to publicly speak against spousal violence now than ever before. The move aimed at fighting violence against women began to gather momentum in Japan in the 1980s when women started to fight back against the terrible acts of sexual harassment, rape, killings, and so. Women’s groups in Japan today continue to work to make sure that violence against women is recognized and classified as an issue of human rights violation.
15. Shujin means master.
16. This is insight gleaned from focus group discussions with some married Japanese women in North Chiba of the Chiba Prefecture, Japan, between April and October 2001.
17. In Japan domestic violence is not recognized as a crime. There are hardly any private or government help. However, as noted earlier, since the 1980s, Japanese women’s groups began to work relentlessly to alter this situation in the country. See, for examples, details at www.noho.com/zontadv.html. On women and gender issues in Japan, consult Haruko, Bouchy, and Chizuko (1999); Jolivet (1997); Fanselow and Kameda (1995); and Buckley (1997).
18. Domestic violence cases in Japan more than doubled. On this issue, see details at http://www.ipn.intelihealth.com/IPN/ihtIPN/WSIPN000/7187/7199/327715.html. See also details at www.mdn.mainichi.co.jp
19. On the issue and practice of psychological counseling and professional therapy, see, for example, the following references: Dugan and Hock (2000); Jane (2000); Hegstrom (1999); Mason (1998); Matsakis (1998); Ed. D. Weiss (2000); Wilson (1997); Ackerman and Pickering (1995); and Jones and Schechter (1993). There are also self-help ideas contained in these books.
20. See also detailed information on the failure of such programs in the literature review of Browne (1993). It must, however, be borne in mind that these failures do not imply that some other programs aimed at dealing with spousal abuse do not work. For some success stories, see details in Marx, Calhoun, Wilson, and Meyerson (2001, pp. 25-32). Dunford (2000) reported that evaluation of the Domestic Conflict Containment Program run for Marine Corps men, showed that post-intervention led to significant and positive changes on the Dyadic Adjustment Scale subscales, consensus and cohesion measures, and the Norwicki Strickland Locus of Control Scale.
21. See information on expenditure on civil and criminal justice in Kym Alan Dawson’s introduction to this issue of the journal.
22. The concept, domestic violence industry (DVI), is used in this paper to represent all small, medium, and large scale commercial enterprises (i.e., activities) aimed at the provision of services to people who experience and suffer personal damages from different kinds of abuses (e.g., physical, mental, emotional, spiritual, verbal, etc.) unleashed on them by spouses, parents, children, relatives, friends, strangers, and so on. The major participants in this industry are representatives who work on behalf of governmental organizations (GOs), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and other civil society groups. Also participating in this industry are individuals who set up their own professional practices that are aimed at providing legal, medical, therapeutic, and counseling services to victims of abuse. Some of the specific services provided to victims of domestic violence in this industry include psychological therapy/counseling, accommodation, referrals, information/data, training, education, police protection, legal advice, financial aid, and so on. In addition to these services, the opportunity to obtain commodities such as food, clothing, employment, electronic security gadgets, and so on is also made available to deserving victims. Also, some service providers in this industry focus on programs aimed at dealing with the perceived causes of domestic violence (e.g., the portrayal of violence in movies, pornographic materials, etc.). Most service providers aim at assisting victims to deal with the trauma of abuse, learn to cope, receive healing, and become restored back to their normal health and lifestyles. Others who also contribute to this industry are people from the media (i.e., Hollywood, radio, television networks, etc.), publishers (i.e., of books, newspapers, magazines, newsletters, etc.), website hosts, and so on.
23. This conclusion is based on real life evidence regarding their policies and program of activities. These focus essentially on either accommodating or coping rather than working to assist the general population to develop the appropriate HF through which the occurrence of the problem could be minimized in the long-term. The HF solution set is a preventative measure aimed at minimizing the problem of spousal abuse.
24. On the issue of the impact of violence on brain development, read a brief article entitled "Preventing Family Violence Through Early Intervention: A Priceless Legacy for Future Generations" on-line at www.bcifv.org. This was a media release of May 1, 2000.
25. The use of the word, assigned, in this sentence should not be misconstrued as implying a dictatorial society in which people are literally forced to "develop" whether they want to or not. Instead, it connotes the view that teachers must commit themselves to their primary task of educating young minds as they are permitted to do by the stipulations of the school curriculum and the national constitution. Viewed from this perspective the word, assigned, speaks more to the teachers’ commitment to performing their tasks of education through role modeling, mentoring, and socialization rather than dictatorship.
26. The intervention program referred to here has absolutely nothing to do with legislation or the legal solution whereby people are either forced or legislated to engage in acts against their wishes (e.g., taking parenting classes, passing parenting tests, and obtaining parent licenses in order to be permitted to have children). Quite to the contrary, this program is not a legal requirement. From the HF perspective, the programs that are pursued in terms of giving a head start to the unborn child must be voluntarily participated in. For an appropriate user fee, such a program could be made available to parents who are expecting to have and raise children and are also willing to voluntarily participate in it. Whether more people participate in this program or not will depend on its long-term implications and impacts. For example, positive or negative outcomes would respectively encourage or discourage people’s patronage of the program.
27. See also details in the quotation from Tsunoda (2001, p. 3) presented at the end of this paragraph.
28. I am aware of the contentious debates between the gun control lobby and the other side, especially in Canada and the United States. I am also aware that some Europeans believe that gun control always works. However, from the HF perspective, those who believe that gun control works make a serious error in critical thinking and judgment in that they fail to recognize that guns do not kill people. It is people, using guns, who kill others. The possession of guns does not necessarily mean that the one who carries the gun will kill others. However, those who do not have guns will still kill others if they desire to—due to the poor quality of their HF. I fully agree with my colleague, Chris Whitney, when he notes: “people who are in possession of greater powers (i.e., guns), however, are in need of greater powers of self-control, etc.” Here, the positive HF will play a significant role. Those who desire to minimize gun violence need to focus on the development of the positive HF. Without this, any gun control programs, though they may achieve some short-term objectives, will fail in the long-term.
29. From the HF perspective, it can be argued that given the appropriate HF development programs, most human beings can become more humane in their dealings with others. From this perspective, therefore, it is not too late for HF engineers to assist those who currently suffer from severe HF decay to work toward helping people to improve the quality of their HF.
30. Drawn from the Japanese cartoon movie entitled: Farewell to Space Battleship Yamato. In the name of love.
REFERENCES
Abraham, M. 1995. “Ethnicity, Gender and Marital Violence: South Asian Women’s Organizations in the United States.” Gender and Society, 9 (4): 450-468.
Ackerman, R. J. and Pickering, S. 1995. Before It’s Too Late: Helping Women in Controlling or Abusive Relationships. New York: Health Communications
Adjibolosoo, S. 2001. “A Model of the Human Factor Formation Process.” Unpublished Manuscript.
Adjibolosoo, S. 1999. Rethinking Development Theory and Policy: A Human Factor Critique. Westport, CT.: Praeger.
Adjibolosoo, S. 1998. Global Development the Human Factor Way. Westport, CT.: Praeger.
Adjibolosoo, S. 1997. The Political Economy of Social Engineering. Unpublished Manuscript (Trinity Western University, Langley, B. C. Canada).
Adjibolosoo, S. 1996. Human Factor Engineering and the Political Economy of African Development. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Adjibolosoo, S. 1995. The Human Factor in Developing Africa. Westport, CT.: Praeger.
Armstrong, A. K. 1998. Culture and Choice: Lessons from Survivors of Gender Violence in Zimbabwe. Harare: Violence Against Women in Zimbabwe Research Project.
Bain, P. 2001. “Ontario Murder-Suicide Tragic but Preventable but to be Effective Prevention must Begin Long Before Restraining Orders Become Necessary.” www.bcifv.org.
Barnes, S. L. 1985. “Psychosocial Aspects of Wife Abuse in the United States.” Emotional First Aid, 2 (2): 29-36.
Barnett, O. W. and Hamburger, L. K. 1992. “The Assessment of Maritally Violent Men on the California Personality Inventory.” Violence and Victims, 7 (1): 15-28.
Bowker, L. 1983. Beating Wife-Beating. Lexington MA: Heath.
Buckley, S. (ed.) 1997. Broken Silence: Voices of Japanese Feminism. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Browne, A. 1993. “Violence Against Women by Male Partners Prevalence, Outcomes, and Policy Implications.” American Psychologist, 48 (10): 1077-1087.
Campbell, J. C. and Lewandowski, L.A. 1997. “Mental and Physical Health Effects of Intimate Partner Violence on Women and Children.” The Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 20 (2): 353-374.
Caplan, P. 1987. The Myth of Women’s Masochism. New York: Signet.
Carden, A. D. 1994. “Wife Abuse and the Wife Abuser: Review and Recommendations.” Counseling Psychologist, 22 (4): 539-582.
Chin, K. 1994. “Out of Town Brides: International Marriage and Wife Abuse Among Chinese Immigrants.” Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 25 (1): 53-70.
Coffey, R. 1998. Unspeakable Truths and Happy Endings: Human Cruelty and the New Trauma. Lutherville, Maryland: Sidran Press.
Covey, S. R., Merrill, A. R., and Merrill, R. R. 1994. First Things First. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Crowell, N. A. and Burgess, A. W. 1996. Understanding Violence Against Women. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
De Becker, G. 1997. The Gift of Fear: Survival Signals that Protect Us from Violence. Boston: Little Brown.
Dugan, M. K. and Hock, R. R. 2000. It’s My Life Now: Starting Over After an Abusive Relationship or Domestic Violence. New York: Routledge.
Dunford, F. W. 2000. “The San Diego Navy Experiment: An Assessment of Interventions for Men Who Assault their Wives.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68 (3): 468-476.
Dutton, D. G. 1994. “Patriarchy and Wife Assault: The Ecological Fallacy.” Violence and Victims, 9 (2): 167-182.
Dutton, M. A. 1992a. “Assessment and Treatment of PTSD Among Battered Women.” In D. Foy, ed. Treating PTSD: Procedure for Combat Veterans, Battered Women, Adult and Child Sexual Assaults. New York: Guilford Press.
Dutton, M. A. 1992b. Empowering and Healing the Battered Woman: A Model for Assessment and Intervention. New York: Springer.
Dutton, D. G. 1988a. The Domestic Assault of Women: Psychological and Criminal Justice Perspective. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Dutton, D. G. 1988b. “Profiling of Wife Assaulters: Preliminary Evidence for a Trimodal Analysis.” Violence and Victims, 3: 5-29.
Ed. D. Weiss, E. and Magill, M. 2000. Surviving Domestic Violence: Voices of Women Who Broke Free. Sandy, UT: Agreka Books.
Engel, B. 1992. The Emotionally Abused Woman: Overcoming Destructive Patterns and Reclaiming Yourself. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett Books.
Evans, P. 1996. The Verbally Abusive Relationship: How to Recognize it and How to Respond. Avon, MA: Adams Media Corporation.
Fairbanks, J. A. and Nicholson, R. A. 1987. “Theoretical and Empirical Issues in the Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.” Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43: 44-45.
Finn, J. 1986. “The Relationship Between Sex Role Attitudes and Attitudes Supporting Marital Violence.” Sex Roles, 14 (5-6): 235-244.
Fujimura-Fanselow, K. F. and Kameda, A. 1995. Japanese Women: New Feminist Perspectives on the Past, Present, and Future. New York: The Feminist Press.
Genteman, K. 1984. “Wife Beating: Attitudes of a Non-Clinical Population.” Victimology, 9 (1): 109-119.
Haruko, W., Bouchy, A., and Chizuko, U. (eds.) 1999. Gender and Japanese History: Volumes 1 & 2. Osaka: Osaka University Press.
Healey, K., Smith, C. and O'Sullivan, C. 1998. Batterer Intervention: Program Approaches and Criminal Justice Strategies. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
Hegstrom, P. 1999. Angry Men and the Women Who Love Them: Breaking the Cycle of Physical and Emotional Abuse. Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press.
Hotaling, G. T. and Sugarman, D. B. 1986. “An Analysis of Risk Markers in Husband to Wife Violence: The Current State of Knowledge.” Violence and Victims, 1 (2): 101-124.
Jayne, P. 2000. Ditch that Jerk: Dealing with Men Who Control and Hurt Women. Alameda, CA: Hunter House.
Jolivet, M. 1997. Japan: The Childless Society. London: Routledge.
Jones, A. and Schechter, S. 1993. When Love Goes Wrong: What to Do When You Can’t Do Anything. New York: Harperperennial Library.
Koski, P. R. and Mangold, W. D. 1988. “Gender Effects in Attitudes About Family Violence.” Journal of Family Violence, 3 (3): 225-237.
Levinson, D. 1989. Family Violence in Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Lewin, R. 1975. “Starved Brains.” Psychology Today, September.
Matsakis, A. 1998. Trust After Trauma: A Guide to Relationships for Survivors and those Who Love them. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications.
Marx, B. P., Calhoun, K. S., Wilson, A. E., and Meyerson, L. A. 2001. “Sexual Revictimization Prevention An Outcome Evaluation.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 69 (1): 25-32.
Mason, P. T. 1998. Stop Walking on Eggshells: Coping When Someone You Care About Has Borderline Personality Disorder. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications.
Min, P. G. 1998. Changes and Conflicts: Korean Immigrant Families in New York. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Moskovitz, R. A. 2001. Lost in the Mirror: An Inside Look at Borderline Personality Disorder. Navasota, TX: Taylor Publications.
Munalula, M. M. 1998. “Shelter and Gendered Power Relations: A Study of Spousal Homicide in Zambia.” In M. Mapetla, A. Larson, and A. Schlyter, eds. Changing Gender Relations in Southern Africa: Issues of Urban Life. Roma, Lesotho: ISAS.
O’Leary, D. and Maiuro, R. D. (Eds.) 2001. Psychological Abuse in Violent Domestic Relations. New York: Springer Publishing Company.
Pagelow, M. D. 1984. Family Violence. New York: Praeger.
Palmer, S. E., Brown, R. A., and Barrera, M. E. 1992. Group treatment program for abusive husbands: Long-term evaluation. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 62, 276-283.
Raphael, J. 1999. “Cutting Edge Issues and New Areas in Domestic Violence/Welfare Research: An Overview.” Introductory Comments made at the Trapped by Poverty/Trapped by Abuse Conference on September 26, 1997. See details at: http://www.ssw.umich.edu/trapped/conf97_future.html.
Ricucci, G. and Ricucci, B. 1992. Love that Lasts: Making a Magnificent Marriage. Gaithersburg, Maryland: People of Destiny International.
Rude, D. 1999. “Reasonable Men and Provocative Women: an Analysis of Gendered Domestic Homicide in Zambia.” Journal of Southern African Studies, 25 (1): 7-27.
Santoro, J. 1997. The Angry Heart: Overcoming Borderline and Addictive Disorders: An Interactive Self-Help Guide. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger Publications.
Saunders, D. G., Lynch, A. B. Grayson, M., and Linz, D.1987. “The Inventory of Beliefs About Wife Beating: The Construction and Initial Validation of a Measure of Beliefs and Attitudes.” Violence and Victims, 2 (1): 39-57.
Schechter, S. 1982. Women and Male Violence. New York: Macmillan.
Shields, N. and Hanneke, C. R. 1983. “Battered Wives' Reactions to Marital Rape.” In D. Finkelhor, R. J. Gelles, G. T. Hotaling, and M. A. Straus, eds. The Dark Side of Families. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Schiraldi, G. R. 2000. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Sourcebook. New York: McGraw-Hill-NTC.
Singh, G. 1986. “Violence Against Wives in India.” Response to the Victimization of Women and Children, 9 (1): 16-18.
Smith, M. D. 1990. “Patriarchal Ideology and Wife Beating: A Test of a Feminist Hypothesis.” Violence and Victims, 5 (4):: 257-273.
Solomon, S. D., Gerrity, E. T., and Muff, A. M. 1992. “Efficacy of Treatments for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: An Empirical Review.” Journal of the American Medical Association, 268(5), 633-638.
Sonkin, D. J. (1988). The male batterer: Clinical and research issues. Violence and Victims, 3(1), 65-79.
Stets, J. E. & Straus, M. A. 1990. “Gender Differences in Reporting of Marital Violence and Its Medical and Psychological Consequences.” In M. A. Straus and R. J. Gelles, eds. Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaption to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction (pp. 151—165).
Straus, M. A. and Gelles, R. J. 1990. Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptions to Violence in 8,145 Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction).
Straus, M. A., Steinmetz, S. and Gelles, R. 1980. Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
Susan, M. 1996. No Visible Wounds: Identifying Nonphysical Abuse of Women by their Men. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett Books.
Tang, C. S. 1994. “Prevalence of Spouse Aggression in Hong Kong.” Journal of Family Violence, 9 (4) 347-356.
Tjaden, P. and Thoennes, N. 1998. Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of Justice.
Tsunoda, Y. 2001. “Japanese Women Confront Domestic Violence.” The Journal of the International Institute, 3 (1): 1-9. This article is posted on the web and can be accessed at www.umich.edu/~iinet/journal/vol3no1/jpndv.html.
Tyrangiel, J. 2001. “Dial “M” for Misconduct: A Judge’s Love Affair, and Her Deceptions, Has Michigan in an Uproar. Should she be Benched?” Time, (February 12): 64.
Walker, L. E. (1984). The Battered Woman Syndrome. New York: Springer.
Walker, L. E. 1979. The Battered Woman. New York: Harper & Row.
Wilson, K. 1997. When Violence Begins at Home: A Comprehensive Guide to Understanding and Ending Domestic Abuse. Alameda, CA: Hunter House.
Wurtman, R. 1978. “Brain Muffins.” Psychology Today, October.
Yllo, K. A. and Straus, M. 1990. “Patriarchy and Violence Against Wives: The Impact of Structural and Normative Factors.” In M. A. Straus and R. J. Gelles, eds. Physical Violence in American Families. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Yoshioka, M. and Dang, Q. 2000. Asian Family Violence Report: A Study of the Chinese, Cambodian, Korean, South Asian and Vietnamese Communities in Massachusetts. Boston, MA: Asian Task Force Against Domestic Violence, Inc [This Report is available on-line at www.atask.org].
Navigation
