FAMILY VIOLENCE ARTICLE CRITIQUE 6
FamilyViolence Article Critique
FamilyViolence Article Critique
Issuespertaining to domestic violence have become considerably prevalentand controversial in the contemporary human society. This may partlybe as a result of the increased awareness and sensitizationpertaining to the negative effects of domestic violence on the familyand the society at large, as well as the increased push for genderequality in the contemporary human society (Shaw et al, 2007).However, it has been well acknowledged that family violence does notoften occur in isolation. Indeed, family violence, more often thannot, has some predisposing factors which may include substance abuse,alcoholism or other forms of addiction such as gambling (Shaw et al,2007). Needless to say, volumes of literature have been writtenexploring the connection between these predisposing factors andfamily. Two articles including Afifi et al (2010) “Therelationship of gambling to intimate partner violence and childmaltreatment in a nationally representative sample”and Suomi et al (2013) “Problemgambling and family violence: family member reports of prevalence,family impacts and family coping”explore the linkage between gambling and intimate partner violence.
Thearticle by Afifi et al (2010) was aimed at undertaking an analysis ofthe relationship or connection between gambling problems and thevictimization and perpetration of domestic or intimate partnerviolence and child maltreatment by the use of nationallyrepresentative data. The hypothesis in this case is that financialcrisis and stress emanating from gambling problems could manifest inthe home and, therefore, lead to the perpetration of domesticviolence. The research in this article aims at accomplishing fourtasks. First, it examines the connection between the heighteninggambling range problems and the perpetration of severe and minorintimate partner and child violence. Further, it aims at determiningwhether mental problems could explain some differences betweenproblems in gambling and the perpetration of domestic violence. Inaddition, it examined the connection between severe and minordomestic violence and varied gambling problems. Lastly, it aimed atdetermining whether mental disorders can explain the differences inminor and severe domestic violence across a wide range of gamblingproblems. The study was done using data from the United StatesNational Comorbidity Survey Replication. This data was analyzed usingmultiple logistic and multinomial logistic regression models. Theresults of the study showed that males had a higher likelihood forbeing pathological gamblers. Further, the prevalence of lifetimemental disorders of any nature heightened with the severity ofgambling, and came up numerous times among pathological gamblers.Pathological gambling was tied to increased likelihood for domesticviolence.
Thereare varied limitations in the manner in which the research wascarried out. First, it is noted that the data used in the study wascross-sectional, in which case it would be impossible to makeinferences pertaining to causation. On the same note, research ondating relationships was done using respondents aged below 21 years,which means that the information may not be applicable to olderadults.
Thearticle by Suomi et al (2013), on the other hand, analyzed theseverity and prevalence of intimate partner violence among problemgamblers who had been recruited from advertisements in the newspaper.Its stated aims included the establishment of the patterns andprevalence of family violence perpetration and victimization insamples of help-seeking family members with problem gamblers, as wellas exploring gambling-related impacts and coping strategies offamilies in the absence or presence of family violence. In thisstudy, 120 help-seeking family members pertaining to problem gamblersin varied clinical services for problem gambling and family violencewere screened. The results of the study showed that more than half ofthe respondents (52.5%) experienced some type of family violence inthe previous one year, with 21.6 reporting both perpetration andvictimization, 10.8% only perpetration, while 20% reportedexperiencing only victimization. On the same note, the study showedthat parents, ex-partners and even current partners had a highlikelihood for being both victims or perpetrators of family violence.On the same note, there existed no gender variations in reciprocalviolence although females stood higher chances of being the onlyvictims and even less likely to report no violence compared to theirmale counterparts. Even more crucial to the research was the factthat a large proportion of the 32 participants subjected to deeperinterviews underlined the fact that gambling preceded the domesticviolence. The scholars went ahead to note that there was a highlikelihood for the perpetration of family violence as a reaction toaccumulated and deep-rooted mistrust and anger. Victimization, on theother hand, resulted from gamblers’ anger emanating from gamblingfrustrations and losses. As much as multiple and interconnectednegative impacts on the family had a higher likelihood for occurrencein family violence, it was noted that there was no relationshipbetween gambling-related coping strategies and the absence orpresence of family violence.
Thesetwo articles have been written in a completely comprehensive mannerwhere ach addresses the pertinent issues that the authors needed todiscuss. Indeed, it has well been acknowledged that family violencemay, in fact, have been based on varied predisposing factors andaddictions including gambling and substance abuse. For the article bySuomi et al (2013), the study may not explain some aspectsparticularly the high prevalence of violence in families of problemgamblers. This is especially with regard to the sample size andcross-sectional design, not to mention the likelihood of errors inself-report assessments. Indeed, it is noted that participants whoundertake surveys that involve self-reporting have a likelihood ofover-reporting or even under-reporting depending on their interests.Further, crosss-sectional designs in research may not always be thebest especially considering that they are usually limited to aparticular period, in which case they would offer informationpertaining to a particular sample of the population within aparticular time. Unfortunately, the characteristic of populations arealways dynamic in which case the cross-sectional surveys may notalways be a reflection of the actual situation.
Nevertheless,the two articles come as considerably crucial in forming a basis forfuture studies with regard to the predisposing factors of familyviolence. As much as gambling has been identified as on, there is ahigh possibility that other elements play a role or at leastaggravate the situation (Raylu & Oei, 2007). In essence, it isimperative that they future research examines the reasons for theconnection between family violence and gambling, and possibly compareit with other addictions. On the same note, there must be somedistinguishing traits for such violence, which could also informresearchers on the most appropriate manner to combat or at leasteliminate such forms of violence (Raylu & Oei, 2007).
Afifi,TO, Brownridge, DA, MacMillan, H, & Sareen, J. (2010). Therelationship of gambling to intimate partner violence and childmaltreatment in a nationally representative sample.Journal of Psychiatric Research,44(5), 331–337
Raylu,N, & Oei, TS. (2007). Factors associated with the severity ofgambling problems in a community gambling treatment agency.InternationalJournal of Mental Health Addiction,7(1), 124–137
Shaw,M, Forbush, KT, Schlinder, J, Rosenman, E, & Black, DW. (2007).The effects of pathological gambling on families, marriages, andchildren. CNS Spectrums: TheInternational Journal of Neuropsychiatric Medicine,12, 615–622
Suomi,A., Jackson, A.C., Dowling, N.A., Lavis, T., Patford, J., Thomas,S.A., Harvey, P., Abbott, M., Bellringer, M.E., Koziol-McLain, J &Cockman, S (2013). Problem gambling and family violence: familymember reports of prevalence, family impacts and family coping. AsianJournal of Gambling Issues and Public Health 3:13