Parental and Others' Responses to Physical Sibling ...

15 downloads 0 Views 516KB Size Report
Jul 19, 2015 - by physical sibling violence were asked to reflect on how .... others as sibling rivalry and, therefore, minimized as unprob- lematic. Parents have ...
Parental and Others’ Responses to Physical Sibling Violence: a Descriptive Analysis of Victims’ Retrospective Accounts Courtney McDonald & Katherine Martinez

Journal of Family Violence ISSN 0885-7482 Volume 31 Number 3 J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401-410 DOI 10.1007/s10896-015-9766-y

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media New York. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23

Author's personal copy J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410 DOI 10.1007/s10896-015-9766-y

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Parental and Others’ Responses to Physical Sibling Violence: a Descriptive Analysis of Victims’ Retrospective Accounts Courtney McDonald 1 & Katherine Martinez 2

Published online: 19 July 2015 # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Abstract Although sibling abuse may be the most common form of family violence, relatively few studies have been conducted on this topic. The current exploratory study addressed this gap in the literature through analyses of thematic categories in sibling abuse narratives gathered from an online survey of sibling violence victims. All data was collected via an online survey. Participants who reported being victimized by physical sibling violence were asked to reflect on how others—family members, professionals, and friends— responded to knowledge of the abuse. Results demonstrate a need for general education about sibling violence, particularly for parents who might minimize or normalize their children’s violent conflicts. Additionally, parents need assistance in developing appropriate responses to sibling violence, as participants often perceived their parents to be ineffective at preventing or stopping the abuse. Finally, this study suggests that negative or unhelpful parental responses can be as harmful as the sibling violence itself. Keywords Physical sibling violence . Sibling abuse . Siblings . Abuse disclosure . Qualitative analysis Physical violence between siblings is the most common form of family violence, but it has not yet achieved the status of a social problem and remains largely absent from the academic * Courtney McDonald [email protected] 1

Department of Psychology and Sociology, Georgia Southwestern State University, 800 Georgia Southwestern State U. Drive, Americus, GA 31709, USA

2

Institute for Women’s Studies and Services, Metropolitan State University of Denver, Denver, CO, USA

literature on family violence (Caffaro and Conn-Caffaro 1998; Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Latzman et al. 2011; Rapoza et al. 2010; Shadik et al. 2013). In fact, violence between siblings is so culturally acceptable that it is difficult to differentiate between behaviors that are non-harmful and those that may be considered harmful, problematic, and abusive. Given the lack of consideration of siblings in most of the family violence literature, it is not surprising that researchers differ in how they define sibling violence, although most consider the motive of the offender, the severity and frequency of violence, and the emotional and physical impact on the victim as important factors (Morrill-Richards and Leierer 2010). Morrill-Richards and Leierer (2010) have broadly defined sibling abuse as Bone member of a sibling pair deliberately causing physical harm to the other sibling^ (p. 19). Caffaro and Conn-Caffaro (1998) more narrowly defined sibling assault as repeated and escalating physical aggression that is motivated by the desire to harm, humiliate, defeat or feel power over another; emotionally hurts the victim; and is not controlled by parents. To complicate matters more, there is some evidence that ethnic minority groups differ in what they view as mildly, moderately, and extremely abusive behaviors (Rapoza et al. 2010). In their effort to escape definitional inconsistencies, Krienert and Walsh (2011) relied on official data from the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). They described their data selection criteria as Badhering to a criminal justice oriented legal definition, [that] intentionally limited selected cases to aggravated assault, simple assault, and intimidation perpetrated against a sibling victim. The objective was to implement a standardized/universal criminal justice/legal oriented definition of sibling violence . . .^ (p. 336). However, given that this area of research has remained underdeveloped, the goal of agreeing on a clear definition of sibling abuse has yet to be realized. Despite this important limitation,

Author's personal copy 402

researchers have documented that, regardless of the definition, sibling violence is widespread and should be a primary area of concern for researchers and practitioners.

Extent of the Problem In one of the earliest efforts to establish national prevalence rates of sibling abuse, Straus and Gelles (1990) concluded that while the rate of parent-child abuse was 23 per 1000, the sibling abuse rate was 800 per 1000 children. More recent studies have confirmed that sibling abuse is indeed a significant social problem. Finkelhor et al. (2006) analyzed data from the nationally representative Developmental Victimization Survey and found that one-third of children had been physically assaulted (defined as being hit or attacked) by a sibling in the past year. In a 2010 study of public school students, 42 % reported experiencing sibling violence in the past month alone (Button and Gealt 2010). Using NIBRS data, Krienert and Walsh (2011) determined that 33,066 incidents of sibling violence had been reported to law enforcement agencies from 2000 to 2005. In a survey of 218 college students at a Southeastern university, 70.5 % of respondents reported they had either perpetrated or been victims of severe sibling physical violence at least once in their lifetime (Kettrey and Emery 2006). Severe violence was measured using the Severe Violence Index of the Conflict Tactics Scale and included behaviors such as biting, hitting, punching, beating up, and using a knife or gun. The prevalence of sibling abuse among this sample increased to 83 % when mild sibling violence was also included in the survey (Kettrey and Emery 2006). In a similar survey of 203 undergraduates at a large Southern university, about 48 % of respondents said they had been victims of sibling aggression, and 41 % admitted to being aggressive themselves (Hardy 2001). While studies such as these have indicated that sibling violence is a pervasive social problem, we still know relatively little about why siblings commit violence, how victims respond to violence, and how sibling violence is addressed by others (e.g., parents, teachers, and peers). Research on sibling abuse has focused on what, if any, demographic patterns relate to victimization and perpetration. Most commonly, researchers have found that males are more likely than females to perpetrate violence (Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Hardy 2001; Krienert and Walsh 2011), and females make up a higher percentage of victims (Button and Gealt 2010; Krienert and Walsh 2011). However, some studies have indicated that both genders are equally likely to be victims and perpetrators of aggression (Hardy 2001; Kettrey and Emery 2006), although the context in which they use violence is not clear. Drawing on NIBRS figures from 2000 to 2005, Krienert and Walsh (2011) analyzed data of simple and aggravated

J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410

assaults between siblings who were 21 years old or younger. Cases involving multiple victims or perpetrators were excluded. Of the 33,066 incidents analyzed, 67 % of victims were White and 58 % were female. About 73 % of perpetrators were males. Most commonly, brothers perpetrated violence against their sisters (40 % of cases), followed by brotherbrother violence (34 %), and both male and female offenders were more likely to abuse a sister than a brother. Based on the NIBRS data, Krienert and Walsh determined that most of the victims and offenders were 14 years old or older. Half of the cases included siblings who were 3 years or less apart in age, with 61 % of the perpetrators being the same age or older than the victim. About 80 % of the incidents involved simple assaults, 91 % occurred in the victims’ homes, and 10 % did not include a weapon aside from the perpetrators’ hands or feet. Additionally, both Krienert and Walsh and Kettrey and Emery (2006) found that females were more likely to be involved in serious offenses, with Krienert and Walsh suggesting Ba gendered trajectory of escalating violence^ (p. 340), proposing that girls may prefer to avoid violence but engage in it out of long-term frustration. Further, using data from the Developmental Victimization Survey, Finkelhor et al. (2006) found that sibling violence tends to be less serious in terms of injury than other forms of violence against children (i.e., peer assault). However, they noted that sibling violence is more likely to be chronic, and thus has the potential to be especially traumatic to younger children (see also Button and Gealt 2010).

Minimization of Sibling Violence One reason that little research has been conducted in this area is that sibling physical aggression is largely perceived as normal and inevitable rather than as abusive behavior (Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Finkelhor et al. 2006; Krienert and Walsh 2011; Shadik et al. 2013; Tucker and Kazura 2013). Often, verbal and physical aggression are perceived by parents and others as sibling rivalry and, therefore, minimized as unproblematic. Parents have difficulty in determining what behaviors are acceptable and even beneficial, and which might cause real harm. In fact, evidence suggests that many children do not label their experiences of sibling violence as abusive until adulthood (Hardy 2001; Hardy et al. 2010). The inability to label sibling violence as abuse is compounded by the context in which it frequently occurs, namely families characterized by other forms of abuse or dysfunction. Scholars have found that experiencing parent-tochild violence (Button and Gealt 2010; Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Noland et al. 2004, parental marital discord (Eriksen and Jensen 2006), familial financial and legal stressors (Hardy 2001), and witnessing violence in the home (Button and Gealt 2010) all increase the likelihood that one will also

Author's personal copy J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410

be a victim of sibling violence. Sibling abuse is particularly troubling because it can be frequent and last for years (Bass et al. 2006; Carlson et al. 2006; Morrill-Richards and Leierer 2010; Rudd and Herzberger 1999). Such prolonged exposure has significant consequences for victims’ well-being, as the effects of sibling abuse can last well into adulthood. Depression, substance abuse, suicidal ideation, dating and domestic violence, bullying, and developing a low sense of wellbeing have been documented as harmful effects of sibling abuse (Button and Gealt 2010; Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Morrill-Richards and Leierer 2010; Noland et al. 2004; Rudd and Herzberger 1999).

Responding to Sibling Violence Clearly, sibling violence is a significant social problem that is generally not taken as seriously as other forms of child maltreatment (Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Latzman et al. 2011). Minimization of and insufficient responses to sibling violence can compound the negative effects of the abuse (Bass et al. 2006; McVeigh 2003; Tucker and Kazura 2013). For example, when parents refuse to intervene or react inappropriately (e.g., by telling victims to fight back or be tougher), sibling conflict increases and children’s physical health may decline (Tucker and Kazura 2013). It is also possible that sibling abuse may prompt parental abuse, as parents who do not know how to address sibling conflict might use violence themselves to control their children (Shadik et al. 2013). On the other hand, when victims are taken seriously and adults intervene appropriately to protect them, the effects of sibling violence can be minimized. For example, a recent survey of undergraduate students found that most had told an authority figure about the sibling violence they were experiencing and believed that the adult had intervened in a manner that diminished the violence (Hardy 2001). Thus, it is likely that if children are encouraged to report sibling abuse to authority figures and are taken seriously, abusive behaviors can be properly addressed. Unfortunately, few studies to date have attempted to systematically analyze accounts of sibling abuse disclosure and corresponding responses. An important exception has been the work conducted by Rowntree (2007) with 19 female survivors of childhood sibling sexual abuse in Australia. The goal of this research was to analyze the ways in which adults made sense of the abuse upon disclosure. The six most common thematic responses that emerged were viewing the abuse as: (a) normal or natural, (b) the victim’s fault, (c) not serious, (d) a family matter, (e) a taboo subject, or (f) abusive. Generally, sexual abuse was understood by adults to be a normal part of growing up (i.e., Bnormal or natural^), was less serious than other forms of abuse (i.e., Bnot serious^) and, in part, caused by the victim’s own disobedient or promiscuous behavior (i.e., Bvictim’s fault^). When adults found the behavior to be

403

problematic, they either insisted that victims remain silent in order to avoid telling family secrets to outsiders (i.e., Ba family matter^) or refused to allow the topic to be raised at all, even within the confines of the family (i.e., Ba taboo subject^). All of these reactions were reported to be emotionally damaging and sometimes led to isolation from family members. Only the last theme, in which adults classified victims’ experiences as abuse, included responses that affirmed that the women were unfairly treated by their brothers, were not themselves to blame, and should not feel ashamed. Trained professionals (e.g., counselors) were the only adults to respond by viewing the behavior as abuse; no family member did so. Rowntree’s work demonstrated that victims of sibling sexual abuse often risk secondary victimization when they choose to disclose and are not adequately supported by family members. Unfortunately, no other research has been done regarding responses to sibling abuse.

The Current Study The present study contributes to the literature by providing retrospective accounts from adults who have identified themselves as current or former victims of physical sibling abuse (all reported having been victimized during childhood). All participants recounted that as children, at least one adult knew about their experiences with physical violence perpetrated by a sibling. Participants were prompted to recall how family members, friends, and other adults (e.g., counselors or teachers) responded to knowledge about the maltreatment they experienced. In light of Rowntree’s (2007) findings about sexual abuse, this research is crucial, as victims of sibling physical violence may also be receiving harmful or ineffective responses from adults, compounding the effects of the abuse. The descriptive analysis provided here can help shed light on how some adults perceive their past experiences with sibling violence and adults’ reactions to knowledge about said violence.

Methods The current exploratory study conducted via an online survey was approved by an Institutional Review Board in April of 2012. Data collection took place between this time and November 2013. Sixty-three individuals over the age of 18 who self-identified as either victims or perpetrators of sibling abuse participated in an online survey which prompted them to retrospectively reflect on their experiences with sibling abuse. Individuals were recruited by emailed advertisements to family violence agencies and to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community centers across the U.S. The LGBT community was targeted for recruitment because some

Author's personal copy 404

research has indicated that during childhood, sexual minority individuals are at a higher risk of victimization for a range of abusive behaviors (Friedman et al. 2011). One goal of the larger project from which this paper derives was to examine whether or not LGBT and heterosexual individuals varied significantly in their experiences of sibling abuse, although such a focus is beyond the scope of the current paper. While the online survey included question prompts about physical, sexual, and emotional sibling abuse, the current study only analyzed the narratives of participants who (a) self-identified as victims of physical sibling abuse (but not sexual abuse) and (b) reported they had either disclosed the violence to an adult, or an adult found out about it in some other way (e.g., witnessing violence). The goal was to explore how victims of physical violence perceived the responses of others when the violence was disclosed. Given the stigma of child sexual violence, we believed it likely that the responses to physical violence would be qualitatively different, and thus should be analyzed separately from narratives of sexual abuse. In total, 20 participants self-identified as victims of physical sibling violence during childhood (but not sexual abuse) and reported that adults knew of the violence. Thus, the current study is a descriptive analysis of 20 participants’ accounts of the ways in which adults responded to the knowledge of their childhood victimization from sibling violence. To date, no other publication has systematically analyzed victims’ perceptions of others’ responses to sibling physical violence. Data Collection Before completing the online survey, participants were directed to a web page that explained the study and the types of questions to be asked. They were also informed about their rights as respondents and provided contact information for the first author. To be redirected to the survey, individuals had to confirm that they were at least 18 years old and were giving informed consent for data collection. The online survey included a range of closed- and openended question prompts regarding sibling violence. The first prompt for participants to answer was, BCan you recall a time when a sibling hit/bit/punched/slapped/kicked/scratched you?^ These forms of sibling violence have been identified as common but problematic in Wiehe’s (2002) case studies of sibling abuse. Based on the fact that it is entirely probable that most siblings have engaged in this sort of behavior and it is doubtful that many of these cases should be classified as abusive, open-ended question prompts were included as a followup. If the participants answered BYes,^ to the first question, they were prompted to identify which sibling Bdid these things to you^ and which sibling did them most frequently and most severely (as defined by the participants). Participants were also provided question prompts regarding how often the behavior occurred and their age at the first and last occurrences

J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410

of violence. They were further asked to provide a narrative of one instance of abuse, speculate on the cause of the violence and to explain the current effects of the violence. Only those participants who reported that the violence had not been an isolated incident, had been severe (e.g., resulted in injury or was accompanied by a weapon), or continued to affect them emotionally as adults were considered to be victims of physical abuse. Another question prompt posed via the online survey was, BWere you ever physically, emotionally, or sexually abused by a sibling?^ Rather than imposing a definition of sibling abuse that might not conform to their experiences, this question allowed participants to identify their siblings’ actions as either abusive or not. A major benefit of allowing participants to self-define their siblings’ behaviors as abusive or not is that it illuminated how people make sense of their own experiences and gave them the opportunity to provide their own examples of what they believed constitutes abuse rather than being limited to the researchers’ conceptualization of sibling violence. Any participant who had identified as experiencing sexual abuse was excluded for the purposes of this analysis. Finally, the participants were prompted to answer the question, BDid you ever tell anyone about the abuse from a sibling, or did anyone find out about the abuse?^ If they answered BYes,^ they were directed to another question prompt regarding who was told or who found out and what happened following the disclosure. Only disclosures made to an adult were included in the current analysis. Thus, every participant (n=20) included in the study (a) did not report sibling sexual abuse; (b) could recall an instance in which they had been hit, bit, punched, slapped, kicked, or scratched by a sibling; (c) reported that such violence had not been an isolated event, had been severe, or had lasting emotional effects; (d) identified themselves as a victim of sibling abuse; and (e) reported that an adult was either told or found out about these experiences.

Data Analysis Qualitative methods were used to examine participants’ accounts of abuse disclosure and their interpretations of other people’s responses to the maltreatment they received. Openended survey question prompts were coded by the first author utilizing the thematic categories developed by Rowntree (2007) in her investigation of sibling sexual abuse. Although inductive reasoning is more common in qualitative research (Maxwell 2005), the decision was made to use Rowntree’s conceptual codes because the narratives of the current participants closely resembled those shared in Rowntree’s study. However, the first author altered or expanded the meaning of each code when necessary to better fit the current data.

Author's personal copy J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410

Maxwell (2005) has argued that both inductive and deductive methods can be useful for qualitative research. He stated, There are thus two main ways in which qualitative researchers often fail to make good use of existing theory: by not using it enough, and by relying too heavily and uncritically on it. The first fails to explicitly apply any prior analytic abstractions or theoretical framework to the study, thus missing the insights that only existing theory can provide . . . The second type of failure has the opposite problem: It imposes theory on the study . . . preventing the researcher from seeing events and relationships that don’t fit the theory (Maxwell 2005, p. 46). Our analysis, then, was both deductive (as it relied on previously constructed themes) and inductive (as the data drove the ways in which the final codes were defined). In addition, the adaptation of Rowntree’s themes allowed for some comparison between the two studies. This is important in exploratory studies of new areas of inquiry as it provides the opportunity to develop new insights that do not yet exist (Babbie 2014). As stated in the literature review, Rowntree’s (2007) thematic categories (this study’s original coding categories) were as follows: (a) normal or natural, (b) the victim’s fault, (c) not serious, (d) a family matter, (e) a taboo subject, and (f) abusive. These codes were revised throughout the data analysis process. For example, Rowntree’s thematic category of abuse included explicit acknowledgement from counselors and other professionals that the behaviors the victims had experienced in fact constituted abuse. We expanded this theme to include any acknowledgement that the experiences were problematic, including parents’ attempts to discipline the abuser or protect the victim, regardless of whether or not the behaviors were specifically labeled as abuse. Additionally, Rowntree’s participants did not indicate that sibling rivalry emerged as an explanation or justification of abuse, yet this notion did arise for the current participants who experienced physical violence. Mention of sibling rivalry as an explanation for violence was coded as Bnatural or normal^ as sibling rivalry is widely accepted as an inevitable component of sibling relationships. Overall, however, Rowntree’s conceptual categories of responses to sibling sexual abuse were quite easily adapted to the current data on physical violence, suggesting that responses to sibling abuse can be similar, regardless of the form of abuse.

405

and nine were between 40 and 60 years old. Seven participants grew up in the Midwest, followed by the Northeast (five), West (four), and South (three), and one did not report a region. Nine believed yearly family incomes to have been below $30, 000, while nine others estimated yearly incomes of $31000– 80,000. The remaining two grew up in families making at least $90,000 per year. All participants reported experiencing reoccurring physical abuse in childhood, and two had continued to be victimized as adults (including one woman under the age of 30 years who reported ongoing physical violence at the hands of her brother). The mean age at which the abuse began was 5 years old, and the mean age at which the abuse ended was 18 years. On average, the participants experienced physical abuse for 13 years; abuse most commonly ended when the participant or his or her sibling left the home. At the time of the abuse, five participants had only one sibling, 12 had two to four siblings, and three had six to seven siblings. The most common perpetrator was a brother (14), followed by both a brother and sister (three), and one sister (three). Of the three participants who identified both brothers and sisters as abusive, two viewed their brothers as perpetrating the most severe and frequent physical abuse. The thematic categories described below reflect victims’ perceptions of other adults’ responses to their experiences of physical sibling abuse. They are listed in order of frequency reported. The section concludes with a description of participants’ assessments of the long-term consequences experienced due to negative responses to sibling abuse disclosure. Sibling Violence as Abuse/Problematic Behavior

Results

Surprisingly, given the widespread acceptance of sibling conflict (Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Finkelhor et al. 2006), the most common response to abuse as remembered by participants was an acknowledgement that the behaviors were problematic. Twelve of the 20 participants reported that at least one adult had taken the violence seriously and was concerned for the victim. Interestingly, none of the participants indicated that parents used the word Babuse^ to describe siblings’ actions. This was true even of those who did take participants’ accounts seriously and seemed to wish the offending siblings’ behaviors would change. For example, one participant noted that her parents used the term Bbullying^ to describe her brother’s behaviors. This is an important challenge for practitioners, as avoidance of the term Babuse^ might serve to legitimize sibling violence (Kettrey and Emery 2006).

Twenty victims of physical sibling abuse were included in the present study; 16 were women and four were men. The majority (16) of the participants were White and identified as heterosexual (15). At the time of completion of the online survey, 11 participants were between the ages of 18 and 30,

Effective Responses The strongest reactions condemning the sibling abuse came from individuals outside of the family. For example, one woman recounted that after telling a best friend of the emotional and physical abuse she was enduring, her friend Bjust stared at me then called him a basterd (sic) and

Author's personal copy 406

said she wanted to kill him.^ Although this might not be a particularly constructive comment, it did confirm the participant’s belief that she was being mistreated. Another woman, who herself refrained from using words like Babuse^ or even Bviolence^ to describe her brother’s behavior, wrote, Presently when I tell people they seem disturbed and suddenly realize that when I say I have Bfriction^ with my brother I mean something quite a bit more serious. Normally they make a statement about not liking my brother regardless of whether or not they’ve met him before and then either change the subject or share their own story.

J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410

In the majority of cases in which participants claimed their parents’ discipline was ineffective, the perpetrator was a brother and the parent was a mother. One woman noted, BMy mother saw it. She couldn't control him. She did nothing.^ This, of course, is a retrospective interpretation of her mother’s actions; it is possible that in fact her mother tried numerous ways to Bcontrol^ the brother. Importantly, though, she and other participants like her perceived their mothers as ineffective protectors against brothers. Thus, simply recognizing that a problem exists is not sufficient to adequately address the problem. Sibling Violence as Not Serious

Of those reporting abuse to an educator, one told his college professor (via a term paper) and another told her first grade teacher. The professor advised the man to seek counseling, and the first grade teacher called a meeting with the victim’s parents (this event took place approximately 20 years ago), although the parents denied any abuse. Both participants identified the educators’ responses as affirming their feelings that they were indeed being abused. Ineffective Responses More commonly, participants reported that while their parents knew they were being mistreated and identified the behaviors as problematic, they were not able or willing to end the abuse. According to seven of the participants’ retroactive interpretations of their parents’ behaviors, parents seemed to lack the knowledge of how to discipline a violent child, preferring instead to allow children to resolve the conflicts themselves. For example, one man wrote, I do recall that my mother’s responses to my sister’s abuse, generally, was (sic) not harsh enough to be a deterrent. I think I recall thinking that my father knew how to deal with my sister but my mother did not and that I wished he would be around more to witness what my sister did to me. Another participant recounted that her father was worried about her safety as she had been physically attacked by her brother multiple times before. To protect her, he put locks on her bedroom door, but did nothing (to her knowledge) to discipline his son, despite lethal levels of violence. Looking back, she felt as if her father’s reaction was minimal compared to the level of violence present in the home:

The next most common reaction, reported by nine of the participants, was a minimization of the abuse. As mentioned above, the word Babuse^ connotes serious maltreatment (Rowntree 2007; Wiehe 2002); thus, it is not surprising that part of minimizing violence is a straightforward rejection of this label. Furthermore, according to participants, those who minimized the violence also expressed disbelief that siblings could actually be violent or cause any real harm. For example, when one woman attempted to talk with her family about her childhood experiences of violence at the hands of a brother and sister, they reacted strongly: I remember the very first day that I ever used the word Babuse^ to describe what my brother does to me and ALL of my family and my mom sort of physically drew back as if she was shocked by what I was saying. And then I had to explain it like Bcome on mom . . . think of it like if you heard a stranger saying that these things happened to them . . . we would think it was abuse. Why is this different?^ As in Rowntree’s (2007) study, participants were expected to move on and not take the abuse seriously. One woman explained, BThey [her parents] said it was ridiculous. It's just brother sister stuff. I am too sensitive. And that was that. Case closed.^ These types of responses were perceived as helping parents justify their inaction, since viewing the abuse as not serious allowed parents to shirk the responsibility of preventing it. Sibling Violence as Natural or Normal

My father had put a lock on for me, as he knew I needed protection. My brother wanted to chase me. He eventually kicked the door in, pointed his gun in, and shot several bullets into my room. I hid behind my bed, and eventually into the closet. Later I would find all the bullet holes in the wall.

Closely linked with viewing abuse as not serious was the belief that sibling violence is a natural and normal part of childhood. Four participants expressed that parents and others who minimized abuse did so largely because they believed some violence was inevitable. The following

Author's personal copy J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410

account reflects both the naturalization and the minimization of sibling violence: I told my parents, or at least I complained about it to them. And they always said, ‘He’s younger than you; he can’t hurt you . . . You just bruise easily, so he’s not really hitting you that hard.’ Sadly, the subject once came up with another girl whose brother played hockey on the same team as my brother, and she said her brother beat her up all the time, too, and had hit her with his belt. So it just seemed so normal to all of us. Based on participant reports, when brothers were the perpetrators, parents were likely to view violence as a natural expression for male children, telling their children some variation of the phrase, BBoys will be boys.^ Furthermore, some parents attributed conflict to sibling rivalry or jealousy, which was treated as a normal part of a sibling relationship. BI think my parents just chalked it up to kids being kids. They didn’t get that I was scared out of my wits,^ one man said of his parents’ perceived lack of concern about the violence he endured, sometimes in their presence. Some participants internalized this assumption that sibling abuse was normal, preventing them from seeking help from outside the family. It is crucial, especially when parents are not perceived as taking abuse seriously, that children know they can talk to other authority figures. As one woman recalled, BMy parents sure didn’t care. I don’t know who else I could have told. At the time, I believed siblings were just violent, and there was nothing anyone could do about it.^ Sibling Violence as Victim’s Fault Four women reported that they felt blamed for the physical violence they endured. In two of these cases, the women were told that their brothers hit them because they were being Bannoying^ or had Bangered him.^ A third woman, who reported ongoing physical violence by her brother, felt her mother and aunt blamed her for not being able to forgive her abuser: I’ve kept my sons from him and from his residence, even though my mom would beg for me to let them go. She said things over the last year like, ‘I’ll keep them safe. You are hurting your kids by keeping them from him . . .’ My entire family, which is comprised of my mom, aunt, [and] brother, believed I was just throwing a fit. I was trying to control all of their lives. I was mentally ill. There is something wrong with me because he promised he will never do it again and he won’t! I was tearing the family apart. I am the cause of my mom’s stress and depression because I couldn’t just get over what he did.

407

In a situation where the victim is blamed, current abuse is viewed by others as being caused by the participant’s unwillingness to forgive past abuse. Childhood abuse is minimized as something the victim should get over, and current violence is viewed as the victim’s fault.

Sibling Violence as a Family Matter or Taboo Subject Only four participants in the current study reported that they were pressured to keep the abuse hidden from outsiders or to not speak of it within the family. This was a low number in comparison to Rowntree’s (2007) study of sexual abuse, likely because topics regarding children’s sexuality remain highly charged and largely silenced. This would appear to be less true of physical violence, which has often been accepted as a common aspect of sibling relationships. One participant recalled when she told a teacher she was being abused by her brother: My teacher called my mom and dad in for an emergency conference. They said it was ridiculous . . . Then later in life she [the mother] told me how much that embarrassed her and she couldn’t believe I said my brother abused me. The ability of participants as children to speak out about the violence they suffered reflects the extent to which physical abuse is often visible to family members, unlike sexual abuse which is more likely to be hidden. Unfortunately, while physical abuse may be readily apparent to family members, this does not mean that it is properly addressed.

Impact of Responses to Sibling Abuse Participants indicated that many of the responses they received, particularly from their parents, were harmful to their mental health. They felt isolated and alone when parents minimized abuse or defended perpetrators. When parents were unable to discipline their siblings enough to stop the violence, victims felt more vulnerable to abuse. Many also reported feelings of hostility, blame, anger, or disappointment due to their parents’ inability to keep them safe. Further, all participants reported that the sibling abuse and corresponding familial responses continue to impact their lives today. As one woman noted, I felt powerless. My parents especially my mother would not do anything really to help me. I have issues with trusting people. I have issues with caring enough about myself and what I deserve or not deserve to be treated like.

Author's personal copy 408

Additionally, as the participant below explained, it was often difficult for participants to separate the effects of sibling abuse from the effects of poor parental responses: The effect of my brother’s behavior towards me was cumulative, and made worse by my parents’ ignoring of the situation when I asked for help. He would physically abuse me when angry, emotionally torture me for fun, and ignore me the rest of the time. If he knew something would bother me, he would do it until I cried. I became so anxious that at age 12, I was put on valium. My parents thought I was crazy or Bjealous^ of my brother. I do not know what experience caused me the most problems, but the result was nightmares, anxiety, and NO ONE startles like I do. It is important to note, when addressing the needs of sibling abuse victims, practitioners should remember that they must also address the fractured relationships they may have with other family members.

Discussion While activists and academics alike have been relatively successful at defining child abuse and domestic violence as social problems, little public attention has been devoted to the issue of violence between siblings (Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Hardy 2001; Latzman et al. 2011; Rapoza et al. 2010; Shadik et al. 2013). As Hardy et al. (2010) observed, When an adult hits another adult, it is called assault or domestic violence (and it is illegal); when an adult hits a child, it is called abuse (also illegal); when a child hits another unrelated child, it is sometimes called bullying. But when a sibling hits another, it is called rivalry and is considered by most to be a normal part of growing up (p. 65). Adding to this, Finkelhor et al. (2006) compared sibling violence with domestic violence in the sense that domestic violence was once viewed as a private Bsquabble^ (p. 1416) but is now understood to be hurtful, dangerous, and unacceptable. Similarly, sibling violence has generally been minimized as less traumatic or harmful than other forms of family violence by practitioners, researchers, and the general public. This lack of attention to the frequent occurrence and serious consequences of sibling abuse is important as over 85 % of people in the United States have a sibling (Rapoza et al. 2010). It is imperative that sibling abuse victims have access to the same resources as those victims of domestic violence and parent-child abuse.

J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410

Due to a lack of research in the area of sibling abuse, the current qualitative, exploratory study analyzed accounts from 20 individuals who had been victimized by physical sibling violence. Participants were asked to recall how other people reacted to knowledge of their abuse. The data was coded using the thematic categories (natural/normal, not serious, victim’s fault, family matter, taboo, and abuse) developed by Rowntree’s (2007) examination of sexual sibling abuse victims in Australia. The study found that these categories were also useful in describing reactions to physical violence, with the possible exception of treating the violence as taboo or strictly a family matter. While the most common parental response (as recounted by participants) was to acknowledge the abuse as problematic behavior, participants believed that parents did little to protect them from siblings. Attempts at discipline were reportedly ineffective, as were efforts to protect the victims (e.g., putting locks on their bedroom doors). Participants also felt that their parents routinely minimized and normalized the abuse. Physical violence was understood to be a natural component of the sibling relationship, and thus participants did not believe that parents defined these behaviors as harmful. As such, most participants reported the abuse lasting for years until one of the siblings left the home. Parental reactions that were viewed as negative or ineffective were also emotionally damaging to the participants, many of whom continued to experience severed or damaged familial relationships due to the perceived lack of support given them during childhood. This study confirmed much of the literature on sibling abuse: few people have perceived violence between siblings as abusive (Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Finkelhor et al. 2006; Krienert and Walsh 2011; Shadik et al. 2013; Tucker and Kazura 2013). Even when the violence reached a level that was understood to be problematic, parents did not label it as abusive. Failing to label such behaviors as abuse has contributed to the minimization of sibling violence (Hardy 2001; Hardy et al. 2010). Additionally, as other literature has documented, when families do not properly address sibling abuse, it may be allowed to continue for years (Bass et al. 2006; Carlson et al. 2006; Morrill-Richards and Leierer 2010; Rudd and Herzberger 1999). Our participants largely felt left to fend for themselves against a violent sibling. This meant that the abuse lasted for an average of 13 years, and such longterm abuse has been associated with serious mental health consequences (Button and Gealt 2010; Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Morrill-Richards and Leierer 2010; Noland et al. 2004; Rudd and Herzberger 1999). Furthermore, it has been shown that sibling abuse victims are traumatized when others, particularly parents, are ineffective in protecting them, especially when they do not take the abuse seriously (Bass et al. 2006; McVeigh 2003; Tucker and Kazura 2013). There are some key limitations to the current study. The data was taken from a small, non-representative sample that

Author's personal copy J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410

was highly motivated to write about their experiences. Thus, the findings here may not be generalizable to others. Given the small sample size, conclusions about differences relating to gender, race, age, or other demographic factors could not be made, though this would be an important area of inquiry for future studies. As the survey was online, the authors did not have the opportunity to ask follow-up questions for clarity, limiting the amount of data received. Additionally, this was a retrospective study: while some of the participants were still experiencing abuse, most had not been abused for years, and their recollection of responses has likely been affected by the time that has passed. Finally, the accounts could not be corroborated by other family members. It is possible, for instance, that parents engaged in many strategies to keep their children safe but that these actions were forgotten or went unnoticed by participants. Therefore, the accounts analyzed were based on the retrospective interpretations made by the participants and, thus, results should be interpreted with caution. Despite these limitations, the current findings do have several important implications for professionals working with victims of sibling abuse. First, professionals should not minimize sibling abuse; it can be as harmful as other forms of family violence and should be treated as such (Button and Gealt 2010; Eriksen and Jensen 2006; Morrill-Richards and Leierer 2010; Noland et al. 2004; Rudd and Herzberger 1999). Second, it is important to develop strategies for parents to recognize and properly address sibling abuse. The current and Rowntree’s (2007) analyses have identified six typical responses to knowledge about sibling violence. This data can contribute to the work done by social workers and counselors, as they may use these findings to identity and interrupt similar discourse used by the families of their clients. Further, the effort to disseminate knowledge about sibling abuse to the general population is necessary. Family outsiders—friends, educators, social workers, and counselors—should be informed about this issue so that they can aid the victim in identifying experiences as abuse and seeking proper help. Far more research is needed on how families react to current, ongoing sibling abuse, including collecting data on strategies that parents use to keep their children safe and the effectiveness of such strategies. Research regarding parents’ attitudes about sibling violence can inform practitioners’ practices as they intervene in such cases. Finally, studies on victims’ help-seeking behaviors could be useful in designing programs and other interventions that address victims’ needs both as children and as adults.

Conclusions Relatively little research has been conducted about sibling abuse, particularly qualitative studies regarding responses to abuse. This exploratory study helps to address this gap in the

409

literature by analyzing the accounts of adults who have identified themselves as having been physically abused by siblings. The findings support those made by Rowntree (2007), namely that many adult survivors of sibling abuse believe that their families failed to perceive sibling violence as a form of abuse or to intervene in a way that minimized harm to the victims. It is important to continue efforts to construct sibling abuse as a pressing social problem and to develop effective strategies to intervene when children are at risk of victimization.

References Babbie, E. (2014). The basics of social research (6th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Bass, L. B., Taylor, B. A., Knudson-Martin, C., & Huenergardt, D. (2006). Making sense of abuse: case studies in sibling incest. Contemporary Family Therapy, 28(1), 87–109. Button, D. M., & Gealt, R. (2010). High risk behaviors among victims of sibling violence. Journal of Family Violence, 25, 131–140. Caffaro, J. V., & Conn-Caffaro, A. (1998). Sibling abuse trauma: assessment and intervention strategies for children, families, and adults. Binghamton: The Haworth Press, Inc. Carlson, B. E., Maciol, K., & Schneider, J. (2006). Sibling incest: reports from forty-one siblings. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 15(4), 19–34. Eriksen, S., & Jensen, V. (2006). All in the family? Family environment factors in sibling violence. Journal of Family Violence, 21, 497–507. Finkelhor, D., Turner, H., & Ormrod, R. (2006). Kid’s stuff: the nature and impact of peer and sibling violence on younger and older children. Child Abuse & Neglect, 30, 1401–1421. Friedman, M. S., Marshal, M. P., Guadamuz, T. E., Wei, C., Wong, C. F., Saewyc, E. M., & Stall, R. (2011). A meta-analysis of disparities in childhood sexual abuse, parental physical abuse, and peer victimization among sexual minority and sexual nonminority individuals. American Journal of Public Health, 101(8), 1481–1494. Hardy, M. S. (2001). Physical aggression and sexual behavior among siblings: a retrospective study. Journal of Family Violence, 16(3), 255–268. Hardy, M., Beers, B., Burgess, C., & Taylor, A. (2010). Personal experience and perceived acceptability of sibling aggression. Journal of Family Violence, 25, 65–71. Kettrey, H. H., & Emery, B. C. (2006). The discourse of sibling violence. Journal of Family Violence, 21, 407–416. Krienert, J. L., & Walsh, J. A. (2011). My brother’s keeper: a contemporary examination of reported sibling violence using national level data, 2000–2005. Journal of Family Violence, 26, 331–342. Latzman, N. E., Viljoen, J. L., Scalora, M. J., & Ullman, D. (2011). Sexual offending in adolescence: a comparison of sibling offenders and nonsibling offenders across domains of risk and treatment need. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 20, 245–263. Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. McVeigh, M. J. (2003). ‘But she didn’t say no’: an exploration of sibling sexual abuse. Australian Social Work, 56(2), 116–126. Morrill-Richards, M., & Leierer, S. J. (2010). The relationship between sibling maltreatment and college students’ sense of well-being. Journal of College Counseling, 13, 17–30. Noland, V. J., Liller, K. D., McDermott, R. J., Coulter, M. L., & Seraphine, A. E. (2004). Is adolescent sibling violence a precursor

Author's personal copy 410 to college dating violence? American Journal of Health Behavior, 28, S13–S23. Rapoza, K. A., Cook, K., Zaveri, T., & Malley-Morrison, K. (2010). Ethnic perspectives on sibling abuse in the United States. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 808–829. Rowntree, M. (2007). Responses to sibling abuse: are they as harmful as the abuse? Australian Social Work, 60(3), 347–361. Rudd, J. M., & Herzberger, S. D. (1999). Brother-sister incest, fatherdaughter incest: a comparison of characteristics and consequences. Child Abuse and Neglect, 23(9), 915–928.

J Fam Viol (2016) 31:401–410 Shadik, J. A., Perkins, N. H., & Kovacs, P. J. (2013). Incorporating discussion of sibling violence in the curriculum of parent intervention programs for child abuse and neglect. Health & Social Work, 38(1), 53–57. Straus, M. A., & Gelles, R. J. (1990). Physical violence in American families: risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers. Tucker, C. J., & Kazura, K. (2013). Parental responses to school-aged children’s sibling conflict. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 22, 737–745. Wiehe, V. R. (2002). What parents need to know about sibling abuse: breaking the cycle of violence. Springville: Bonneville Books.