User talk:Toursong123

made on rticir children. They may punish them for coming h에w late one day, bu.t ignore it the next―or dicy may punish them long afterward' so that the children feel they arc being punished for no apparent reason. These parents seem to inflict punishment for its own sake. Furthermore, rhe maritaJ roles of abusive parents arc frequently uncertain. They often fail to allocate responsibility between thcmscivcs for important casks, including discipline of the children. Thus, their children arc often difficult to control and lack any dear idea of what their parents will Tolerate (Parke 8〔 Collmcr, 1975) Since they are conhiscd by their parents' inconsistent expectations, the children often bear increasingly harsh punishments. The parents may also live in a〔ukurc that does not frown on the use of harsh punishment with a child (Bdsky, 1980). These (acton help to set patterns of abuse in motion. Other factors maintain already established patterns of abuse. For example, parents may justify abuse as morally acceptable because it builds (he child's char­acter, They may play down the injury sustained by the child. Abusive parents ftequendy shift die blame to the child and jusdty chcir own violence on the grounds that the child is ^hateful," “crazy," or "dumb" (Parke & Collmcr, 1975) Finally, let us look at the role of the child in abusive families. Parents arc usually selective in their abuse, singling out one chiJd fo『 nustreatmem. Infants and very young children arc the most finequenc targets. Unhealthy children or premature infants may tax some mothers' self-control and caiuc them to react negatively. Premature inbn田 may have difficulty with feeding, cry more than other babies, and gcncrahy require more care Because of these problems, parents may fail co establish a positive emotional attachment to a premature iniant. This is basically a problem of incompatibilicy between parent and child. There may also be differences in physical styles between parent and child； a physically (!'•■ monstrative mother may find chat her infant does not like to be touched. Such mismatches may lead to poor attachment and, sometimes, to abuse (Parke & CoUmcr, 1975). Some children may be singled out for abu« because they uncomfortably remind a parent of his or her own flaws As adults, parents may find it hard to handle certain unresolved conflicts from their own childhood years. If they regard their own passive tendencies as unacceptable、they may be even harsher toward 3 passive child; if they fear their own impulsiveness, they may punish a young child for being impulsive. In other words, some unfortunate children tap a wclkpnng of self hatred in their parents. These three attempts to explain child abuse shed light c none of them has clearly defined its causes. PSYCHOLOGICAL ABUSE All physical abuse or mistreatment is accompanied by ' psychological component. Misircatment exists in the context of an lnicrpcreoiial relationship, and it is the relaQonship itsdf that has become psychologically abu­sive. That is, the relationship is manipulative, rejecting, or degrading. Psychological abuse comes in various forms and may be commincd by var- 1OUS mdividuals and groups Of individuals, such as parents, peers, neighbors, aJid teachers. The significant characteristic of these individuals and groups « they have power in situations in which the chjid is vulnerable (Hart « al. 1987). Fvt example, the child of a divorce may be exposed io teasing because he or she “doesn't have a daddy anymore," with the strong implicatum that it is the child’s taulr. Hart, Germain, and Brassard (1987) discuss the difficukics of determining when psychological abuse occurs. They paint out chac abuse may be "immediately or ultimately psychologically damaging?' The abuse must measurably aficct one or more of the following functions: chc person's behavior, ability to understand, cinocionaJ make-up, and physical well-being. Hart, Germain, and Brassard also list several types of psychological abuse. These are： « Rejection. This involves refusing the request or needs of a child in such a way as co imply strong dislike for chc child. Active rejection rather than passive withholding of a Recti on is involved here. • Denial Emotional Responsiveness. This is the passive withholding of aficc lion. Detachment, coldness, failing to provide warm rcspoiuivencss一such as kissing, hugging, or talking—when the child attempts to relate arc ex am pics of this. Ignoring the child consistently is also part of this. • Degradation. In this instance, the child's self-esteem is lowered by an assault on his or her dignity or intelligence. For example, humiliating the child in public or calling him or her “stupid” or “dummy” is degrading. • Terrorization. Forcing a child to witness violence toward a loved one or threatening a chiJd with violence is a terrifying experienu; ft)r any child. Io regularly beat a child or say to him or her "I’ll break every bone in your body if you don't behave” is to terrorize the child. A nonviuknc form of terrorism is to walk away from a misbehaving child while out in the street. This form of discipline will always terrorize the diild and sometimes trau­matize the parent. ■ Isolation. Refusing to allow a child rn play with fricml.t or take part in family activity is to isolate him or her. Some forms of iMilating the child, such as putting him or her in a closet, arc also terrorizing. • Exploitation. To take advantage of a child's innocuitx or weakness is to ex­ploit him or her. The mast well-known forms tif cxpluitdtinn are sexual, either molestation of a child or using him or her ill pinmgrapliic films. Hart, Germain，and Brassard state that most people have pniiubly experi­enced one form or another of psychological abuse. But, in nwisi »»• those in­stances, the abuse probably lacked “sufficient intensity，frequciuy. Jnd duration to have lasting negative effects” (Hart ct al., 1987). The importnnt distinction between the psychokigically abused child and the rest of us is that the abused child has a damaging tcJati<inship and is not ixing socialized in a pnsiiive, supportive way. Instead，he or she is being exploited, for example. Many students of child abuse mainuin that psycluilogic.il abuse is at least as damaging to die child's ongoing dcidopmcnt as phwicjl jIuim:. As a consequence, the child may not be able io get his or her dcptudviicy needs sat­isfied, may haw to ht overly adaptive to escape abuse, and/or nuv ikvehip neu­rotic traits or conduct disorders. What is more, the child has kanicd to exploit, degrade, or terrorize .ind 的 expect that relationships often hurt. Hicsc are per vasive, long-term conscqucncts.

SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE As wc have seen, children are continually learning how to deal with the complex social world both inside and outside the family. In middle childhood, they must come to terms with the subtleties of friendship and authority, with expanded or conflicting sex roles, and with a host of social rules and regulations. One way they do so is by direct socialization processes, such as rewards and punishment for their behavior, and by the observation and imitation of a model. Social learn¬ing helps children acquire a number of appropriate behaviors and attitudes. An- odicr way children learn about the social world involves psychodynamic pro-cesses. Cliildrcn learn to feel anxious in certain situations, and they learn to reduce this anxiety by using a number of defense mechanisms (see chapter 10). However, there is a diird way by which children learn about the social world. Just as children's understanding of the physical world changes as they ma¬ture, so do their thinking and understanding change about the social world. This composite of thought processes and understanding about the social world is called social cognition. As children develop into middle childhood and adoles¬cence, their social cognition becomes a more and more important determinant of their behavior. It is m middle childhood that children must learn how to deal with some of the complexities and subtleties of friendship and justice, social rules and manners, sex-role conventions, obedience to authority，and moral law. Chil¬dren begin to look at the social world around diem and gradually come to un- dersrand the principles and rules it follows (Ross, 1981). Such developing under¬standing has been studied by cognitive theorists, who believe that all knowledge, whether scientific, social, or personal, exists as an organized system or structure, not as unrelated bits and pieces. In the same way, children’s understanding of the world docs nor devdop by unrelated steps, but instead is built in a predictable sequence. Their understanding of the social world will depend in part on the point in the developmental sequence already reached. As wc saw in chapter 9, preschool children's understanding of the world is limited by their egocentrism. And although by age 7 children have reached urhc age of reason” and arc able to perform some logical operations, they arc still somewhat hampered by their egocentrism. Many children in early middle child-hood still do not recognize that their point of view is limited to themselves. Tliev arc not fully aware that another person has a different point of view and spixilk subjective needs because of a different background, set of experiences, or values. This fact only gradually impinges on the young child. A first component of social knowledge, therefore, is social inference--that is, guesses and assumptions about what anorher person is feeling, chinking, or intending (FlavcU, 1977; Forbes, 1978; Shantz, 1975). A young child, for cx- amplc, hears her mother laughing and assumes that she is happy. An adult might hear something forced about the mother's laughter and infer that the woman is cwcring up her feelings. While young children cannot make such a sophisticated f^rci^c，by age 6 they can usually infer that another perron’s th에ghts mav <7ttcr, m ”]nr own_ B，' aec 8 or so, they realize that another person can think about thar thoughts. And by age 10 they arc able to infer uhar another pcr«>n is thinking while ar the same time inferring that their own thoughts arc the sub¬ject of another person's thoughts. A child might think. “Johnny is angry with me, and he knows that I know he is angry.” The process of developing fully accurate social inference is gradual and continues into late adolescence (Shantz, 1975). A second component of social knowledge is the child’s understanding of social relationships. Children gradually accumulate information and understand¬ing about the obligations of friendship, such as fairness and loyalty, respect for authority, and the concepts of legality and justice. A third aspect of social knowl¬edge is social regulations, such as social rules and c이ivcntk>ns. Many of these convcntk)ns arc learned first by rote or imitation. Later, they can become less rigid, depending on the child’s ability to make correct social inferences or the	 ■	-	广	-	>	-•			u: Stages of Understatiding Psychologists who study social cognition find that it develops in a predictable sequence. Some even call the steps in this sequence “stages.” Most researchers agree that children get beyond the worst of their egocentrism by age 6 or 7. They stop centering on only one aspect of a situation and gradually get better at mak¬ing social inferences. Beyond that, researchers and theorists disagree. How many stages arc there? Arc these universal，or do they depend on the particular social system in which a child lives? The field of studying social cognition is very active at the moment, and it is too new for very definitive conclusions. Instead, wc might look at Sclnian's (1976) studies on children’s understanding of friendship to illustrate their developing knowledge about social rclati이、ships.