Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
effects_of_family_structure_on_child_abuse [2015/11/12 11:33]
marri2
effects_of_family_structure_on_child_abuse [2017/05/23 07:11] (current)
marri
Line 1: Line 1:
 ==========Effects of Family Structure on Child Abuse========== ==========Effects of Family Structure on Child Abuse==========
  
-Today, more Americans live in a manner that separates the bearing and raising of children from traditional marriage. This undermines the well-being of children. Since 1950, the Index of Belonging for U.S. teenagers—the number of teens raised in an intact married family, has decreased from 63 percent to 46 percent.((Patrick F. Fagan and Christina Hadford, “The Fifth Annual Index of Family Belonging and Rejection,​” Marriage and Religion Research Institute (2015). Available at [[http://​marri.us/​get.cfm?​i=OR15B02]])) The United States increasingly is becoming a country of second-, third-, and even fourth-generation marriage-less "​families."​ In such circumstances,​ as the research shows, children are most likely to suffer abuse and neglect, and new subcultures of [[child_abuse_in_the_united_states|abuse]] are more likely to be established.+Today, more Americans live in a manner that separates the bearing and raising of children from traditional marriage. This undermines the well-being of children. Since 1950, the Index of Belonging for U.S. teenagers—the number of teens raised in an intact married family, has decreased from 63 percent to 46 percent.((Patrick F. Fagan and Christina Hadford, “The Fifth Annual Index of Family Belonging and Rejection,​” Marriage and Religion Research Institute (2015). Available at [[http://​marri.us/​research/​research-papers/​fifth-annual-index-of-belonging-and-rejection/​]])) The United States increasingly is becoming a country of second-, third-, and even fourth-generation marriage-less "​families."​ In such circumstances,​ as the research shows, children are most likely to suffer abuse and neglect, and new subcultures of [[child_abuse_in_the_united_states|abuse]] are more likely to be established.
  
 =====1. The Intact Married Family===== =====1. The Intact Married Family=====
Line 9: Line 9:
 Although the sexual act can be an occasion of great intimacy and love resulting in new life, it also can be a violent or meaningless act resulting in profound alienation and fragmentation of the family. Among America'​s poor, the latter is increasingly the case. In 2013, 70.5 percent of children living below poverty were raised in [[effects_of_single_parents_on_poverty_rates|non-intact families]].((//​American Community Survey//, U.S. Census Bureau (2013).)) These poorest of the poor, more than anyone else, need the support of an intimate community and can least afford the [[effects_of_community_environment_on_juvenile_crime_rates|community'​s destruction]]. The children of the poor have the [[effects_of_marriage_on_child_poverty|greatest need for married families]], yet they are the least likely to have them. Although the sexual act can be an occasion of great intimacy and love resulting in new life, it also can be a violent or meaningless act resulting in profound alienation and fragmentation of the family. Among America'​s poor, the latter is increasingly the case. In 2013, 70.5 percent of children living below poverty were raised in [[effects_of_single_parents_on_poverty_rates|non-intact families]].((//​American Community Survey//, U.S. Census Bureau (2013).)) These poorest of the poor, more than anyone else, need the support of an intimate community and can least afford the [[effects_of_community_environment_on_juvenile_crime_rates|community'​s destruction]]. The children of the poor have the [[effects_of_marriage_on_child_poverty|greatest need for married families]], yet they are the least likely to have them.
  
-Traditionally,​ the variable used to explain a rise in the incidence of child abuse has been poverty. The National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect illustrates this pro-poverty bias.((U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect //The Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect// Andrea J. Sedlak, Ph.D., and Diane D. Broadhurst, M.L.A., (NIS-3): Final Report, (Washington,​ D.C., September 1996), 55.)) However, Richard Gelles of the University of Rhode Island Department of Sociology, a recognized expert on abuse, has shown that it is the presence or absence of adult support that makes the greatest difference in determining whether [[demographics_of_child_abuse|child abuse is likely to be present]] or absent within poor families.((Richard Gelles, "​Poverty and Violence Toward Children,"​ //American Behavioral Scientist// 35, no. 3 (1992): 258-274, and "Child Abuse and Violence in Single Parent Families,"​ //American Journal of Orthopsychiatry//​ 59 (1989): 492-501.)) The Fourth Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect has also confirmed ​this.+Traditionally,​ the variable used to explain a rise in the incidence of child abuse has been poverty. The National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect illustrates this pro-poverty bias.((U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect //The Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect// Andrea J. Sedlak, Ph.D., and Diane D. Broadhurst, M.L.A., (NIS-3): Final Report, (Washington,​ D.C., September 1996), 55.)) However, Richard Gelles of the University of Rhode Island Department of Sociology, a recognized expert on abuse, has shown that it is the presence or absence of adult support that makes the greatest difference in determining whether [[demographics_of_child_abuse|child abuse is likely to be present]] or absent within poor families.((Richard Gelles, "​Poverty and Violence Toward Children,"​ //American Behavioral Scientist// 35, no. 3 (1992): 258-274, and "Child Abuse and Violence in Single Parent Families,"​ //American Journal of Orthopsychiatry//​ 59 (1989): 492-501.)) 
 + 
 +The Fourth Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect has also confirmed ​that marriage provides the [[link_between_family_structure_and_child_abuse|safest environment for children]]This federal survey shows that the family environment with the lowest risk ratio for physical abuse is the intact married family: 
 +  * **The rate of physical abuse is 3 times higher** in the single parent family. 
 +  * **The rate of physical abuse is 4 times higher** if mother is cohabiting with the child’s biological father (unmarried). 
 +  * **The rate of physical abuse is 5 times higher** if the child is living in a married step family. 
 +  * **The rate of physical abuse is 10 times higher** if the mother is cohabiting with a boyfriend. 
 + 
 +{{ :​relative_rates_of_physical_abuse.png?​direct&​500 |Relative Rates of Physical Abuse}} 
 + 
 +For sexual abuse the rates are even higher. Compared to the always intact married family: 
 +  * **The rate of sexual abuse is 5 times higher** in the single parent family and when both biological parents are cohabiting (i.e. unmarried). 
 +  * **The rate of sexual abuse is 8.6 times higher** if the child is living in a married step family. 
 +  * **The rate of sexual abuse is 20 times higher** if the mother is cohabiting with a boyfriend. 
 + 
 +{{ :​relative_rates_of_sexual_abuse.png?​direct&​500 |Relative Rates of Sexual Abuse}}
  
-Marriage provides the [[link_between_family_structure_and_child_abuse|safest environment for children]]. It therefore truly makes a difference in advancing the safety and well-being of America'​s children. 
 =====2. The Non-Intact Family===== =====2. The Non-Intact Family=====