The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
No Access

Intergenerational transmission of child abuse: rates, research, and clinical implications

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.150.9.1315

OBJECTIVE: The author reviews current wisdom concerning the rates and mechanisms of intrafamilial components of intergenerational transmission of child abuse and illustrates the unreliability of basic data and of assumptions made by reviewers and partisan advocates, most of whom underestimate the importance of intrafamilial factors in child abuse. METHOD: The information in the report was derived from original research plus a recently prepared compilation of 60 studies, mainly from the United States and the United Kingdom. RESULTS: The crude rates of intergenerational transmission of child abuse according to the studies reviewed are as follows: one-third of child victims grow up to continue a pattern of seriously inept, neglectful, or abusive rearing as parents. One-third do not. The other one-third remain vulnerable to the effects of social stress on the likelihood of their becoming abusive parents. Intrafamilial factors appear to be the cause of personally directed, as opposed to culturally condoned, child abuse. Broad social factors, and some medical and psychiatric conditions, lower or raise thresholds in which family and personal vulnerabilities and propensities operate. CONCLUSIONS: There is no justification for any extremist advocacy in apportioning responsibility between the "sins of the parents" and the failings of society. The contention that clinical research on abuse is inferior to, and must give way to, large- scale or statistically balanced self-report and questionnaire surveys is plausible, popular, convincing, and wrong.

Access content

To read the fulltext, please use one of the options below to sign in or purchase access.