Confronting Violence

Answers To Questions About The Epidemic Destroying America's Homes And Communities

George A. Gellert

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9780429723919
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

This book is a definitive reference work and a call to action, written with a public health physician's eye for public safety and a scientist's evenhanded respect for evidence. It is intended for professionals who interact with or provide services to people affected by violence.

1
IS AMERICA MORE VIOLENT THAN OTHER SOCIETIES?

American life is inundated with violence. Violence has become common in our culture, media, and entertainment. We see, hear about, or experience violence in some way almost every day. Who among us can recall a day that was completely violence-free?

The United States is easily the most violent of any industrialized country that is not engaged in a civil war. Our homicide rate is three to eight times greater than any other Western democracy. Each year violence causes an estimated 2.2 million injuries and more than 20,000 deaths in the United States (more than one-third the fatalities of the Vietnam War). Homicide is the third leading cause of death of all persons fifteen to twenty-four years of age and the leading cause of death of black men of that age. Homicide rates for children and adolescents have more than doubled in the last thirty years. In 1995 there were 5,278 violent and property offenses reported for every 100,000 U.S. inhabitants. There were 685 violent crimes per 100,000 residents, a figure likely to reflect much underreporting.

Each year, more than 1.5 million individuals are victims of assault and more than 650,000 women are raped. Every day more than sixty Americans die from homicide. Since 1950, the suicide rate among children and adolescents has nearly tripled, and at the close of the last decade, it was the highest it has ever been among young Americans. A staggering two million women are beaten by their male partners each year, and 8 to 11 percent of pregnant women are physically assaulted. Two to four million American children were abused or neglected in 1991, and more than one million elderly people were mistreated. To put American violence into perspective, during the two decades between 1973 and 1992 the yearly death rate from heart disease was five per 1000 and from cancer was three per 1000. The yearly rate of violent victimization (excluding murder) was 31 per 1000 adults.

Violence in America differs dramatically across racial lines and has its greatest impact on ethnic-minority males, particularly those who live in urban areas. The lifetime risk of being murdered in the United States is forty-two killings per 1,000 citizens for black males, and only six per 1,000 for white males. The disparity in these statistics regarding blacks and whites and how the justice system responds to the problem is evidenced by the stunning figure that one out of every four young black men between the ages of eighteen and thirty is either in jail, awaiting trial, or on probation.

As a society we share a number of myths in our common perceptions about violence in America. It is true that for every 100,000 Americans, there are 2,243 crimes in cities with more than one million residents. This is three times greater than the rate for the nation as a whole. But since 1980, serious violent crime has increased in smaller cities with less than a half-million residents. Violence in America is not, as portrayed in popular culture, limited largely to young men in large cities. It is not predominantly a behavior that occurs between strangers. Most victims of violence know the perpetrator. The current level of violence in the United States also is not unprecedented. The Department of Justice reports that U.S. murder rates have been as high as the present level twice before in this century, namely, between 1931 and 1934 and again between 1979 and 1981. Indeed, violent crime (excluding murders) decreased by nine percent in 1995, meaning that there were one million fewer violent crimes than the 10.9 million reported in 1994. A seven percent drop in the murder rate occurred during the first six months of 1996. But because the American population has grown, these rates translate proportionately into greater numbers of deaths. The 1990 level of other serious violent crimes was at about the same level as it was in 1975. Between these years, there was a peak in 1980, followed by a decrease in the early years of that decade, and then an increase again in 1986. Thus, while levels of violence may fluctuate from year to year, with some years better than others, overall American violence remains unacceptably high. Importantly, only a small percentage of homes and street addresses within a given area may account for a large share of a city’s violent crime. Available statistics probably underestimate the true extent of violence in the United States. Reported crimes represent only a fraction of all crimes. The Department of Justice has estimated that only 37 percent of all crimes are reported to police. Only half of all violent crimes are reported.

More people are in U.S. prisons today than ever before, and violence persists. At the start of 1996, 5.3 million people in America were in prison or jail, or on probation and parole. This equals 2.8 percent of all U.S. adults. In 1995, the United States-for the first time in its history-spent more money on building prisons than it did on building universities. At present incarceration rates, one out of every 20 U.S. residents will be confined in a state or federal prison during his or her lifetime. The U.S. imprisons 640 inmates per 100,000 adult residents, compared to 119 per 100,000 in England and Wales. In many quarters, there is a sense that the criminal justice approach, which focuses on punishing those who break the law, cannot by itself substantially impact on the problem. Between 1975 and 1989, sentencing for violent crimes in the United States grew harsher, and the prison population has tripled since 1980, yet the number of violent crimes did not decrease. It is believed that this occurred because the violence prevented by more frequent and longer prison sentences was offset by new violence. In effect, America’s efforts to control the epidemic of violence have been “running in place,” struggling to keep up with an ever-increasing number of violent acts committed by greater numbers of people. Also, imprisonment of offenders, while critical to any coherent public response to violence, does not address the cyclical nature of violence, and the way that it breeds itself in a self-perpetuating way within communities, in families, and across generations. About nine of every ten men and eight of every ten women currently in U.S. prisons are believed to have been abused at some time during their lifetimes. It could be argued that our society tends to view violence (because it is so common) with a certain fatalism, as inevitable. Community, political, and public health leaders, however, have argued that no civilized society should be so permeated by firearms, assault, homicide, rape, and child abuse. Many say that violence in America is a social and public health crisis and that it demands immediate attention and corrective action.

While the levels of murder and other violent crime in the United States today are not unprecedented, the United States does have the highest rates of violence in the industrialized world. The 1990 American murder rate, in which 9.4 citizens were killed for every 100,000 people, was double the rate of Spain’s, which had the second highest murder rate in the industrialized world. The 1988 murder rate in America was four times that of our neighbors in Canada. Incidents of violent crime less severe than murder also are common in America. Almost three million serious, nonfatal violent events, including rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults have occurred in each of recent years. The United States’ rates per 100,000 residents for these crimes are also among the highest in the world. The Department of Justice reports about three million simple assaults per year, which are less serious crimes that involve neither a weapon nor an injured party. National reporting systems in this country are not accurate for many other kinds of violence, including those committed in domestic settings between partners, within the family, between friends and intimates, by parents and care-givers upon children, and those that take place in schools. Nonetheless, it appears that the country’s violent crime rate fell by five percent in 1994.

In fairness, when considering the epidemic of civilian violence that is affecting the United States, it is important to keep in mind the world in which Americans live. The twentieth century offers a dark history of global participation in national and international violence, often of a political or ethnic nature. It has been estimated that since 1900, nation states have executed political and military actions directly responsible for the violent or unnatural deaths of over 100 million people (equal to over a third of the United States’ population or 2 percent of the current world population). Genocide has been conducted by at least forty nations. Since World War II, there have been 149 episodes of mass violence, causing a total of 23,142,000 deaths, many of which involved genocide against large, vulnerable populations. When viewed from this perspective, it is clear that while America is indeed a very violent society, violence is a disease affecting people the world over. This book focuses on “interpersonal” violence, or those events involving few assailants and victims. In our examination of violence, there will be no discussion of the large-scale and populational violence that is perpetrated by states and governments such as occurs in war.

America’s tragedy of violence appalls us. We condemn it individually and collectively. It upsets us as individuals, as families, and as a society. Violence represents perhaps the most frustrating problem that America has ever faced as a nation. And the impact of violence goes far beyond what statistics can convey if, for example, one considers that about one-half of all homeless women and children in America are runaways from domestic violence. Yet, although we are aware of violence and find it unacceptable, in some ways we condone and even promote it. In the blood-and-guts realism of our information media and entertainment, from television and newspapers to the movies, childrens’ cartoons and video games, we seem, at some level, to have an insatiable appetite for violence. We consume violence even as it consumes us. Constant exposure has produced a new public indifference to violence. Like an overworked muscle, we hardly respond anymore to the barbaric assault on our senses. The violence of a 1970s movie seems almost comically tame compared to today’s movies. Any instinctive repulsion to violence is gradually being dulled. Are we moving beyond merely accepting violence to viewing it as appropriate and effective behavior, and as something to be expected naturally?

The three most recent U.S. Surgeon Generals have all been outspoken about violence as a national health problem and have held the view that violence in this country constitutes a public health emergency. Public health experts ask if we would be this complacent if so many people were being killed and injured by an infectious disease? Or would a major research and disease-control effort have been implemented long ago? They note that although violence is not a disease in the classic sense, its impact on individual health and the public’s health is as pervasive and profound as any disease. Leaders in medicine and public health have argued for years that violence prevention programs need to be established in schools, clinics, churches, and other community centers to respond to this epidemic. These programs must involve parents, educators, law enforcement personnel, social service workers, clergy, community leaders, government personnel, and health care professionals.

Criminal justice measures have often been the focus of our efforts to protect ourselves from violence. While useful, they have not been adequate. The reason is that violence does not begin in the commission of a crime or in some vague “criminal mind,” but in the relationships between individuals who know each other-acquaintances, intimates, friends, and family members. These are the associations in which most violent acts occur, sometimes over serious arguments, but often enough over trivialities. Despite considerable research and inquiry, the causes of violence are poorly understood.

Recently a National Academy of Sciences Panel on the Understanding and Control ofViolent Behavior was established to provide an overview of what is known about violence in the United States and to develop recommendations towards its control. The panel identified various contributing or “risk” factors for violence, and classified these along broad dimensions. First the panel considered how close in time risk factors are to particular violent events. The proximity in time of a risk factor to a violent incident can range widely, from those that are far removed from an act but still contribute to its occurrence years later to those that precipitate violence almost immediately. For instance, an abused child may develop a potentially violent personality by the time he or she reaches adulthood. Circumstances within a particular situation or an interpersonal relationship shape the risk for violence. Activating events are those that can produce an act of violence immediately.

The panel considered four levels at which risk factors can influence behavior, including the macrosocial, microsocial, psychosocial, and biological. The macrosocial level involves the characteristics of society, communities, or the nation that either promote or decrease violence. Social values are an example of a risk factor at the macrosociallevel. This level can also include events that catalyze violence, such as the outcome of a trial. Other predisposing macrosocial factors are poverty, lack of economic opportunity, and the nature of sex roles in a culture. With respect to situational factors, macrosocial considerations include the way the community is laid out or how readily an individual can access weapons.

The microsocial level concerns encounters and relationships between people. It pertains to considerations such as community organizations, the breakdown of family, and the presence of gangs. Whether weapons are carried or displayed and whether bystanders get involved and try to prevent the escalation of a conflict or argument also pertain to the microsociallevel. An activating factor at the microsocial level would be how individuals actually communicate and such things as whether insults are exchanged.

The next level focuses on the individual and considers the psychosocial environment. Here, predisposing risk factors for violence include the temperament of individuals, how they have learned to respond to each other socially, their understanding of the rewards and penalties for committing violent acts, their social skills, whether they use alcohol, whether they are under stress, and how they typically express anger. Situational risk factors for violence would include the actual consumption of alcohol or drugs, the accumulation of negative emotions, and whether an individual is sexually aroused. Activating factors at the individual level include a sudden impulse or urge within a person who is predisposed to violence in a situation that promotes aggression, along with the opportunity to act violently given this combination of setting and individual characteristics.

The final level for risk factors is the biological, which includes various hormonal and chemical influences on the brain and which affect all behaviors. Biologically determined behavioral traits are considered at this level, such as characteristics or conditions created by birth or a history of trauma. Genetic characteristics, as well as the use of drugs that influence mental states, are predisposing factors at the biological level. All behaviors, including violent and aggressive acts, are the results ofbiological and chemical processes in the brain. Studies have suggested that violence may be associated with several permanent and temporary conditions of the nervous system. Hormones and neurotransmitters in the brain, and physical abnormalities in brain structure at birth or from injury can influence mental states and predispose to violence. Abnormal functioning of the brain that interferes with thinking processes or communication can produce poor school performance and other problems in childhood, which in turn increase the risk of violent behavior.

Our understanding of behavioral processes and their relationship to violence remains too rudimentary at present to say that there is a definite neurological or other biological marker for violence. Scientists have long been interested in whether violence could be predicted on biological grounds so that perhaps individuals who screen positively for a “violence marker” could be provided with special attention to reduce their propensity for violence. Statistical studies of twins and adopted children have produced evidence that genetic and social processes may interact and increase the likelihood that an individual may become antisocial, engage in juvenile delinquency, or become an alcoholic. The little data that specifically looks at violence has suggested, at the most, only a weak influence of an individual’s genetic makeup on their risk of acting violently. The National Academy of Sciences Panel on the Understanding and Control of Violent Behavior suggested that even if a genetic influence on risk of violence was identified by research, it would most probably involve many genes rather than a single “violence gene.” Genetics are likely to interact in a subtle and complex manner with a wide array of social, situational, and cultural factors and life events. In sum, any violent act is the outcome of a long and diverse chain of preceding influences and events. Many violence prevention efforts seek to interrupt this progression and break the chain of events that results a violent outcome.

One approach to understanding criminal behavior suggests that a subculture of violence exists in America and includes people living in poverty, members of lower social classes, and racial minorities who are disenfranchised politically and culturally from mainstream society. It is believed that individuals within this subculture do not share the values and beliefs of greater society, and because they are angry and frustrated by being left out of social and economic opportunities, violence is used as a means of getting what they want. This characteristic is most notable among young, unemployed, and often unskilled men within the subculture. Much violence, particularly stranger and economically motivated violence, is committed by persons in this disenfranchised segment of society, which often coincides with inner-city populations. A large number of victims of violence are found in these same communities.

Two recent events, unusual in the way they captured and held public attention and because of their barbarism, have focused society on the violence epidemic. These are the murders of O.J. Simpson’s former wife, Nicole Brown, and her friend Ron Goldman, and the Oklahoma City bombing. The homicidal attack on a federal building in Oklahoma City provoked fear, outrage, and grief among many Americans at the sudden loss of so many lives. Without diminishing the magnitude of this tragedy, Americans should appreciate that deaths by violence in Oklahoma are neither infrequent nor unusual. While it may be shocking that such violence is rampant, overall it is not surprising. Americans have become the world’s greatest harvesters of homegrown civilian violence. Between 1990 and 1993, an average of 25,644 Americans, including some 2,000 children, were victims of homicide. This is roughly equal to 170 Oklahoma City bombings per year, or one almost every other day. And there is little to the notion that such things should not or do not occur in peaceful places like Oklahoma City. In 1992, there were 252 homicides statewide in Oklahoma, 1 percent of the national homicide total for a state with 1.2 percent of the nation’s population.

The fact that the motive for the Oklahoma homicides appears to be political makes them different only in quality from the thousands of other violent deaths and losses suffered by American families each year. While it may be arguable the extent to which political alienation contributed to the bombing, this tragedy should not be divorced from the greater context of violence in contemporary American life. Terrorism is homicide disguised as rational process, but homicide it is. Just like some other forms of homicide, it is viewed as a means to an end, but a political end and not an interpersonal or material one. Americans should not delude themselves into thinking of this ugly event as a single, self-limited crisis with an eventual resolution. Terror and violence are happening all the time in America, further down the visibility spectrum and with less notoriety, but with no less suffering. The same is true for domestic violence, one of the allegations against O.J. Simpson, who was tried for the murders of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. Sadly, beating wives and abusing children are becoming an integral, everyday part of the American social landscape. This crisis in American life is much broader, deeper, and resistant to resolution than any single exploding bomb, abused spouse, or double murder, however despicable were these acts.

Underlying the terror at Oklahoma City or the relationship between Nicole Brown and her former husband is the violence that exists in millions of American homes and many schools and communities every day of the year. Absent the relentless violence and anger that permeates every dimension of American social life, these events could never have occurred. It is unlikely that the perpetrators of this bombing or these murders would have been impelled to such violent acts without having been exposed to thousands of acts of brutality in the media and in their lives over the course of their childhood years. The Oklahoma City bombing and the abuse and murder of Nicole Brown emerged as just two incidents in the endless tide of American violence. We deceive ourselves in imagining that no relationship exists between the murdered individuals in Oklahoma City and Brentwood and the 1.5 million individuals assaulted each year in the United States, the more than 650,000 women who are raped, the 1,200 women who are killed by a husband or boyfriend, and the 1.5 to 2.5 million children who are abused or neglected. They are all equally the victims of violence, America’s deadliest epidemic.

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title
• Dedication
• Contents
• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction: How Should This Book Be Used?
• Chapter 1: Is America More Violent Than Other Societies?
• Chapter 2: Physical And Emotional Abuse of Children
• Chapter 3: Sexual Abuse of Children
• Chapter 4: School and Youth Violence
• Chapter 5: Bullying—Not Just Kids’ Stuff
• Chapter 6: Spouse Abuse and Domestic and Intimate Violence Against Women
• Chapter 7: Rape and Sexual Assault of Adults
• Chapter 8: Elder Abuse and Violence Against the Elderly
• Chapter 9: Murder and Homicide—Ever More Random
• Chapter 10: Violence and Strangers
• Chapter 11: Guns—Do They Increase or Defend Against Violence?
• Chapter 12: Violence to Oneself—Suicide
• Chapter 13: Epilogue—The Future of Violence Prevention
• Appendix: Suggestions for Further Reading
• About the Author
• Quick reference