<x-html>
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10 (filtered)">
<title>Message</title>
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAutoSig, li.MsoAutoSig, div.MsoAutoSig
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
p
{margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.emailstyle17
{font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
span.EmailStyle20
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
/* List Definitions */
ol
{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
{margin-bottom:0in;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Tom, thanks for your reply. I
thought your response helped me to see how this idea has developed since the
70s. Just by way of information, I consider myself to be a family
therapist and I am a big fan of Bronfenbrenner’s work. My focus,
with regards to child maltreatment and family violence in general, is largely
clinical. I am not a “researcher” per se and I feel somewhat peripheral
to the current conceptualization of family violence used by the research
community. </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>It is my experience that a systemic view
of family violence is more conducive to effective treatment than the more
traditional perpetrator-victim model. However, it still amazes me how
different actual clinical practice can be from the principles generated in the research
community. It is my opinion that local child protection, criminal justice
and community mental health practice still hold to a perpetrator-victim model
of treatment that focuses intervention on the “bad parent” without
addressing any of the larger ecosystemic dynamics that support family
violence. This is similar to the practice of removing “bad children”
from homes and hospitalizing or institutionalizing them, returning them to
their families and neighborhoods after they have “improved” in care
and then watching that “progress” deteriorate within months of
being returned home because none of the natural dynamics supporting the “bad”
behavior has truly changed within the child’s natural home
environment. I would be interested to know of situations where there has
been an effective bridging of research and practice, particularly with regards
to treatment as opposed to prevention.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>I would also like to respond to your
comment that “…[it] </span></font><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>is not inconsistent with keeping
children out of harm's way until it may be safe for them to be with their
parents.” I would whole-heartedly agree with this principle with this
caveat—I do not believe that prolonged removal of the child from his or
her family of origin is an effective way to motivate primary caregivers to
improve their caregiving nor is it conducive to learning new parenting skills.
In fact, removal of the children from the home may initially reduce the
motivation of primary caregivers to change their parenting strategy because it
effectively reduces the pressure on the family to change by removing their
perceived cause of the problem e.g., the child him/herself. I think that
those who advocate for the removal of children for <i><span style='font-style:
italic'>any other reason</span></i> <i><span style='font-style:italic'>than to
guarantee the immediate safety of the child</span></i> are likely to create
circumstances that can undermine the effectiveness of attempts to correct abusive
parenting strategies and/or prevent the future recurrence of abuse. Family
systems have a tendency to adaptively reorganizing to achieve functional
stability once a child is removed for a prolonged period of time. I
suspect that this was one causative factor behind the </span></font><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>U.S.</span></font><font
size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'> government’s
relatively recent change in permanency guidelines which put increasing pressure
on states and local governments to shorten the length of time a child is in
limbo awaiting either reunification or placement in permanent alternative care.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>I have often thought that in order for treatment interventions
to fairly demonstrate long-term effectiveness i.e., permanent reduction in
family violence, we need to be willing as a society to tolerate a higher risk
of violence towards children. I have long been a fan of home-based
interventions, but I have also read criticism of this form of treatment because
it is not effective in preventing the recurrence of abuse. Conversely, it
often raises the recidivism rate by reporting incidents of abuse in families
that are involved with home-based services. Home-based services are one
of the few ecosystemic forms of treatment that has been fully operationalized
in my opinion. We run the risk of “throwing the baby out with the
bath water” if we do not consciously define as a society how much risk we
are willing to run when preserving the integrity of the family and protecting
children are principles that are at odds with each other.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'> </span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoAutoSig><font size=3 color=navy face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:navy'>Mr. John M. Polstra, MSW, LCSW</span></font></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original Message-----<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>From:</span></b>
owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
[mailto:owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu] <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>Thomas R. Chibucos<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Sunday, August 03, 2003
10:39 PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> Child Maltreatment Researchers<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> RE: Interactional nature
of physical abuse</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Hi, John--</span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>At the time of the Parke
and Collmer review you cite, the IDEA that there are reciprocal and interactive
(between parent and child) determinants of child behavior and child outcomes
was, believe it or not, a relatively recent one! And, I am talking here
of child behavior and child outcomes generally--not just with regard to
negative things like abuse. Bell's (1968) paper arguing the case that
children influenced parents as well as parents influencing children was
"hot stuff" when I was a doctoral student at Michigan State in the
early 1970's. "Systemic" thinking (as in family systems)
and "ecological" perspectives (as in Bronfenbrenner's classic
1979 book) were essentially unheard of. (Yes, I know, the intellectual
history is longer than this; but, I am talking about the significance of these
ideas for research and practice.) </span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>And "developmental
contextualism" was simply an intellectual development still waiting to
happen (Essentially, developmental contextualism holds that the individual's
characteristics and the contexts (e.g., parents) in which we find the
individual change continuously over time and that NEITHER alone 'causes' this
or that child outcome. Further, it is the CURRENT pattern of
person-context interaction, the pattern of relations, that causes
this or that behavior. cf. Ford & Lerner, 1992).</span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>With regard to your
question: a resounding "yes." Across the board I do not think
it an exaggeration to say that "unidirectional influence"
is seen by researchers, theorists, and many practicing professionals
as completely inadequate to explain human development in almost any
area you might choose. (This, by the way, is not inconsistent with
keeping children out of harm's way until it may be safe for them to be with
their parents.) As to support for this conclusion from more current
research, just pop open any issues of JMF, FR, or CD, and you should find all
the evidence you would want.</span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Cheers,</span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 color=blue face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Tom</span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'><!-- Converted from text/plain format --> </span></font></p>
<p style='margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:.5in'><font size=2
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>********************************************<br>
Thomas R. Chibucos, Ph.D.<br>
Professor, Human Development and Family Studies<br>
School of Family and Consumer Sciences<br>
206 Johnston Hall<br>
Bowling Green State University<br>
Bowling Green, OH 43403-0254<br>
OFFICE PHONE: 419 372-7823<br>
CELL PHONE: 419 250-0863<br>
FAX: 419 372-7854<br>
Email: tchibuc@bgnet.bgsu.edu<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.bgsu.edu/colleges/edhd/FCS/";>http://www.bgsu.edu/colleges/edhd/FCS/</a><br>
<br>
********************************************<br>
I regretfully note that the opinions I express and communicate via this email
are mine alone, and do not necessarily reflect those of the institution with
which I am affiliated.<br>
<br>
</span></font></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:12.0pt;margin-left:
.5in'><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original
Message-----<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>From:</span></b>
owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu
[mailto:owner-CHILD-MALTREATMENT-RESEARCH-L@cornell.edu] <b><span
style='font-weight:bold'>On Behalf Of </span></b>John Polstra<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> Tuesday, July 29, 2003 2:00
PM<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> Child Maltreatment Researchers<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> Interactional nature of
physical abuse</span></font></p>
</div>
<blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt'>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>I recently read a study completed by
Kadushin and Martin (1981) where they completed an extensive literature review
describing the interactional nature of child physical abuse.
Specifically, they quoted a literature review by Parke and Collmer entitled,
“Child Abuse: An Interdisciplinary Review” in <i><span
style='font-style:italic'>Review of Child Development Research</span></i>
(1975) that says</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>“… a serious shortcoming
in both the psychiatric and sociological models [of child abuse] is their <i><span
style='font-style:italic'>failure to give adequate recognition to the
interactive nature of child abuse. It is insufficient to view abuse from
a unidirectional viewpoint,</span></i> whereby the main cause is located in
either the parent or in external circumstances. One important feature of
the social-situational approach is the recognition that both partners, the
child victim as well as the parent, need to be considered if child abuse is to
be fully understood.” (Emphasis added by the authors). </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Have several requests that I would
like to make:</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>1.<font size=1
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'>
</span></font></span></font><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>This research seems a bit dated. Does anyone
involved with the listserv have any suggestions for more current research that
supports the same conclusion?</span></font> </p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:1.0in;text-indent:-.25in'><font size=3
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>2.<font size=1
face="Times New Roman"><span style='font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'>
</span></font></span></font><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>Is this a view that continues to hold water in the
research community? I ask because I have suspect as much in my work with
abusive families, but much of the services that are designed to treat an
abusive family are directed at the parents primarily i.e., parenting classes,
anger management programs, etc. with some notable exceptions such as Healthy
Families. I have always wondered at the logic of removing a child form an
abusive home and expecting parents to attend skills training programs without
the opportunity to use them with effectiveness prior to the return of the
child. I realize that this is an overgeneralization of the process. But,
I believe that there is still some validity in this view of the child
protection process.</span></font> </p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=2 face=Arial><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'>I appreciate any feedback that you
have to offer.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoAutoSig style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'>Mr. John M. Polstra, MSW, LCSW</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-left:.5in'><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt'> </span></font></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</body>
</html>
</x-html>