Journal of Family Violence

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 237–253 | Cite as

Victims With Voices: How Abused Women Conceptualize the Problem of Spousal Abuse and Implications for Intervention and Prevention

  • Robin L. Nabi
  • Jennifer R. Horner

Abstract

Working from the conceptualization of abused women as both victims of and experts on spousal abuse, this study compares how women who have been abused, and how men and women with either less direct or no experience with spousal abuse, understand the problem and their beliefs about how it should be addressed. Results of a telephone survey of Philadelphia adults (N = 1,850) indicate that although in many ways abused women's opinions regarding domestic violence do not differ from those of nonabused women, abused women are more likely to believe that society gives tacit consent to abusive behavior through its silence and that talking openly about the problem will make it easier to solve. These findings suggest that initiatives aimed at changing the social norm around domestic violence may assist in both intervention and prevention efforts.

victims spouse abuse domestic violence attitudes beliefs 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Bograd, M. (1988). How battered women and abusive men account for domestic violence: Excuses, justifications, or explanations? In Hotaling, G. T., Finkelhor, D., Kirkpatrick, J. T., and Straus, M. A. (eds.), Coping With Family Violence: Research and Policy Perspectives, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, pp. 60–77.Google Scholar
  2. Brendtro, M., and Bowker, L. H. (1989). Battered women: How can nurses help? Issues Ment. Health Nurs. 10: 169–180.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, R., Sullivan, C. M., and Davidson, W. S. (1995). Women who use domestic violence shelters: Changes in depression over time. Psychol. Women Q. 19: 237–255.Google Scholar
  4. Caralis, P. V., and Musialowski, R. (1997). Women's experiences with domestic violence and their attitudes and expectations regarding medical care of abuse victims. South. Med. J. 90: 1075–1080.Google Scholar
  5. Carden, A. D. (1994). Wife abuse and the wife abuser: Review and recommendations. Counseling Psychol. 22: 539–582.Google Scholar
  6. Cascardi, M., and O'Leary, K. D. (1992). Depressive symptomatology, self-esteem, and selfblame in battered women. J. Fam. Viol. 7: 249–259.Google Scholar
  7. Coulter, M. L., and Chez, R. A. (1997). Domestic violence victims support mandatory reporting: For others. J. Fam. Viol. 12: 349–356.Google Scholar
  8. Cox, J., and Stoltenberg, C. (1991). Evaluation of a treatment program for battered wives. J. Fam. Viol. 6: 395–413.Google Scholar
  9. Dutton, D. G., and Painter, S. (1993). The battered woman syndrome-effects of severity and intermittency of abuse. Am. J. Orthopsychiat. 63: 614–622.Google Scholar
  10. Gerbert, B., Johnston, K., Caspers, N, and Bleecker, T., Woods, A., and Rosenbaum, A. (1996). Experiences of battered women in health care settings: A qualitative study. Women Health 24(3): 1–17.Google Scholar
  11. Gordon, J. S. (1996). Community services for abused women: A review of perceived usefulness and efficacy. J. Fam. Viol. 11: 315–329.Google Scholar
  12. Hamilton, B., and Coates, J. (1993). Perceived helpfulness and use of professional services by abused women. J. Fam. Viol. 8: 313–324.Google Scholar
  13. Jones, R. (1993). Female victim perceptions of the causes of male spouse abuse. Sociol. Inquiry 63: 351–361.Google Scholar
  14. Nurius, P. S., Furrey, J., and Berliner, L. (1992). Coping capacity among women with abusive partners. Viol Vict. 7: 229–243.Google Scholar
  15. Pagelow, M. (1981). Women battering: Victims and Their Experiences, Sage, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
  16. Rodriguez, M. A., Quiroga, S. S., and Bauer, H. M. (1996). Breaking the silence: Battered women's perspectives on medical care. Arch. Fam. Med. 5: 153–158.Google Scholar
  17. Saunders, D. G., and Size, P. B. (1986). Attitudes about women abuse among police officers, victims, and victim advocates.J. Interpers. Viol. 1: 25–42.Google Scholar
  18. Stalans, L. J., and Lurigio, A. J. (1995). Public preferences for the court's handling of domestic violence situations. Crime Delinq. 41: 399–413.Google Scholar
  19. Straus, M. A., and Gelles, R. J. (eds.). (1990). Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptions to Violence in 8,145 Families. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ.Google Scholar
  20. Straus, M. A., & Smith, C. (1990). Family patterns and primary prevention of family violence. In Straus, M. A., and Gelles, R. J. (eds.), Physical Violence in American Families: Risk Factors and Adaptions to Violence in 8,145 Families. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick, NJ, pp. 507–526.Google Scholar
  21. Sullivan, C. M., Campbell, R., Angelique, H., Eby, K. K., and Davidson, W. S. (1994). An advocacy intervention program for women with abusive partners: Six-month follow-up. Am. J. Commun. Psychol. 22: 101–122.Google Scholar
  22. Tolman, R. M., and Weisz, A. (1995). Coordinated community intervention for domestic violence: The effects of arrest and prosecution on recidivism of woman abuse perpetrators. Crime Delinq. 41: 481–495.Google Scholar
  23. Torres, S. (1991). A comparison of wife abuse between two cultures: Perceptions, attitudes, nature, and extent. Issues Ment. Health Nurs. 12: 113–131.Google Scholar
  24. Tutty, L. M. (1996). Post-shelter services: The efficacy of follow-up programs for abused women. Res. Soc. Work Pract. 6: 425–441.Google Scholar
  25. Tutty, L. M., Bidgood, B. A., and Rothery, M. A. (1993). Support groups for battered women: Research on their efficacy. J. Fam. Viol. 8: 325–343.Google Scholar
  26. Voelker, R. (1992). Nation begins to see family violence as public health issue. JAMA 267 (Violence. A Compendium), 3184–3189. Reprinted from American Medical News.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robin L. Nabi
    • 1
  • Jennifer R. Horner
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of CommunicationUniversity of ArizonaTucson
  2. 2.Annenberg School for CommunicationUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphia

Personalised recommendations