Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

CHILDREN IN PARTNER VIOLENT HOMES, INTERVENTIONS AND VIRTUAL REALITY Ernest N. Jouriles FAMILY RESEARCH CENTER SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "CHILDREN IN PARTNER VIOLENT HOMES, INTERVENTIONS AND VIRTUAL REALITY Ernest N. Jouriles FAMILY RESEARCH CENTER SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY."— Presentation transcript:

1 CHILDREN IN PARTNER VIOLENT HOMES, INTERVENTIONS AND VIRTUAL REALITY Ernest N. Jouriles FAMILY RESEARCH CENTER SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY

2 The Journey

3

4

5 Partners

6 Overview I.Scientific knowledge on intimate partner violence (IPV) and children  Definitions  Prevalence and correlates  Interventions II.How we are helping  Project Support  What it is  What it does III.Prevention of Sexual Assault

7 In the past year, how often has your partner... ? 1. Discussed an issue calmly 2. Got information to back up his side of things 3. Brought in or tried to bring in someone to help settle things 4. Insulted you or swore at you 5. Sulked or refused to talk about an issue 6. Stomped out of the room, house, or yard 7. Cried 8. Did or said something to spite you 9. Threatened to hit you or throw something at you 10. Threw or smashed or hit or kicked something 11. Threw something at you 12. Pushed, grabbed or shoved you 13. Slapped you 14. Kicked, bit or hit you with a fist 15. Hit or tried to hit you with something 16. Beat you up 17. Threatened you with a knife or gun 18. Used a knife or fired a gun Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS) Items

8 How Prevalent is IPV? Each year, men’s violence toward women occurs in 12%-14% of US couples  Lower income families  Younger couples Some claim that IPV is more common among military families  Selection biases  Military training?  Stress of military life?  Demographics

9 How many children live in families with IPV?  Common estimate: 3-10 million  Underestimate

10 How Many Children Live in Families with IPV?  52,000,000 children  15,500,000 exposed to at least one act of physical IPV  7,000,000 exposed to at least one severe act of physical IPV McDonald, Jouriles, Ramisetty-Mikler, Caetano, & Green, 2006

11 How many children in military families live with IPV ?  Not clear?  Like other estimates, at least as high as 30%

12 CTS: Community Sample Never Once Twice 3-5 Times 6-10 Times Times >20 Times 1.Thrown something at you ✕ 2.Pushed, grabbed or shoved you ✕ 3.Slapped you ✕ 4.Kicked, bit, or hit you with a fist ✕ 5.Hit or tried to hit you with something ✕ 6.Beat you up ✕ 7.Threatened you with a knife or gun ✕ 8.Used a knife or fired a gun ✕ In the past year, how often has your partner…?

13 CTS: Domestic Violence Shelter Never Once Twice 3-5 Times 6-10 Times Times >20 Times 1.Thrown something at you ✕ 2.Pushed, grabbed or shoved you ✕ 3.Slapped you ✕ 4.Kicked, bit, or hit you with a fist ✕ 5.Hit or tried to hit you with something ✕ 6.Beat you up ✕ 7.Threatened you with a knife or gun ✕ 8.Used a knife or fired a gun ✕ In the past year, how often has your partner…?

14 Where do shelter families fit in? Violence Frequency and Severity Nonviolent Families Shelter Families Violent Families 1 million children are estimated to be brought to a domestic violence shelter in US over the course of a year

15 Does IPV Increase Risk for Child Problems? 87 couples requesting marital therapy Participants had a child between 5 & 12 Conflict Tactics Scales Short Marital Adjustment Test IPV + Marital Discord vs. Marital Discord Outcome Variables Behavior Problem Checklist Conduct disorder Personality disorder Inadequacy immaturity Socialized delinquency Jouriles, Murphy, & O’Leary, 1989

16  Child problems are associated with:  Frequency of IPV  Severity of IPV  Kicked, bit or hit you with a fist  Hit or tried to hit you with something  Beat you up  Threatened you with a knife or gun  Used a knife or fired a gun  Broader conceptualization of IPV is more powerful in the prediction of child problems Things We Know: Jouriles, Norwood, McDonald, Vincent, & Mahoney (1996); Jouriles, McDonald, Norwood, Ware, Spiller, & Swank (1998): Jouriles, Spiller, Stephens, McDonald, & Swank (2000)

17 In the past year, how often has your partner... ? 1. Discussed an issue calmly 2. Got information to back up his side of things 3. Brought in or tried to bring in someone to help settle thin 4. Insulted you or swore at you 5. Sulked or refused to talk about an issue 6. Stomped out of the room, house, or yard 7. Cried 8. Did or said something to spite you 9. Threatened to hit you or throw something at you 10. Threw or smashed or hit or kicked something 11. Threw something at you 12. Pushed, grabbed or shoved you 13. Slapped you 14. Kicked, bit or hit you with a fist 15. Hit or tried to hit you with something 16. Beat you up 17. Threatened you with a knife or gun 18. Used a knife or fired a gun Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS) Items

18 What are the problems? Broad-band problem areas Internalizing Emotional Problems Trauma Anxiety Depression Withdrawal Externalizing Behavioral/Conduct Problems Noncompliance Aggression Lying/cheating Rule Breaking Social and Other Problems Academic difficulties Cognitive difficulties Health problems Peer problems

19 How many children have significant adjustment problems? Children in domestic violence shelters: No apparent problems 31% Mild problems18% Moderate to severe problems51% Grych, Jouriles, Swank, McDonald, & Norwood (2000)

20 What Else? IPV is associated with:  Problems for children of all ages  Psychological and family processes important for child problems Parenting Appraisals of conflict Very little longitudinal research  Conduct problems persist  Co-occurring emotional problems tend to get better Jouriles & LeCompte (1991); Jouriles & Norwood (1995); Jouriles et al., (2000); McDonald et al., (2007); Ware et al., (2000)

21 What treatments have been evaluated for children exposed to IPV? Jouriles & McDonald (4-9 years) PROJECT SUPPORT Graham-Bermann (6-12 years) KIDS CLUB Lieberman & Van Horn (0-3 years) CHILD-PARENT PSYCHOTHERAPY

22 Project Support ■Empirically-based treatment designed to reduce conduct problems among children aged 4-9 exposed to frequent and severe domestic violence ■Families who sought shelter at a domestic violence agency ■Clinical levels of conduct problems ■Applicable to other families (not just shelter families) in which violence is an issue

23 Why are conduct problems so important? ■Mothers are concerned ■Very prevalent among children brought to domestic violence shelters ■Early onset conduct problems  Persist into adulthood  Best single predictor of later antisocial behavior  Must be addressed early ■Great costs to society  Law Enforcement & Criminal Justice systems  Education  Social services

24 Research Base for Project Support High quality research on:  Correlates of IPV  Causes and maintaining factors for conduct problems  Effective treatments for conduct problems Practical & clinical experience  Input from the women themselves  Input from shelter staff  Our own experiences with families  Including offering parenting groups in shelters

25 Components of Project Support? ■Structural components  Home-based services  Child care offered  Flexible schedule  Weekly appointments  8-month/6-month duration ■Substantive Components  Social and Instrumental Support  Parenting and the Parent-Child Relationship

26 Social and Instrumental Support  Access to community resources  Access to goods through  Community resources  Donated goods  Problem-solving and decision-making skills  Demonstrate that we care

27 The “Adversity Package” Multiple Risk Factors: ■Poverty ■Parental low education ■Parental employment problems ■Transience/school changes ■Move-related needs ■Legal issues  Separation/Divorce  Child custody and visitation  Child support  Protective orders ■Antisocial fathers/father figures ■Poor quality child care ■Child maltreatment The more risk factors, the greater the risk for mental health problems.

28 Together Time Listening, communicating & comforting Praise & positive reinforcement Rewards & privileges Discipline Enhancing the Parent- Child Relationship Services that target children’s problems II. Parenting and the Parent-Child Relationship

29 Besides the skills, what else is important in Project Support? ■Skills are cumulative ■Focus on skill mastery at each step  Role plays  Review and Repetition  Homework and corrective action

30 And what else? ■Working hard to keep them!  Transience  Crises and stress  Lack of interest, time, or competing demands ■Small caseloads  Cases are time consuming  Burnout prevention ■Internal support mechanisms for therapists ■Mechanisms for tracking/locating families ■Safety policy and procedures for home visits  Family safety – Always trust the woman’s sense of danger  Staff safety

31 Program Evaluation: Does Project Support Help? PILOT STUDY  36 families  Randomized clinical trial (RCT) Project Support Families Comparison Families – ”Treatment as Usual” ContactWeekly (6 mos.)Monthly Access to other services No restriction Referrals offered Yes Goods provided Yes AAssessments every 4 months 22½ year follow-up period

32 Treatment Effects Project Support Group Shelter Residence16 Months After Shelter 32 Months After Shelter Assessment CBCL Ext. T-Score “Treatment as Usual” Comparison Group Shelter Residence16 Months After Shelter 32 Months After Shelter Assessment CBCL Ext. T-Score

33 Summary of 1 st Evaluation: How “good” is it?  Significant group differences in:  Child Externalizing Problems  Observations of Parenting  Clinically significant findings:  Project Support group:  83% no longer at clinical levels  Comparison group  55% no longer at clinical levels  Effects persisted for 2 years  In context:  Maintenance of effects over 2 years is exceptional  No other samples have been followed  Only a pilot

34 So, can you do it again?  NIMH treatment outcome study  66 Shelter Families  Assessed every 4 months for 2 years  All had ODD/CD diagnosis  Mother, Teacher, Observational Data Treatment as usual Project Support Follow-up periodPre to Post-Tx Asst. #

35 Summary and New Directions  Strong results with shelter families  Pilot  NIMH RCT  Similar results with CPS-referred families  Focus on parenting  Reductions in re-referrals  Next Steps  Can we improve upon our treatment effects?  Talking with the children about the violence  Dissemination

36 Continuing the Journey… Older Children

37 Relationship Violence, Sexual Coercion and Rape: The Problem Have you ever been physically forced to have sexual intercourse when you did not want to? Females % vs Males - 4.8% 12 th Graders: 12.2% vs 5.8%

38 Sexual assault in the military Source: 2006 Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty Members Unwanted sexual contact Rape Non-consensual sodomy Unwanted fondling Prevalence: 5.1% - 6.8% Unwanted sexual attention Unwanted attempts to establish a sexual relationship Prevalence: 31%

39 CNN News Report Sexual assault in military ‘jaw- dropping,’ lawmaker says Prevalence: 41% female veterans at VA hospital

40 Sexual assault is associated with… Depression Anxiety Trauma Substance use “In an era when the military relies on women for invaluable and difficult frontline duties, the threat to their morale, performance and long- term well-being is starkly clear.”

41 Sexual assault prevention programs Classroom-based didactic interventions Bystander interventions Criminal justice interventions Empathy-and/or skills-based programs Most lack strong theoretical grounding Few have been evaluated and found effective in reducing violence Knowledge, Attitudes vs. Behavior

42 Developing Skills to Prevent Acquaintance Assault Assertive, active resistance strategies Clearly setting boundaries Yelling at a potential attacker Leaving situation Substantial research evidence Research on sexual predators

43 Skills Training & Role Plays Make it engaging for adolescents Teach the skills more effectively Increase realism  Sexual coercion is threatening  Generalize skills to threatening situations  Learning vs. performance

44 Role Plays Designed with assistance of college- aged women to make it realistic Instructions: You were at a party where you met a guy. He offered to give you a ride home. He seemed nice enough, so you agreed. On the way home, it started to rain, so he pulled over to let the storm subside. Involved a trained male actor Duration 9 -10½ min 4 phases:  Getting Acquainted (3 - 3½ min.)  Beginning Advances (2 - 2½ min.)  Escalation (2 - 2½ min.)  Anger (2 min.)

45 Role Play Setting 10’ by 12’ room 2 adjacent car seats

46 Research Goals Create a role play perceived as realistic … threatening Evaluate whether VR can enhance perceived realism

47 Participants & Design 62 college-aged women Random assignment  Role Play (RP)  Male Actor  Virtual Role Play (VRP)  Virtual “date” controlled by male actor  VR goggles and headphones (what they were seeing was the inside of a car)

48 Measures Realism and effects of the virtual role play compared to the conventional role play Self-Report  5 negative affect items from the PANAS  2 questions about the perceived “realism” of the role play Observation  Behaviors and displays of emotion reflecting immersion  Hostile responses  Strong verbal protests Physiology  Heart rate

49 Results: Ratings of Actor Behavior The RP & VRP conditions did not differ on:  Duration of role plays  Each of the 4 phases  Total duration  Frequency of sexual advances, threats/insults by actor  Observer ratings of actor persistence or hostility

50 Results: Group Differences

51 Conclusions VR technology Appears to enhance the realism of role plays designed to teach college-aged women behavioral skills for resisting sexual coercion Future research  Incorporate VR in relationship violence intervention efforts  Expand to other populations  Continue to evaluate validity of VR role plays

52 Thank you!

53 Ernest N. Jouriles, Ph.D. Professor and Chair Department of Psychology Southern Methodist University P.O. Box Dallas, TX Phone: Contact Information

54 PARTNERS

55

56 Same data, different view: Assessment Number ■Project Support  Improved over the 8 months of treatment  “Normal” range at end of treatment  Continued gains after treatment ended ■Comparison  Also improved during first 8 months  Still at clinical levels 8-months after shelter  Worsened through the follow-up period CBCL Ext. t-score


Download ppt "CHILDREN IN PARTNER VIOLENT HOMES, INTERVENTIONS AND VIRTUAL REALITY Ernest N. Jouriles FAMILY RESEARCH CENTER SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google