Child Maltreatment

Child Maltreatment forms the foundation for the bullying dynamic in childhood and throughout the lifespan.

Child maltreatment is abuse and/or neglect inflicted upon youth under the age of 18 and includes all forms of physical and emotional mistreatment including sexual abuse, neglect, negligence, and exploitation (World Health Organization, 2016).  In 2014, about 3.2 million children were the subjects of at least one report to Child Protective Services and of those reports, an estimated 702,000 were substantiated; 75% were cases of neglect, 17% physical abuse, and 8% sexual abuse (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2016). In 2015, an estimated 1,670 children died from abuse and neglect, which is almost 5 children per day (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2017). The Fourth National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect found that 1 in every 58 children in the United States experiences maltreatment. It is important to note that rates of maltreatment vary widely across studies depending upon the method of research used including the definition of maltreatment, the type of maltreatment studied, the coverage and quality of the statistics, and the coverage and quality of the surveys requesting self-reports from victims and parents/caregivers (World Health Organization, 2016). Using a nationally representative sample of 4,549 youth ages 0 to 17, the National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence found that 18.6% of respondents reported some form of maltreatment over their lifetime and for youth ages 14-17, 32.1% reported lifetime maltreatment.

The vast majority of child maltreatment cases are comprised of three racial/ethnic groups: White (44%), Hispanic/Latino (23%), and African American (21%; U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2016). While children under three are at the highest risk for maltreatment and comprised over one quarter (27%) of maltreatment cases in 2014, pre-adolescents and adolescents are also a vulnerable group and youth ages 10 to 18 comprised 31% of maltreatment cases (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2016). Socioeconomic status (SES), including income, educational attainment, occupational prestige, and perceptions of social status and class, has been linked to child maltreatment (American Psychological Association, 2017). Indeed, a low SES is a risk factor for child maltreatment and increased income significantly decreased the risk for child maltreatment. This finding may be due to the chronic stress that low-income parents struggle with as they single parent, juggle multiple jobs, and cope with meeting basic family needs. Under this stress, parents may become impatient, use extreme discipline techniques, and/or lack capacity to provide adequate supervision to their children (Administration for Children Youth and Families, 2016).

In 2008, it was estimated that nonfatal and fatal cases of child maltreatment cost the United States $124 billion; $83.5 billion in lost productivity, $25 billion in health care costs, $14.5 billion for special education, $4.5 billion for child welfare, and $3.5 billion in criminal justice expenses.

Negative consequences of maltreatment

The negative consequences of child maltreatment are both immediate (i.e., in childhood when the maltreatment is occurring) and enduring (i.e., lasting into adulthood). For example, as a direct result of physical abuse, youth can suffer from bruises, cuts, broken bones, head trauma, or hemorrhages (Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2013) and neglected youth were at an increased risk for obesity and had a body mass index that grew significantly faster compared to their non-neglected counterparts.

Child maltreatment has been found to actually alter brain structure and function. For example, compared to non-maltreated youth, those who suffered from childhood maltreatment had significantly smaller hippocampal and amygdala volume. The hippocampus is responsible for storing and processing long term memories and emotional responses and the amygdala is responsible for the memory of emotions (especially fear) and controls the way we react to events (The Brain Made Simple, n.d.). These brain changes in the hippocampus and amygdala were evident both in childhood and in adulthood indicating that maltreatment has an immediate and enduring negative impact on the brain structure and function. Perhaps as a result of these brain changes, compared to non-maltreated youth, maltreated children have lower IQ’s and deficits in language and academic achievement. Further, youth exposed to interpersonal trauma, such as maltreatment, display dysregulation of affect (e.g., flat, numbed, or inappropriate affect) and behavior (e.g., withdrawal, aggression, substance use); disturbances of attention and consciousness (e.g., dissociation, difficulty concentrating or planning); disturbances of attribution (e.g., difficulty understanding responsibility for personal behavior and behavior of others); and interpersonal difficulties (e.g., poor social skills, disrupted attachment styles). 

Table 6.1 Attachment Styles, Maltreatment and Bullying

Adults abused and neglected as children were at an increased risk for diabetes, vision problems, malnutrition, and lung disease. Maltreatment also increases the likelihood of substance use and those with a history of child abuse and neglect were 1.5 times more likely to report past year illegal drug use in middle adulthood, reported use of a larger number of drugs, and more substance-use-related problems compared to their non-maltreated counterparts. Research suggests that maltreatment is also associated with at least a 25% increased risk of violent delinquency, teenage pregnancy, symptoms of mental illness, and low academic achievement. Indeed, child maltreatment negatively impacts adolescent and adult criminality and increased the likelihood of juvenile arrest by 59%, adult arrest by 28%, and engagement by violent crime by 30%. Further, maltreatment negatively impacts mental and emotional health. For example, one study found that 80% of young adults maltreated before the age of 18 met the criteria for at least one psychiatric disorder by the age of 21. Compared to their non-maltreated counterparts, those who had been maltreated had increased depressive symptomology, anxiety, psychiatric disorders, emotional-behavioral problems, suicidal ideation, and suicide attempts.

Gershoff and Grogan-Kaylor (2016) analyzed 111 studies representing 160,927 children; 99% of studies (102 out of 111) indicated an association between spanking and a detrimental child outcome. In childhood, parental use of spanking was associated with low moral internalization, aggression, antisocial behavior, externalizing behavior problems, internalizing behavior problems, mental health problems, negative parent– child relationships, impaired cognitive ability, low self-esteem, and risk of physical abuse from parents. In adulthood, prior experiences of parental use of spanking were significantly associated with adult antisocial behavior, adult mental health problems, and with positive attitudes about spanking. These researchers also showed that the effects for spanking were quite similar to effects from physical abuse. This strongly conclusive scientific research underscores how even socially-sanctioned bullying in the home, such as spanking, is toxic to victims and serves as a precursor to seriously detrimental consequences in adulthood.

What is the recipe for creating a bully? The answer would arguably be to place an infant with vast natural potential in an environment characterized by multiple adversities (i.e., emotional, physical, or sexual abuse, emotional or physical neglect, domestic violence, substance abuse, mental illness, parent separation/divorce or incarceration) add insensitive, inconsistent, unresponsive caregiving with coercive physical punishment, like spanking, and the result is likely to be a child that is insecurely attached to others, has neurological damage, a hyperactive biological stress response system, low social skills, and a tendency to compulsively lash out when feeling threatened (which is most of the time). That recipe, or some variation of it, happens to 1 in every 58 children in the United States. Some of these maltreated children cope with their suffering by anxiously withdrawing; others cope by lashing out with aggression. Anxious withdrawn children are targets for victimization on the playground and aggressive children with low empathy are perpetrators on the playground. Early adverse child experiences set the stage for the playground politics that dominate middle school. Then, place these same wounded children in college, in marriages, in workplaces, and in retirement homes and it is clear why a lifespan approach is needed to fully understand bullying perpetration and victimization.

Sibling Violence and Bullying

Routine sibling conflict is generally a mutual disagreement, whereas sibling abuse occurs when one sibling is consistently the aggressor and the other sibling is consistently victimized. Sibling abuse is a repeated pattern of verbal and physical aggression where the aggressor intends to inflict harm and is motivated by the desire for power and control. Like child maltreatment and peer bullying, sibling abuse comes in various forms including psychological abuse (e.g., ridicule, intimidation, provocation), physical abuse (e.g., purposefully inflicting physical harm by shoving, hitting, slapping, biting), and sexual abuse (e.g., unwanted sexual interactions).

In a sample of 336 middle school youth, 30% reported they were commonly bullied by their siblings. And in a study of 455 youth grades 5 through 12, about 32% reported sibling bullying, a rate more than three times higher than the percentage reporting peer bullying (in that study 10%).

Younger children are at higher risk for engaging in physical sibling violence and are more often victimized. Indeed, as the age of the victim increased, the number of acts of physical violence he/she experienced decreased. Research indicates that boys are more likely compared to girls to engage in sibling violence and bullying, while girls are more likely to be victims. Having an older brother is a risk factor associated with increased sibling bullying for both boys and girls. Low levels of empathy and sibling relationships fraught with conflict were significantly associated with increased sibling bullying perpetration for both boys and girls. Further, individual characteristics such as trait anger (i.e., becoming easily angered across a variety of situations) and moral disengagement increased the likelihood of bullying ones sibling.

Parent to child violence, mother engaging in physical punishment, and the father losing his temper were also significantly associated with increased sibling violence. Indeed, negative sibling interactions are four times more frequent in abusive and neglectful families. Youth who experienced child maltreatment had 4 times the risk of experiencing sibling abuse compared to their non-maltreated counterparts and those who witnessed adult domestic violence had 2 times the risk of experiencing sibling violence.

Being punched or kicked by a sibling increased the odds of using substances by 31.4% and being threatened with a weapon during a sibling fight increased the odds of substance use by 52.6%. Sibling verbal abuse and/or sibling shoving, pushing, or slapping increased the odds of delinquency by 39.0% and being threatened with a weapon increased the odds of delinquency by 119.2%. Other researchers found that victims of sibling bullying suffered from depression, insecurity, and low self-esteem even later in life. Indeed, victims of sibling bullying were about twice as likely to suffer from depression, anxiety, and self-harm compared to their counter parts who did not endure sibling bullying.

Being a victim of sibling abuse can also put youth at increased risk for other forms of violence such as dating violence. Most alarming, sibling bullying and victimization were significantly associated with peer bullying and victimization suggesting that exposure to sibling bullying might prime or train children to take on their sibling role (i.e., perpetrator, victim) in the larger peer group.