000			03174nab a2200385Ia 4500
001			114853
005			20250625151153.0
008			110331s2004 eng
022			_a0021-843X
040			_aWSS _dAFV
100			_aEhrensaft, Miriam K. _91097
245			_aClinically abusive relationships in an unselected birth cohort : _bmen's and women's participation and developmental antecedents _cEhrensaft, Miriam K.; Moffitt, Terrie E.; Caspi, Avshalom
260			_aWashington, DC _bAmerican Psychological Association _c2004
365			_a00 _b0
520			_a This journal article reports the findings of a study using a longitudinal research design with an unselected birth cohort (n = 980, 24-26 years) to test three hypotheses: Can intimate partner violence with "clinical" consequences, or "real" abuse, be detected in community samples; is this abuse gender mutual; and is it "psychopathological". Participants were members of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study. The study tracked a representative birth cohort of 1,037 young people (52% male, 48% female) at the following assessment points: 3 years (n = 1,037), 5 years (n = 991), 7 years (n = 954), 9 years (n = 955), 11 years (n = 925), 13 years (n = 850), 15 years (n = 976), 18 years (n = 930, and 26 years (n = 980). Five types of candidate risk were selected on which to compare groups who were in clinically abusive (n = 75), non-clinically abusive (n = 134), and non-abusive relationships (n = 746): family of origin characteristics, parenting, child behavioural problems, adolescent psychiatric disorders, and adolescent personality traits. The authors' findings are that, in non-clinically abusive relationships, perpetrators were primarily women. In clinically abusive relationships, men and women used physical abuse, although more women needed medical treatment for injury. Women in clinically abusive relationships had childhood family adversity, adolescent conduct problems, and aggressive personality; men had disinhibitory psychopathology since childhood and extensive personality deviance. The authors argue that these findings counter the assumption that if clinical abuse was ascertained in epidemiological samples, it would be primarily man-to-woman, explained by patriarchy rather than psychopathology.--ADAPTED FROM THE JOURNAL ABSTRACT
650	2	7	_2FVC _aABUSED MEN _924
650	2	7	_2FVC _aADOLESCENTS _943
650	2	7	_2FVC _aDEMOGRAPHICS _9189
650	2	7	_2FVC _aDOMESTIC VIOLENCE _9203
650	2	7	_aDunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study _94056
650	2	7	_2FVC _aGENDER _9269
650	2	7	_2FVC _aHEALTH _9283
650	2	7	_2FVC _aMENTAL HEALTH _9377
650	2	7	_2FVC _aPARENTING _9429
650	2	7	_2FVC _aPHYSICAL ABUSE _9439
650	2	7	_2FVC _aSOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS _9568
650	2	7	_2FVC _aWOMEN _9645
650	2	7	_9431 _aINTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE _2FVC
650	2	7	_9660 _aYOUNG PEOPLE _2FVC
700	1		_aMoffitt, Terrie E. _91743
700	1		_aCaspi, Avshalom _9897
500			_aJournal of Abnormal Psychology 113(2) 2004 : 258-271
773	0		_tJournal of Abnormal Psychology 113(2) 2004 : 258-271
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE
999			_c2116 _d2116