Witnessed Domestic Violence and Juvenile Detention Research

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction/Statement of the Problem
Literature Review
Methodology
Analysis
Ethical Considerations
References

Introduction/Statement of the Problem

Domestic violence is highly prevalent in the United States and one of the most significant concerns today. This problem affects around 10 million Americans annually (Boserup et al., 2020). This vice exists in many forms, including psychological, emotional, sexual, economic, and physical abuse (Piquero et al., 2021). Around one in nine men and one in four women are victims of domestic violence, with one in fifteen children being either direct or indirect victims (Boserup et al., 2020). There is a strong possibility that these estimates are far from reality. The evils of domestic violence are Well documented and linked to decreased productivity, quality of life, and diminished physical and psychological health, especially for the highly vulnerable juveniles.

This paper will focus on witnessed domestic violence and its effects on children’s short and long-term outcomes in the context of juvenile detention. Research shows that around 5 million children are witnesses to domestic violence and its effects are as harmful as those of being victims to direct abuse (Walters, 2019; Wood & Sommers, 2011). A significant amount of discourse is available discussing the prevalence, consequences, and implications of witnessing this vice in childhood (Fox et al., 2015; Janssen et al., 2014; Margolin et al., 2010; Zinzow et al., 2009).

Witnessing domestic violence is associated with a broad range of problem behaviors and psychiatric symptoms (Akers, 2017; Margolin et al., 2010; Weber & Lynch, 2021). The same problems have been shown to persist to adulthood, leading to persecution and other adverse outcomes (Boserup et al., 2020; Zinzow et al., 2009). However, few studies have looked into the aftermath of these behaviors during adolescence, specifically concerning juvenile detention.

Investigating this issue is especially important because this is the most crucial stage of growth, and unchecked can create chronic and often violent adult offending. Growing up in a toxic environment is linked to developing problem behavior later in life (Sousa et al., 2011). Juvenile detention results from delinquency and is an early manifestation of problematic behavior patterns that could get worse if not addressed (Weber & Lynch, 2021). Further juvenile detention has been shown to have negative consequences, including disrupted schooling, exacerbated health issues, and a higher likelihood of incarceration (Shaw, 2019). Therefore, We must understand the relationship between witnessed domestic violence and juvenile detention to help identify at-risk populations and help abate adverse consequences.

The primary purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between witnessed domestic violence and juvenile detention. This examination will test the hypothesis that children who witness domestic violence are more likely than those who do not to end up in juvenile detention. Research has pointed to a relationship between witnessed violence and juvenile delinquency, and this study holds that it is the reason for a higher likelihood of detention for victims. A secondary purpose of this study is to determine if specific characteristics of witnessed violence increase the risk for juvenile detention.

Although there is Well-documented research supporting the link between witnessed violence and behavior problems, there is reason to think that the effects can be due to co-occurring direct trauma. A substantial body of evidence shows an overlap between exposure to direct violence like physical abuse and witnessed violence (Akers, 2017; Moylan et al., 2010; Sousa et al., 2011). It is, therefore, necessary to determine the unique contributions witnessed violence makes to the development of risk behaviors. Understanding the risk factors predisposing children who have witnessed domestic violence to juvenile detention will facilitate the development of effective interventions and prevention initiatives. Further, establishing a direct link between risk behavior and witnessed violence will increase the number of children identified as at-risk and ensure victims of indirect violence also receive help.

Definitions

Problem behavior is defined as patterns of conduct that are considered typically unacceptable. These are consistent patterns of errors in judgment and disruptive mannerisms (Moylan et al., 2010).
A child is a witness to domestic violence when a child can see, hear or is physically present when an act characterized as domestic violence is committed (Wood & Sommers, 2011).
Protective factors are attributes or conditions of an individual or their environment that reduce the risk of negative outcomes and promote Well-being and healthy development (Walters, 2019).

Literature Review

Current research in the context of witnessed domestic violence during childhood and juvenile detention can be put under three general classifications: dynamics, moderating factors, effects, and the relationship between witnessing violence and offending.

Dynamics of Witnessed Domestic Violence

Dynamics are the factors that set up negative outcomes for children who have witnessed domestic violence. These include isolation, normalized violence, extreme levels of stress and tension, and decreased parental availability. Understanding these elements helps draw a picture of how violence in the home leads to adverse consequences for children and how the presence of all of them is especially detrimental.

Isolation

Children in homes with intimate partner violence often have limited access to family feedback regarding the most critical cognitive developmental areas, most notably social interactions and self-esteem. Unknowledgeable of how to see or carry themselves, children become isolated and do not get the input necessary to equip them with the abilities necessary to function appropriately in society and with themselves (Sousa et al., 2011). This isolation means children do not have opportunities to practice their social skills (Moylan et al., 2010). They then have difficulties setting healthy personal boundaries and respecting those set by others. Very little literature exists on the connection between isolation and problem behavior (Sousa et al., 2011; Moylan et al., 2010). This study will look to add to the available body of evidence and further the conversation on how it sets children up for juvenile detention and related outcomes.

Normalized Violence

Children living in homes with normalized violence come to see it as a regular part of human interaction. They develop a skewed view of life and come to see aggression, control and use of force as the only way to attain their ends (Walters, 2019). This may lead to tendencies to victimize animals and Weaker siblings and peers. Other children, instead of modelling the violent mannerisms, become passive and withdrawn, taking on the role of victim in their social interactions (Sousa et al., 2011). Thus children may see violence as the de facto means of resolving conflict and have problems with gratification delay, expressing emotions, and controlling their impulses. Substantial knowledge exists on the connection between normalized violence and social problems (Fox et al., 2015; Janssen et al., 2014; Margolin et al., 2010; Zinzow et al., 2009). This study will look to add to the available literature and provide additional insight into the connection.

Extreme Levels of Stress and Tension

Children in violent homes are exposed to elevated and chronic levels of stress and tension. They often live with a constant fear of death or injury to a family member or themselves (Walters, 2019). Research differs on the specific behavior that results from this situation (Deane et al., 2018; Zinzow et al., 2009). However, there is a consensus that it is always negative as the children look to monitor the behaviors of the adults around them and provide protection for themselves and others (Margolin et al., 2010). This study will look to offer clarification by identifying some of the strategies children develop to control or avoid violence and the consequences of the impossible or overwhelming demands they place on themselves.

Decreased Parent Availability

The abused partner is often unable to avail adequate care due to depression, emotional exhaustion, or injuries. The abuser is often too preoccupied with controlling their victim to pay the children the much-needed levels of attention (Walters, 2019). There is a good amount of research on the impact of severe parental unavailability (Sousa et al., 2011; Janssen et al., 2014; Zinzow et al., 2009). This study will look to expand the current knowledge and specifically link it to the behaviors that lead to juvenile detention.

Literature on the dynamics of witnessed domestic violence outlines how they set up children for adverse outcomes. However, these studies do not go further and speak about the ramifications of impaired development in children. This research fails to touch on the consequences of the adaptations and coping skills children that have grown up in these environments develop. This study will look to further these findings by showing their relationship with juvenile detention.

Predisposing Factors

Research shows that different children have different and varying responses to witnessing domestic violence. Some children are more sensitive, while others are more resilient, depending on different factors put in three general categories; child-specific characteristics, family environments, and community and neighborhood settings.

Child Characteristics

These are characteristics specific to the child independent of the people around them and their environment. The child’s exposure to the harmful effects of domestic violence depends on the degree to which they manifest them. Further, they can serve as either protective or risk factors, working to either undermine or uphold the child’s outcomes. The most significant characteristics include age, gender, and self-esteem, the combination of which determines the overall result.

Age

Younger children are yet to develop adequate processing and coping strategies and usually have the most adverse reactions to witnessed domestic violence (Chun & Mobley, 2010). Older children are more resilient and less likely to react as adversely but are most likely to model violent behavior and re-enact violent acts (Margolin et al., 2010). However, research cannot agree on the protections and affordances of each class because others hold that older children’s more developed cognitive abilities set them up for worse outcomes (Armstrong et al., 2018; Chun & Mobley, 2010; Margolin et al., 2010). This study will look to clarify this issue of contention and shed more light on the problem.

Gender

There is also mixed support regarding the effect of gender on reactions to witnessed domestic violence. Some researchers have found no significant difference between how males and females respond to witnessing violence at home (Moylan et al., 2010; Parrish, 2020). Others have found that females have stronger reactions, while others find male children to be more affected (Duke et al., 2010). This is another aspect of the problem that needs better-designed and organized studies like this one to remove the confusion.

Self-Esteem

Self-esteem refers to an individual’s subjective sense of value or worth. High self-esteem has been classified as a protective factor that mitigates the effects of witnessed intimate partner violence (Duke et al., 2010). This characteristic increases a child’s ability to cope or adapt to the adversity they face positively. These children often thrive despite witnessing regular acts of violence at home (Chun & Mobley, 2010; Derzon, 2010; Estrada-Martínez et al., 2013). There is consensus in literature about the effect of self-esteem and this study will look to confirm the same and show how lack of it can lead to situations that end with juvenile detention.

Family Environments

The family environment is the immediate situation the child finds themselves in. This is the context within which the acts of violence occur (DiClemente et al., 2018). However, several factors influence the child’s reaction to what is happening around them. The most consequential factors include family structure, relationships with supportive adults and siblings, and drug and alcohol use in the family.

Family Structure

Family structure refers to the linkages between the members of the unit. The type and strength of these links determine the severity of the children’s reactions (DiClemente et al., 2018). Children who are not the offspring of both parties in abusive relationships experience the worst outcomes (Estrada-Martínez et al., 2013). This study will explore this issue further and determine the role family structure plays in determining whether the child ends up in juvenile detention or not.

Quality of Relationships with Supportive Adults

Supportive adults are the individuals around children with the ability to provide the structures that can significantly affect their outcomes. Support may be in the form of emotional support, provision of material things, or a safe space (Estrada-Martínez et al., 2013). Studies have found that high-quality relationships with these individuals are moderators of exposure to family violence and negative behavior patterns (Margolin et al., 2010). However, it can be inferred that the opposite is true, but this study will look for insights into the same.

Relationships with Siblings

Relationships between children in the family can act as buffers from the effects of the stress they experience. Good relationships between siblings have been shown to increase resilience in a violent home, acting as a protective factor that keeps the children from negative adaptation (Deane et al., 2018; Margolin et al., 2010). However, it has been shown that positive relationships are only effective in families with low levels of violence (Estrada-Martínez et al., 2013). This study will look for clarification and provide more insight on this issue.

Alcohol Use in the Family

Studies have shown that the presence of family alcohol and drug use problems exacerbates the outcomes for children (Goodrum et al., 2020). This is especially so because they are associated with increased frequency and intensity (Derzon, 2010; DiClemente et al., 2018). However, these studies focused on both witnessed and experienced domestic violence, which means no conclusive relationship can be drawn from the findings. This study will look to draw a direct relationship between witnessed domestic violence and drug and alcohol use problems.

Community and Neighborhood Setting

These are the secondary environments children move and operate in immediately outside their homes. Prevailing factors in these settings can function as either protective or risk factors. For instance, neighborhoods with a high rate of violence have been shown to worsen the effects of domestic violence (Estrada-Martínez et al., 2013). This research narrowed the focus to one setting and factor; school environment and peer relationships. This is because children spend most of their time engaged in one or the other.

School Environment

Children from violent homes that attended schools seen as safe environments are less likely to engage in delinquency (Estrada-Martínez et al., 2013). The impact such environments have is especially significant because children spend most of their time in school. This study will add to the limited pool of knowledge by providing additional insights into how the type of school environment they study in is related to juvenile detention.

Peer Relationships

Children are highly susceptible to influence by their peers, who play an important role in their behaviors and mannerisms. Having delinquent friends has been shown to increase the likelihood of committing offenses (Zinzow et al., 2009). Children from homesteads with domestic violence are highly likely to be attracted to the wrong people (Estrada-Martínez et al., 2013). Further, having abusive relationships with friends is directly associated with adverse effects, resulting in increased delinquency (Shaw, 2019). Children from violent homes are likely to lash out due to the stress associated with living under constant violence.

The studies featured here touch on the factors that predispose the behaviors and adaptations of children from violent homes. However, the authors focused on all aspects of abusive homes, including both experienced and witnessed violence. It is, therefore, unclear if a relationship exists between only witnessed domestic violence. This research project will focus on that to find out how it creates negative outcomes for the children. The study will look to determine if a relationship exists between witnessed domestic violence and maladaptation and negative behavior.

Effects

Research shows that children that are witnesses to domestic violence experience similar distress to those that are directly abused. However, this segment is usually excluded from social services and interventions because they do not fit the typical profile of abuse victims. The lack of healthy ways to combat trauma increases the risk of developing internalizing and externalizing behaviors that may earn them the label of problem children, increasing their probability of ending up in juvenile detention (Wood & Sommers, 2011). Children that have witnessed domestic violence without suffering abuse sometimes go for delinquency to regain a sense of power and self-worth.

All children, irrespective of age, are affected by the violence in their environment. It has been shown that even infants and very young children suffer the effects of the abuse around them. These juveniles are often detached and less responsive to adult attention (Margolin et al., 2010). Babies often receive inadequate attention and become passive and inconsolable, and infants also display eating disorders and sleep disturbances. These issues worsen as the problems persist and the children grow in unconducive environments.

Preschoolers and toddlers are also aware of domestic violence as it occurs around them. The effects of the abuse they witness manifest in somatic complaints like headaches and stomachaches and eating and sleeping disorders. Other effects may include separation anxiety, clinginess, and violence-associated nightmares (Margolin et al., 2010). As they are often left to their means, these children do not develop optimally, leading to cognitive, motor skill and speech delays. These juveniles often suffer from anxiety and depression, which they usually express as anger.

By the time children attain school age, they have developed coping strategies that might lead them to either success or failure. In the former case, these children thrive in the predictable and consistent school environment. This newfound order allows them to excel and perform Well as they have the stability that is non-existent at home. In the other case, the children may expect little success and have a glim outlook on what to expect. Their self-esteem can drop because of an inability to concentrate, erratic attendance, or constant mood swings. They are also more likely to get into conflict with their classmates due to poor social skills (Sousa et al., 2011).

Consistent in both cases is continued uncertainty over what to expect and fear (Janssen et al., 2014). They may have trouble with how to approach their parents and whether to love or hate them. Children at this age often express powerlessness, depression, sadness, and guilt (Sousa et al., 2011). Signs of PTSD are also frequent, in addition to restlessness and sleep disorders. This study will explore the connection between these problems and antisocial behavior and see how they lead to juvenile detention.

These children are often anxious, fearful, on guard, worried, insecure, and feeling powerless and worthless (Wood & Sommers, 2011). These concerns and fears manifest in internalizing behaviors like depression and anxiety or externalizing behaviors like disruptiveness and aggression (Moylan et al., 2010). These juveniles are at a higher risk of drug and alcohol abuse and post-traumatic stress disorder (Fox et al., 2015). They also run away from home at a higher rate than their counterparts who do not witness violence.

Witnessed domestic violence in childhood has been identified as the top predisposing factor for criminal activity and delinquency (Zinzow et al., 2009). The intensity of the resultant effects increases depending on the length of exposure to home violence (Janssen et al., 2014). Violent homes usually have dysfunctional relationships, support, and cohesion, which means there is often an absence of protective factors (Wood & Sommers, 2011). A lack of these factors denies them a chance to learn how to develop prosocial relationships, increasing the probability of delinquency as they search for a sense of worth, safety, and power (Moylan et al., 2010). Actions like minor theft and disorderly conduct are more common among these children. Parental battery, vandalism, assault, rape, gang membership, and murder are some of the most consequential reactions to untreated trauma.

Two of the many ways children react to trauma are parental battering and gang violence. Indeed, these are some of the most common ways they end up in juvenile detention. Parental battery and gang membership stand out because they predispose many other negative behaviors. Children who witness violence at home identify with the aggressor as an unconscious adaptation mechanism to cope. Often, this involves mimicking the aggressor’s actions and becoming violent towards the victim. Children do this to feel safe and powerful rather than victimized (Wood & Sommers, 2011). Children often seek support and reassurance after episodes of violence, but they cannot receive it, leaving them with feelings of abandonment and resentment. The children may react by either attacking the victim or the perpetrator (Margolin et al., 2010).

This may result in severe injury or death of either party and a cause of detention. Very little research exists specifically talking about parental battery and gang involvement (Margolin et al., 2010; Wood & Sommers, 2011). This study will explore the direct relationship between parental battery or gang involvement with juvenile detention.

Children from violent homes are usually attracted to gangs to get a sense of family and avoid the situation at home. These juveniles look for protection against victimization and to replace broken family bonds (Janssen et al., 2014). Joining gangs gives these children a sense of security and acceptance and lowers their anxiety levels. Once members of the new “family” and the perceived benefits, it becomes almost impossible to disentangle them. The children then start participating in gang activities, which are usually illegal, increasing their contact with the police. Research on this connection between gang involvement and delinquency includes it as one of the reasons for juvenile detention (Janssen et al., 2014; Weber, S., & Lynch, 2021; Wood & Sommers, 2011). This study will look to determine the specific relationship this issue has with juvenile detention.

Most research on the effects of witnessing domestic violence in childhood does not explore the consequences of the developed problems and issues. Some research connects the effects, especially delinquency, to problems with the law, pointing to a relationship between the issue and juvenile detention. In the former case, this study will go a step further and explore the relationship between externalized and internalized behaviors and the rate of juvenile detention. In the latter case, this study will add to the current body of knowledge by providing further insights into the relationship between witnessing domestic violence and juvenile detention.

Methodology

Sampling

This study’s target population will be U.S. adults in the city of Los Angeles, California. This is the state of choice because of convenience and its diversity. The adult population in California is large and diverse enough to serve as an adequate representative sample of the total U.S. adult population. Further, Los Angeles is the largest city in the state and one of the largest in the country, which means it has a level of diversity high enough to result in a quality sample.

We target a final sample size of 100 individuals using random stratified sampling. This sample size was arrived at because of time and resource constraints, but it would be big enough to paint a general picture of the problem under study. Stratified random sampling is a method where the population is divided into strata or smaller subgroups. This study will specifically go with proportional stratified random sampling because this approach involves taking samples from the strata in proportion to the population. In this case, this is the method of choice because it is the best way to ensure optimal representation of the sexes in the final sample that matches the characteristics of the general U.S. adult population.

The inclusion criteria for participants will include the following:

Is over 18 years old.
Has been held in juvenile detention.
Had encounters with the police in their childhood.
Was born in the United States.
Was not a direct victim of domestic violence.

Individuals who meet all these requirements will offer the highest quality data that will give concrete insight into the research problem. Individuals that do not meet any of these criteria will be excluded from the study.

Materials

Survey questionnaires will be the primary materials used to collect data. We will use cross-sectional surveys to collect data from all participants at a single point in time. The self-administered questionnaires will feature items of different formats, including dichotomous questions, self-assessment items, multiple choice questions, those measured on the 7-point Likert scale, and open-ended questions. The questionnaires will specifically seek information about the participant’s background and encounters with the law. The primary objective is to understand if the respondent witnessed violence in childhood, their current age, age during exposure, length of exposure, immediate family environment, support structures, and reasons and age during arrest (if any).

Procedures

The researchers will employ multiple steps to come up with the best quality sample that will provide the most actionable insight. We will design a survey that captures all information crucial for our purposes and walk around the city of Los Angeles and randomly give hand them out to an initial sample of 10 people from different areas of the city that meet our criteria. These individuals will then be supplied with a link to an online form of the survey and the list of criteria, informed consent form, and participant information form. We will ask them to pass it along to people they know who meet the criteria. The group with the link will respond to the survey and submit their results via the internet. During data collection, we will specifically look out for the participant’s sex, severity of witnessed violence (if witnessed), reasons for detention during childhood, relationship with different stakeholders, and personal characteristics.

We will allocate four days for data collection because this will give as many respondents as possible adequate time to fill in their forms without unnecessarily extending the research. The U.S. adult population is too large to include in this study, so the study will look to collect a sample that best represents it. The population groups used in this study will be based on gender, where we will take a random sample from each sex in proportion to its size compared with the overall population. We will then pool these subsets to form a final random sample. This means the initial list of respondents will first be placed into two general groups from which we will randomly select participants for the final sample.

This will involve randomly selecting a percentage of participants from each group in proportion to the total U.S population. More specifically, as of 2020, females made up 50.5% of the population and males 49.5% (United States Census Bureau, 2021). The number of participants randomly selected from each subgroup will be in the same proportion. Selected participants (51 females and 49 males) will be further assigned into two groups; those that witnessed domestic violence during childhood and those that did not. The assignment will depend on the answers provided on the questionnaire. In this case, the independent variable (IV) is exposure to domestic violence in childhood, while the dependent variable (DV) is juvenile detention. The IV has two levels, whether they were exposed to domestic violence or not.

Analysis

We will compare the rate of juvenile detentions for participants who had witnessed domestic violence during their childhood against those that had not, and if the rate of detentions in the former group is significantly higher than in the latter, that will mean that witnessed domestic violence is directly related to juvenile detention, therefore supporting our hypothesis that children who witness domestic violence are more likely than those who do not to end up in juvenile detention.

This study is also set up to determine extra insights relevant to the question of witnessed domestic violence, including the role of protective and risk factors. We will compare the prevalence of these factors in both groups and offer our input to further the current conversation in the literature. First, we will look at the role child-specific characteristics (age, sex, self-esteem) play in determining the outcomes of the participants, and if there is a significant difference between age, sex, and self-esteem in the former group compared to the latter, that will mean that weaker characteristics lead to more adverse outcomes and vice versa. We will also look at the family environment, community, and neighborhood situations and determine if a link exists between them and the outcomes, and if these factors are significantly more negative for individuals in the former group, it will prove their significance in determining the outcomes for children who witness domestic violence.

Ethical Considerations

Research ethics will be involved and will inform all aspects of this study. Ethics matter because they ensure ample collaboration between science and society, human rights and dignity, and scientific integrity. We will follow all principles to ensure participation is informed, safe for the subjects, and voluntary. In line with research standards, we will look to uphold ethics related to results communication, the potential for harm, confidentiality, anonymity, informed consent, and voluntary participation.

To this end, we will develop an informed consent form to obtain permission from participants and a participant information form to communicate all details about the study. Further, there will be no risks for participation or incentives or rewards and we will explicitly inform them of the same in the information form. The survey will target individuals born in America so we do not anticipate many language issues. However, our research team will be available to offer clarifications and directions in case of any issues. As outlined in the information form, we will keep all information related to this study away from unauthorized individuals, conceal participant information using codes, and store all documents in a secure storage.

The informed consent form will lay out the participant’s rights, confirm their agreement to participate in the study, and provide assurance that their rights will be upheld. The participant information form will relay all information related to how We will conduct the study, what participation means, how the information will be used, and much more. The relevant forms are featured in the following section, “Research Tools.” More specifically, We will ensure the following:

Voluntary participation by allowing participants to take part in the study at their own will and opt-out whenever they feel like it.
Informed consent by ensuring participants know about the funding, benefits and risks, and purpose of the study before they decide on whether or not they will be involved.
Anonymity by making it impossible to trace any submitted data back to the participants. This will involve deleting any data that can be used to identify participants.
Confidentiality by keeping any information We know about the participants from getting into the hands of any other parties. We will anonymize all data to ensure nobody else can link it to participant data elsewhere.
We minimize the potential for harm by keeping psychological, social, and physical harm at negligible levels.
We optimize result communication by accurately representing our results and keeping our research free of misconduct or plagiarism.

References

Akers, R. L. (2017). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Routledge.

Armstrong, G. S., Cain, C. M., Wylie, L. E., Muftić, L. R., & Bouffard, L. A. (2018). Risk factor profile of youth incarcerated for child to parent violence: A nationally representative sample. Journal of Criminal Justice, 58, 1-9. Web.

Boserup, B., McKenney, M., & Elkbuli, A. (2020). Alarming trends in US domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. The American journal of emergency medicine, 38(12), 2753-2755. Web.

Chun, H., & Mobley, M. (2010). Gender and grade-level comparisons in the structure of problem behaviors among adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 33(1), 197-207. Web.

Deane, K., Richards, M., Mozley, M., Scott, D., Rice, C., & Garbarino, J. (2018). Posttraumatic stress, family functioning, and externalizing in adolescents exposed to violence: A moderated mediation model. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 47(sup1), S176-S189. Web.

Derzon, J. H. (2010). The correspondence of family features with problem, aggressive, criminal, and violent behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology, 6(3), 263-292. Web.

Duke, N. N., Pettingell, S. L., McMorris, B. J., & Borowsky, I. W. (2010). Adolescent violence perpetration: associations with multiple types of adverse childhood experiences. Pediatrics, 125(4), e778-e786. Web.

DiClemente, C. M., Rice, C. M., Quimby, D., Richards, M. H., Grimes, C. T., Morency, M. M., White, C. D., Miller, K. M., & Pica, J. A. (2018). Resilience in urban African American adolescents: The protective enhancing effects of neighborhood, family, and school cohesion following violence exposure. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 38(9), 1286-1321. Web.

Estrada-Martínez, L. M., CaldWell, C. H., Schulz, A. J., Diez-Roux, A. V., & Pedraza, S. (2013). Families, neighborhood socio-demographic factors, and violent behaviors among Latino, White, and Black adolescents. Youth & Society, 45(2), 221-242. Web.

Fox, B. H., Perez, N., Cass, E., Baglivio, M. T., & Epps, N. (2015). Trauma changes everything: Examining the relationship betWeen adverse childhood experiences and serious, violent and chronic juvenile offenders. Child Abuse & Neglect, 46, 163-173. Web.

Goodrum, N. M., Smith, D. W., Hanson, R. F., Moreland, A. D., Saunders, B. E., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2020). Longitudinal relations among adolescent risk behavior, family cohesion, violence exposure, and mental health in a national sample. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 48(11), 1455-1469. Web.

Janssen, H. J., Deković, M., & Bruinsma, G. J. (2014). Parenting and time adolescents spend in criminogenic settings: A betWeen-and within-person analysis. British Journal of Criminology, 54(4), 551-567. Web.

Margolin, G., Vickerman, K. A., Oliver, P. H., & Gordis, E. B. (2010). Violence exposure in multiple interpersonal domains: Cumulative and differential effects. Journal of Adolescent Health, 47(2), 198-205. Web.

Moylan, C. A., Herrenkohl, T. I., Sousa, C., Tajima, E. A., Herrenkohl, R. C., & Russo, M. J. (2010). The effects of child abuse and exposure to domestic violence on adolescent internalizing and externalizing behavior problems. Journal of family Violence, 25(1), 53-63. Web.

Parrish, D. E. (2020). Achieving justice for girls in the juvenile justice system. Social Work, 65(2), 149-158. Web.

Piquero, A. R., Jennings, W. G., Jemison, E., Kaukinen, C., & Knaul, F. M. (2021). Domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic-Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of criminal justice, 74, 101806. Web.

Sousa, C., Herrenkohl, T. I., Moylan, C. A., Tajima, E. A., Klika, J. B., Herrenkohl, R. C., & Russo, M. J. (2011). Longitudinal study on the effects of child abuse and children’s exposure to domestic violence, parent-child attachments, and antisocial behavior in adolescence. Journal of interpersonal violence, 26(1), 111-136. Web.

Shaw, S. M. (2019) The relationship betWeen witnessing domestic violence and criminal recidivism among juvenile sex offenders”. PCOM Psychology Dissertations. 511. Web.

United States Census Bureau. (2021). U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: United States. Web.

Walters, A. (2019). The forgotten children: Victims of domestic violence, victims of the system. Government Law Review, 12(2), 24015.

Weber, S., & Lynch, S. (2021). Understanding the relations among adverse childhood experiences (ACE), substance use, and reoffending among detained youth. Child Abuse & Neglect, 120, 105211. Web.

Wood, S. L., & Sommers, M. S. (2011). Consequences of intimate partner violence on child witnesses: a systematic review of the literature. Journal of child and adolescent psychiatric nursing, 24(4), 223-236. Web.

Zinzow, H. M., Ruggiero, K. J., Hanson, R. F., Smith, D. W., Saunders, B. E., & Kilpatrick, D. G. (2009). Witnessed community and parental violence in relation to substance use and delinquency in a national sample of adolescents. Journal of Traumatic Stress: Official Publication of the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies, 22(6), 525-533. Web.

Click Here To Order Now!