Child-to-parent Violence: Challenging Perspectives on Family Violence

Author’s Submitted & Published Manuscript.

Date of Publication: October 2011.

Citation: Coogan, D (2011) Child to Parent Violence –

Challenging Perspectives on Family Violence. Child Care in Practice.

Volume 17, No. 4: 347-358.

Published version:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13575279.2011.59681

5

Child to Parent Violence – Challenging Perspectives on Family

Violence.

Author: Declan Coogan, Lecturer, MA in Social Work Programme

at the National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland; Social

Worker & Registered Family Therapist (FTAI).

Until relatively recently, the focus of research, policy and intervention responses to

abuse and violence within families has been almost exclusively on the behaviour of

adults rather than on the violence within families carried out by children and

adolescents. As a consequence, the aggressive and violent behaviour of children and

adolescents at home has received scant attention in practice, policy and research

literature and this form of family violence remains poorly understood.

This paper aims to broaden discussions about violence and abuse in families by

examining the use of violence by children and young people at home towards

parents through a review of the relevant literature. Dilemmas of definition will be

explored, including distinctions between abusive behaviour and what could be

termed as “normal” conflict between parents and their children during adolescence.

Social and cultural factors contributing to the lack of attention to child-to-parent

1

violence will be explored. The “Tackling Violence at Home” Strategy (DHSSPS 2005) in

Northern Ireland and the “National Strategy on Domestic, Sexual and Gender Based

Violence 2010-2014” ( Cosc 2010) in the Republic of Ireland will be examined for

policy and practice guidance in relation to child-to-parent violence. It will be

suggested that conventional social and cultural assumptions in relation to children,

power and violence within families lead to challenges in the detection and

development of effective responses to child-to-parent violence. Attention will also be

drawn to the potential that may lie within established domestic violence frameworks

for policy and practice development and to promising research and practice

interventions.

Expanding Perceptions of Family Violence

Changes in social values and norms in recent decades have led

to a growing public awareness of abuse and violence within the

family and the emergence of policy and practice initiatives

such as new legislation to protect individuals within the

family home in United Kingdom and Ireland (DHSSPS 2005; Kearns

et al 2008; Cosc 2010). In Northern Ireland and in the

Republic of Ireland, Women’s Aid together with other voluntary

and statutory agencies have raised awareness about the impact

of domestic violence and have co-operated in the development

of support and other services for victims (DHSSPS 2005; Cosc

2010). Such developments in the Republic of Ireland, the

United Kingdom and throughout the European Union have had a

significant impact on public perceptions of the complexities

of domestic violence. Across the European Union (EU), the vast

majority of citizens (98%) are aware of domestic violence and

one in four people across the EU know a woman among friends or

2

in the family circle who is a victim of domestic violence.

There has also been a hardening of attitudes in the EU towards

perpetrators of domestic violence, with 86% of citizens

believing that domestic violence is unacceptable and should

always be punishable by law (Eurobarometer 73.2, 2010).

The recognition of additional forms of violence such as elder

abuse and violence within gay and lesbian relationships as

policy, practice and research concerns in family violence

literature represents a similar emergence of a broader

understanding of violence within the family (Cottrell & Monk

2004; Hoffman & Edwards 2004; DHSSPS 2005; Walsh & Krienert

2009; Cosc 2010). However, the primary focus of investigation

and discussion in relation to violent behaviour and crime in

the family violence literature tends to be limited to adult-

initiated violence such as violence within intimate adult

relationships and violence by parents towards their children,

largely ignoring a major type of under-reported family

violence: various forms of emotional and/ or physical abuse

carried out by children under the age of 18 years old against

their parents, known as child-to-parent violence or parent

abuse (Agnew & Huguley 1989; Walsh & Krienert 2009; Tew &

Nixon 2010).

Difficulties of Definition

There is no single or simple definition of child-to-parent

violence or parent abuse, with the terms used to describe a

wide range of behaviours (Tew & Nixon 2010). This presents

considerable difficulties for the identification and

3

understanding of this form of violence in practice, policy

development and in research. Kennedy et al (2010) urge

researchers to address as a matter of priority the lack of

agreement in the literature in relation to the definition of

key concepts in relation to child-to-parent literature.

Harbin and Madden (1979) have been credited with first

identifying a new form of family violence, describing it as

battered parent syndrome (Edenborough et al 2008; Walsh and

Krienert 2009). Writing about parent abuse, (defined as the

abuse of parents by their adolescent children), Cottrell

describes it as a harmful act intended to gain power and

control over one’s parents. The abuse can be physical,

psychological or financial (Cottrell 2001). Describing

research studies on adolescent to parent abuse carried out in

Nova Scotia and in Vancouver, Cottrell and Monk (2004) further

refine this definition to clarify that the terms “adolescent”

and “youth” used interchangeably through the paper refer to an

age range of ten to eighteen years of age.

Sheehan (1997) also focuses on adolescent violence in a paper

which describes the features and characteristics of a clinical

sample of sixty families attending a mediation and family

therapy service in New Zealand. However she also notes that

twenty four of the young people attending the service were

described by their parents as having had behaviour problems

since the ages of two to four years of age.

It seems evident then that one of the factors that may

contribute to the relative obscurity of child-to-parent

4

violence involves difficulties of definition. Terms such as

“child-to-parent violence”, “child-to-mother”, “child-to-

father violence”, “adolescent violence” and “parent abuse”

have been variously used to describe this form of family

violence. In this paper, the term “child-to-parent violence”

is preferred as it encompasses a wide range of abusive

behaviours, indicates that it is the parent who is the target

of the abusive behaviour by the child under the age of

eighteen years of age, and the one who uses physical or

psychological violence to dis-empower the parent.

Although formally identified over thirty years ago, child-to-

parent violence has remained a largely neglected form of

family violence (Walsh & Krienert 2009). Following a number of

investigations into child-to-parent violence in the early

1980s and 1990s (for example see Cornell and Gelles 1982;

Agnew & Huguley 1989; Paulson et al 1990), there seems to have

been very limited interest in the area until relatively

recently. There are fewer than 30 published studies on the

theme of child-to-mother violence, the majority of these using

data that is between 10 and 30 years old (Edenborough et al

2008).

Adolescence can be regarded as a time of tensions between

parental authority and an adolescent’s increasing need for

autonomy and independence when conflict patterns are developed

and reinforced between parents and children (Edenborough et al

2008; Pagani et al 2009). There is a need then to mark a clear

boundary between child-to-parent violence and troublesome

5

behaviours that could be seen as falling within “normal”

adolescent behaviour. Child-to-parent violence can be

understood from the perspective of the dynamics of power

within family relationships; such a perspective clarifies

child-to-parent violence as an abuse of power through which

the child or adolescent attempts to dominate coerce and

control others in the family (Tew & Nixon 2010).

Factors other than difficulties of definition that make child-

to-parent violence difficult to detect relate to shortcomings

of existing literature on child-to-parent violence such as a

dearth of contemporary empirical research, a reliance on small

sample clinical and case study papers and contradictory and

inconclusive findings relating to variables such as gender,

race, age, relationship and substance use (Edenborough et al

2008; Walsh & Krienert 2009). Social and cultural factors that

may contribute to the relative invisibility of child-to-parent

violence will be considered later in this paper.

Child-to-Parent Violence and Policy in Northern Ireland and

the Republic of Ireland?

In the context of the scant attention child-to-parent violence

has received in the literature of familial violence, it is

perhaps unsurprising that the issue has yet to emerge as an

explicit concern in policy and practice development. In 2005,

the Northern Ireland government launched “Tackling Violence at Home –

a Strategy for Addressing Domestic Violence and Abuse in Northern Ireland”

(DHSSPS 2005). In the Republic of Ireland, the government

launched “National Strategy on the Prevention of Domestic, Sexual and Gender

6

Based Violence 2010-2014” (Cosc 2010) early in 2010. Both policies

share the aim of supporting the further development of

systemic strategic responses to domestic violence and abuse,

building on the contributions and experiences of a variety of

statutory and voluntary agencies. Acknowledging the complexity

of violence within the family and intimate relationships, the

“Tackling Violence at Home” and “National Strategy 2010-2014” policy

documents deliberately use the terms domestic violence and/or

domestic abuse inter-changeably to “highlight the fact that

the problem is not restricted to physical violence but

involves also psychological, verbal, sexual, financial and

emotional abuse” (DHSPS 2005:8. See also Cosc 2010:20).

Perceptions of domestic violence and abuse have broadened in

contemporary research and clinical papers and both the

“Tackling Violence at Home” and the “National Strategy 2010-

2014” reflect such developments. For example, the Northern

Ireland and the Republic of Ireland policies explicitly state

that most cases of domestic violence and abuse involve

violence perpetrated by men against women while also

acknowledging that there are male victims of female

perpetrated abuse and that there are victims within lesbian

and gay relationships . The COSC (2010) document also

recognises the realities of elder abuse (the abuse of parents

by their adult children).

“Tackling Violence at Home” and the “National Strategy 2010-

2014” policy documents focus on adult initiated violence

within the family and intimate relationships. Child to parent

7

violence is not explicitly identified and there is no

recognition of the harsh realities of parents who live with

such experiences. However while the violence perpetrated by

children against their parents remains invisible, children are

to some extent visible in the policy documents. When children

are considered in the context of family violence in both the

“Tackling Violence at Home” and “National Strategy 2010-2014” papers, they

are regarded as either a direct victim of domestic violence or

abuse or as secondary victims, as witnesses to domestic abuse.

Neither policy documents articulate any understanding of

children as perpetrators of violence towards parents.

This raises the question of whether policy and practice

responses to child to parent violence are best located within

a domestic violence or domestic abuse discourse. Reflecting

on the adequacy of Parenting Orders and youth justice

responses to child to parent violence in the UK, Holt (2009)

notes that that while a domestic violence framework does

acknowledge the gendered power relations usually involved in

the experience of abuse, there are two specific differences

involved in child to parent violence that need to be

addressed. Since parents are legally responsible for the care

of their children, the parent is not likely to be in a

position to leave the family home, for example. Additionally,

since parents are likely to have more economic and social

resources than the child, the power dynamic between parents

and children is a particularly complex one. It seems that one

of the challenges facing practitioners, researchers and policy

makers is the identification of a conceptual framework that

8

best fits the complex realities of child to parent violence

while building upon the significant developments in policy and

practice that have been facilitated so far in the field of

family and intimate partner violence.

The emergence of Child-to-Parent Violence in society

Although child-to-parent violence has yet to become a visible

and explicit concern of policy and practice development, it

seems that child-to-parent violence is a growing social

problem with broad implications for research, policy and

intervention (Avrahim-Krehwinkel & Aldridge 2010; Tew & Nixon

2010). Over 20 years ago, Agnew and Huguley (1989) reported

that limited survey data available then indicated that 10% of

all adolescents hit their parents each year in the United

States. They also stated that mothers are more likely to be

targets of adolescent violence than fathers, though as

adolescent males get older, fathers are more likely to become

targets of physical aggression.

More recently, in a review of child-to-parent violence

literature, Walsh and Krienert (2009) found research that

indicated that 18% of two parent and 29% of one parent

families in the US experience child-to-parent violence, with

mothers being the most likely targets of child-to-parent

violence. It has been suggested that the proportionately high

prevalence rate for child-to-mother as opposed to child-to-

father violence in published papers could be due to mothers

demonstrating more willingness to disclose their experiences

of child-to-parent violence than fathers (Walsh & Krienert

9

2009). Additionally the fact that mothers tend to be the

primary caregivers, particularly in one parent families, could

place them at increased risk of experiencing child-to-parent

violence due to their more frequent interactions with their

children.

Pagani et al (2009) studied adolescent verbal and physical

aggression towards fathers in a randomised sample of 2,908

children selected for follow up annually from kindergarten to

mid-adolescence as part of a large longitudinal child

development study in Quebec. They found that among the male

and female 15/16 year old participants in the study, 12.3% of

males and 9.5% of females were physically aggressive towards

their father in the previous six months. The Pagani et al

(2009) study also found that patterns of aggression at school

during childhood were the best predictors of aggression in

adolescence towards fathers. Interestingly, such risk factors

remained even when allowance was made within the research

design for correlates such as harsh verbal punishment,

problematic adolescent substance use, paternal levels of

education and low parent-child involvement. There is also

evidence from other studies that child-to-parent violence is

not confined to under-privileged and multi-stressed families

but occurs across the spectrum of social and cultural

landscapes (Omer 2004; Avrahim-Krehwinkel & Aldridge 2010;

Kennedy et al 2010). It seems that child-to-parent violence

may present considerable challenges to established patterns of

thinking and intervention in the field of family violence.

10

Other research suggests factors frequently used to understand

family violence such as social isolation, parental stress,

family power structure, family size and structure and social

status are unrelated or weakly related to child to parent

violence (Agnew & Huguley 1989). It is likely that attempts to

develop effective approaches to detecting and responding to

child-to-parent violence within conventional child protection

and domestic violence perspectives may fall short of providing

constructive frameworks for researchers, policy makers and

practitioners.

Towards an understanding of Child-to-Parent Violence in

Families

Pagani et al (2009) raise questions about how we might begin

to understand the family and individual factors that can lead

to the emergence of child-to-parent violence. Focusing on

individual temperament, it has been suggested that for some

children, a “child tyrant” influenced by a sense of

entitlement and grandiosity develops a habitual aggressive

social interaction pattern (Barcai & Rosenthal 1974 in Pagani

et al 2009). Adopting an alternative perspective that focuses

on relationship patterns within families, Omer (2004) and Omer

and Weinblatt (2008) suggest that a characteristic shared by

families with violent and self destructive children are

escalation processes that lead to the development of a pattern

of hitting out and giving in and the emergence of recurrent

incidents of child-to-parent violence.

11

Walsh and Krienert (2009) also propose a relationship based

escalation process hypothesis suggesting that the frequency

and intensity of conflict between parents and their children

may escalate from childhood and throughout adolescence,

frequently coinciding with hormonal changes, physical stature

changes and puberty. During adolescence, parent-child

interactions may intensify and become more frequent, leading

to the development of an escalation process that sees verbal

exchanges leading to the emotional and physical abuse of

parents.

Pagani et al (2009) also draw attention to the diminishing

difference in size and stature between adolescent children and

their parents compared to their children’s pre-school years,

making sons and daughters formidable opponents in heated

exchanges. Heightened tensions between parents and their

children revolving around conflict about home

responsibilities, money and privileges have the potential to

lead to violence and abuse. A cycle of escalation and coercion

between parent and child may develop, in which higher levels

of aggression become part of what had been familiar conflict

patterns between the child and the parent within the family.

This can then lead to the emergence of adolescent violence

towards parents (Omer 2004; Pagani et al 2009).

There are indications that child-to-parent violence occurs

across all levels of society. Broadening our understanding of

the family context within which child-to-parent violence takes

place, Gallagher (2004) suggests that child-to-parent violence

12

occurs in two types of family environments. One type involves

two parent families, often middle class well educated parents

who are victimised by their over-entitled young people. The

second type includes families in which mothers parenting their

children alone are assaulted by their children in the wake of

domestic violence.

Experiences of family violence, substance misuse and child-to-

parent violence

Evidence elsewhere also raises questions in relation to the

correlation between a history of violence in the family and

the emergence of child-to-parent violence. In the study

referred to earlier, Cottrell and Monk (2004) provide detailed

qualitative data taken from two independent studies involving

adolescents, parents and service providers in semi structured

focus group and individual interviews. They found a common

pattern whereby a youth would begin to abuse his mother

shortly after the violent father had left the family home.

This could be understood from a psychological point of view as

the influence on behaviour of direct male role modelling,

idealisation of the abuser and anger at the mother for the

perceived failure to protect the family (Cottrell & Monk 2004:

1082).

The Cottrell and Monk paper (2004) also found that youth who

abused their parents had often themselves been physically

abused as children with the youth becoming violent towards

parents when he/she developed the physical strength to do so

or when motivated by a desire for retribution. Some female

13

youth reported that they had been sexually abused by the

father or stepfather in the family. In these cases, the youth

described their violence as being motivated by a need for self

protection or as an expression of rage at the offender. Some

of the female youth who reported sexual abuse victimisation

attributed their aggression to the need to protect siblings

from sexual abuse. Sheehan (1997) also raises the question of

the correlation between child to parent violence and childhood

experiences in sexual abuse: six adolescents among their

sample of sixty young people reported childhood sexual abuse,

while clinicians speculated that there were cases of

unreported sexual abuse among the group, especially among

young males (Sheehan 1997: 90).

More recently, a US study compared the characteristics of a

group of juvenile offenders who used child-to-parent violence

(CPV) with a group of juvenile offenders who had never used

child-to-parent violence (NCPV). Kennedy et al (2010) found

that youths in the CPV group were significantly more likely to

have been exposed to incidents of domestic violence (51%) and

were more likely to report being physically or verbally abused

by another member of the household (63%) than those in the

NCPV group (17.1% and 18.9% respectively). Childhood

experiences of sexual abuse were not explored as part of this

study.

Drug and alcohol misuse is often highly correlated with family

and child-to-parent violence (Cottrell & Monk 2004; Kennedy et

al 2010). But assumptions about direct causal links between

14

substance misuse and child-to-parent violence is challenged by

Cottrell and Monk (2004) who found that child-to-parent

violence was often a result of arguments between the youth and

parents in relation to substance misuse. In some cases parents

who had experienced child-to-parent violence were also

misusing substances themselves, raising further questions

about family relationships. Cottrell and Monk (2004) also

found that substance misuse was viewed by the participants in

their study as symptomatic of deeper issues related to

historical abuse and family conflict.

The literature seems to indicate that a narrow focus on

individual factors such as personality characteristics and

use/misuse of substances could risk obscuring the interplay

between individual, family and social dynamics that may

contribute to the emergence of child-to-parent violence. A

more detailed exploration of sociological and psychological

perspectives on child-to-parent violence lies outside the

remit of this paper but may be found in sources such as

Sheehan (1997), Omer (2001), Cottrell and Monk (2004) and

Weinblatt and Omer (2008).

Cultural and Social Factors and Child-to-Parent Violence

Research described earlier suggests that child-to-parent

violence is occurring at an increasing rate in a variety of

family environments (Agnew and Huguley 1989; Omer 2004;

Gallagher 2004; Walsh & Krienert 2009; Avrahim-Krehwinkel &

Aldridge 2010). We have also seen that there is evidence to

suggest that parent-child conflict patterns in some families

15

may evolve through escalation processes to increasingly

violent incidents (Omer 2004; Omer & Weinblatt 2008; Walsh and

Krienert 2009; Pagani et al 2009). This leads us to the

inevitable question: how is it that child-to-parent violence

remains in relative obscurity in practitioner, policy and

research discourses about family violence?

Perhaps one explanation is that cultural views about the

family and a general reluctance in Western society to place

responsibility on children for aggressive and violent

behaviour restrict the ability to detect and respond

appropriately to child-to-parent violence (Korbin 2003;

Gallagher 2004; Omer 2004; Walsh & Krienert 2009). The

violent behaviour of children challenges the conventional

beliefs about human nature and childhood and may be easily

minimised or regarded as a passing child developmental stage

that need not be taken too seriously (Agnew & Huguley 1989;

Korbin 2003).

Child-to-parent violence also challenges our perceptions of

cycles of abuse and power within families. Violence within the

family usually involves attacks on less powerful individuals

(children or partners) by more powerful individuals but child-

to-parent violence involves attacks on parents, usually

regarded as more powerful individuals, by the usually less

powerful child or adolescent (Agnew & Huguley 1989). The

reversal of conventional power dynamics within families

represented by child-to-parent violence leads to significant

challenges for the conceptual frameworks of practitioners and

16

policy makers (Tew & Nixon 2010). The counter intuitive

dynamic inherent to child-to-parent violence could lead

researchers and practitioners to the belief that child to

parent violence is uncommon, a belief reinforced by parents

reluctance to describe their experiences of violence at the

hands of their child or adolescent.

When practitioners and policy makers are presented with

reports of child-to-parent violence, it is likely that

children who use violence towards their parents will be

regarded more as victims than as perpetrators. The aggressive

behaviour of children is often understood as being “caused” by

parents due to some deficits in their parenting ability

(Gallagher 2004; Omer 2004; Holt 2009; Tew & Nixon 2010).

Recognition of child-to-parent violence is also hindered by

the reality that some children who use violence towards their

parents have experienced abuse themselves or have witnessed

abuse of their mothers (Gallagher 2004). As we have seen

earlier, there may be a link between child-to-parent violence

and other forms of violence in the family whereby a child

begins to use violence within their family of origin – the

environment in which they first were exposed to violence as a

method of interaction (Agnew & Huguley 1989).

A further contributory factor to the under recognised

characteristics of child-to-parent violence may be that while

survivors of child abuse and domestic violence have their

advocates to bring to light their experiences and to support

the development of effective intervention and prevention

17

practices, parents of children who use violence at home do not

(Agnew & Huguley 1989). Child and family focused services such

as child protection or youth support agencies tend to operate

on the assumption that children are victims and need support

(Holt 2009; Tew & Nixon 2010). Consequently it becomes more

difficult for practitioners to regard a child as being both a

victim and a perpetrator of abusive behaviour and to recognise

parent’s experiences of being abused by their children

(Gallagher 2004; Coogan 2009).

Dilemmas of Disclosure

Cultural and social barriers to the recognition of child-to-

parent violence have a direct impact on the experiences of

parents who seek help outside the family. Parents who disclose

experiences of child-to-parent violence to external agencies

may find themselves at the centre of child protection

investigations and may have their child removed from their

care (Omer 2004). Holt (2009) and Tew and Nixon (2010)

describe the ineffective, parent blaming and less than helpful

responses from child protection and criminal justice services

in the United Kingdom to mothers’ persistent requests for help

in managing the child-to-parent violence of their children.

Domestic violence policy development in Northern Ireland and

the Republic of Ireland has been influenced by an

understanding of existence of barriers to disclosure of

domestic violence and the obstacles a survivor of abuse must

overcome when they decide to tell (DHSSPS 2005; Cosc 2010).

The “Tackling Violence at Home” strategy identifies the factors that

18

make domestic violence and abuse such difficult issues to

detect – it mostly takes place behind closed doors, many

victims suffer in silence “afraid for themselves and for their

children” (DHSSPS 2005:17) and victims may disregard their own

safety and stay in abusive relationships for a variety of

reasons. Describing the dilemmas of disclosure experienced by

victims of domestic violence, the “National Strategy 2010-2014”

(Cosc 2010) reports that feelings of embarrassment and shame,

fears that the abuse may not be taken seriously, or that is

too trivial to tell someone else often result in many not

telling anybody.

It seems that many parents living with child-to-parent

violence share common experiences with women and men who have

been targets of domestic violence. It is common for parents

who are assaulted by their young children to deny or minimise

the violence they experience or to blame themselves for the

abusive behaviour of the perpetrator (Cottrell & Monk 2004;

Gallagher 2004; Edenborough et al 2008). Similar to the

experiences of those living with domestic violence, it seems

that many parents living with child-to-parent violence may be

isolated in the community and struggling in silence.

New Perspectives on Family Violence – Implications for Policy

and Practice

We have considered the dilemmas of definition and recognition

relating to child-to-parent violence, noting the relative

obscurity in family violence policy and practice literature

about this form of abuse within the family. We have also

19

recognised the barriers to the detection of child-to-parent

violence and to effective intervention in the context of

social and cultural assumptions about children, violence,

power and the family. It seems clear then that we need to

adjust our lens when considering family violence to broaden

the focus of our conceptual frameworks, taking into account to

the complexities and dynamics of child-to-parent violence.

This could facilitate the design of research and intervention

projects to influence the development of theoretical, policy

and practice responses to the complex realities of this form

of family violence.

The raising of awareness among practitioners, policy makers,

researchers and parents could also create the potential for

the development of strategies to empower parents who have

become targets of child-to-parent violence to rediscover a

sense of hope and competence (Omer & Weinblatt 2008; Tew &

Nixon 2010). There are promising results from intervention

programmes designed to assist parents in the development of a

new awareness of their own role in (de)escalation cycles and

new skills in their responses to child-to-parent violence

(Weinblatt & Avrahim-Krehwinkel 2004; Omer et al 2008;

Avrahim-Krehwinkel & Aldridge 2010). For example, Weinblatt

and Omer (2008) describe a comparative study of the Non

Violent Resistance (NVR) programme in Israel where parents who

had received training in the NVR programme demonstrated a

decrease in parental helplessness and escalatory behaviours as

well as a decrease in their children’s abusive behaviour.

There is a need to design and implement research projects in a

20

variety of cultural contexts for intervention programmes such

as the NVR programme that may have the potential to respond

effectively to the needs of families within which child-to-

parent violence takes place. There is also a need for research

to focus on a further neglected area of abuse and aggression

within families – the violent behaviour of young children and

adolescents towards siblings (Hoffman & Edwards 2004; Eriksen,

S & Jensen, V 2006; Omer et al 2008).

Starting from a broader understanding of family violence that

encompasses child-to-parent violence, practitioners, policy

makers and researchers could find much that is useful in the

lessons already learned in the field of domestic violence

prevention and intervention. Factors that have played a

significant positive role in detection and intervention with

domestic violence could have a similar constructive role to

play in the evolution of effective responses to child-to-

parent violence. There is a need, for example, for awareness-

raising and education for practitioners about the dynamics

involved in this form of abuse within the family, the

provision of easily accessible community supports, and an

understanding of the immediate protection and safety needs of

young people (including siblings) and parents. Furthermore, an

increasing awareness of the complex realities of child-to-

parent violence could also serve to significantly reduce the

feelings of blame and guilt felt by parents who are the

targets of the violent behaviour of their children.

21

It is also essential that inter-agency policies on child-to-

parent violence are established so that parents and families

receive a consistent response across a range of services

(Cottrell & Monk 2004). There is an urgent need for the

broadening of policy and practice frameworks for understanding

violence within the family to include child-to-parent violence

and to create opportunities for parents to disclose their

experiences in a safe, non-judgemental and open environment.

References.

Agnew, R & Huguley, (1989) Adolescent Violence towards

Parents. Journal of Marriage and the Family. Vol. 51: 699-711

Avrahim-Krehwinkel, C & Aldridge, D (2010) A Non Violent Resistance

Approach to Children in Distress – A Guide for Parents and Professionals. London.

Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Coogan, D (2009) Protection, responsibilities and hope:

working with families where children assault their

parents/carers. Irish Social Worker. Winter 2009: 7-11.

Cottrell, B (2001) Parent Abuse: the abuse of parents by their teenage

children. Retrieved on the 30th of November 2010 from

http://www.canadiancrc.com/parent_abuse.htm

Cottrell, B & Monk, P (2004) Adolescent-to-Parent Abuse; A

Qualitative Overview of Common Themes. Journal of Family Issues. Vol.

25, No.8: 1072-1095).

Cornell, C & Gelles, R (1982) Adolescent to parent violence.

The Urban and Social Change Review. Vol. 15: 8-14.

22

Department of Health, Social Services & Public Safety (DHSSPS)

(2005) Tackling Violence at Home – a Strategy for Addressing Domestic Violence

and Abuse in Northern Ireland. Stormont, Northern Ireland. DHSSPS.

Edenborough, M, Jackson, D, Mannix, J & Wilkes, L M (2008)

Living in the red zone: the experience of mother-to-child

violence. Child and Family Social Work. Vol.13: 464-473.

Erikson, S & Jensen, V (2006) All in the Family? Family

Environmental Factors in Sibling Violence. Journal of Family Violence.

No. 21: 497-507.

Eurobarometer 73.2 (2010) Domestic Violence Against Women Report.

Brussels. European Commission.

Gallagher, E (2004) Youth who victimise their parents. Australian

New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy. Vol. 25, No.2: 94-105.

Harbin, H & Madden, D (1979) Battered parents: a new syndrome.

American Journal of Psychiatry. Vol. 36: 1288-1291.

Hoffman, K L & Edwards, J N (2004) An Integrated Model of

Sibling Violence and Abuse. Journal of Family Violence. Vol.19 No 3:

185- 200.

Holt, A (2009) Parent Abuse: Some reflections on the adequacy

of a youth justice response. Internet Journal of Criminology. Accessed

on the 20th of October 2010 at

http://www.internetjournalofcriminology.com/Holt_Parent_Abuse_

Nov_09.pdf

Korbin, J E (2003) Children, Childhoods and Violence. Annual

Review of Anthropology. Vol. 32: 431-446.

23

Kearns, N, Coen, L & Canavan, J (2008) Domestic Violence in Ireland:

An Overview of National Strategic Policy and Relevant International Literature on

Prevention and Intervention Initiatives in Service Provision. Galway. Child and

Family Research Centre, National University of Ireland.

Kennedy, T D, Edmonds, W A, Dann, K T J & Burnett, K F (2010)

The Clinical and Adaptive Features of Young Offenders with

Histories of Child-Parent Violence. Journal of Family Violence. Vol.

25, No. 5: 509-520.

Omer, H (2004) Nonviolent Resistance – A New Approach to Violent and Self

Destructive Children. Cambridge UK. Cambridge University Press.

Omer, H, Schorr-Sapir, I & Weinblatt, U 2008 Non-violent Resistance

and Violence Against Siblings. Journal of Family Therapy, Vol. 30: 450-

464

Omer, H & Weinblatt, U 2008 Non-violent Resistance: a treatment for

parents of children with acute behaviour problems. Journal of Marital and

Family Therapy, Vol. 34. No. 1: 75-92

Paulson, M, Coombs, R & Cotton, S (1990) Youth who physically

assault their parents. Journal of Family Violence. Vol.5: 1051-1060.

Pagani, L, Tremblay, R. E, Nagin, D, Zoccolillo, M, Vitaro, F

& McDuff (2009) Risk Factor Models for Adolescent Verbal and

Physical Aggression Toward Fathers. Journal of Family Violence. Vol.24:

173-182.

Sheehan, M (1997) Adolescent Violence – Strategies, Outcomes

and Dilemmas in Working with Young People and their Families.

Australia New Zealand Journal of Family Therapy. Vol. 18, No.2: 80-91.

24

Tew, J & Nixon, J (2010) Parent Abuse: Opening Up a Discussion

of a Complex Instance of Family Power Relations. Social Policy and

Society. Vol.9, No.4: 579-589.

Walsh, J A & Krienert, J. L (2009) A Decade of Child-Initiated

Family Violence: Comparative Analysis of Child-Parent Violence

and Parricide Examining Offender, Victim and Event

Characteristics in a National Sample of Reported Incidents

1995-2005. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Vol. 24 No.9: 1450-1477.

Weinblatt & Avraham-Krehwinkel (2004) The Parents Instruction

Manual. Pages: 47-73 in Omer H (2004) Nonviolent Resistance – A New

Approach to Violent and Self Destructive Children. Cambridge UK. Cambridge

University Press.

25