Page 19
future injuries, illnesses or death. Failure to identify victims of abuse also creates consequences for the health care system. The health care practitioner misses the opportunity for early identification, intervention and ultimate prevention. Initial injuries and illnesses are followed by repeated injuries and illnesses due to the violence. Victims seeking assistance return to the health care system for multiple visits, consuming scarce resources. For some victims the only professional with whom they have contact is the health care provider and they will return again and again in hopes that their suffering will be alleviated. 1. VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CAN BE FOUND IN ALL AGE, RACIAL, SOCIOECONOMIC, EDUCATIONAL, OCCUPATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND PERSONALITY GROUPS Victims of domestic violence are a very heterogeneous population whose primary commonality is that they are being abused by someone with whom they are, or have been, intimate. They do not fit into any specific age group, racial group, personality profile, socioeconomic, educational, occupational, religious or sexual orientation. Too often, victimization is seen as a problem for one group but not for another. For example, teen victims of domestic violence are often ignored. While there is a great deal of public discussion about the need for appropriate sex education to help teens protect themselves from unwanted disease or pregnancy, there is little awareness of the need for teen education about domestic violence. With further documentation of dating violence (Levy, 1991), there is a call for more attention to this issue by those professionals in contact with adolescents who are just beginning to have intimate relationships. They need assistance in specific ways to avoid violence in their dating relationships. Victims of partner abuse may be 12, 25, 43, 78, 98 or any age in between. All age groups have the potential to be victimized by perpetrators of domestic violence. Sometimes ignoring the issue takes the form of stereotypes that communicate that wife beating is just a way of life or “culturally acceptable” in “that” group. As noted previously, there is little comprehensive research on the prevalence and “acceptability” of domestic violence in specific groups (e.g., certain cultural groups, gays, lesbians). What research has been done raises as many questions as it answers. What is known is that domestic violence is a problem in all racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, ability, economic class, educational, and occupational groups. Furthermore, there is no evidence that battered women fit a particular personality profile. Early studies of battered women attempted to focus on characteristics of the victim that would provide a causative explanation for the violence (Snell, Rosenwald, & Robey, 1964). Later studies indicate that no causative link has been found between the characteristics of battered women and their victimization (Hotaling & Sugarman, 1986). Consequently, as with victims of other trauma (e.g., car accidents, floods, muggings), there is no particular personality profile for the person who is battered. Being a victim of domestic violence is due to behaviors of the perpetrator, rather than the personal characteristics of the victim. 2. VICTIMS MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ABUSED AS CHILDREN, OR IN PREVIOUS RELATIONSHIPS Just as some have looked to the personUNDERSTANDING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 31 CHAPTER 1 32 ality or demographic characteristics of the victim to explain her victimization, others have suggested that most domestic violence victims have a history of childhood abuse and/or previous violent relationships, and that this contributes to the current victimization. Yet there is no evidence that previous victimization, either as adults or as children, results in women seeking out or causing their current victimization (Dutton, M.A., 1992). Some victims of domestic violence have been victimized in the past and some have not. While it may be helpful to understand an individual victim’s history and her coping strategies in dealing with past and current abuse, the practitioner should exercise caution and avoid making victim blaming interpretations of such history. 3.