Hello,
Could you please read my essay and give me some feedback?
The prompt is:
Discuss your thoughts about courtship violence in the year 2007. The text discusses that this is evidenced as young as 12years old, what are we as a society doing to address this? What are families doing to address this issue and do you believe that courtship violence is at a higher risk for preteens from families with a history of violence?
Thank you in advance
Frederic
-------------
At first sight, from a French point of view, the most surprising element as far as courtship violence is concerned, is that violence seems so deeply ingrained in the American culture that researchers, activists, and intervention services feel the need to tackle this issue because of its prevalence in the USA. From a French point of view, the fact that violence could be so prevalent in the American society and that violent acts could be so horrendous is somewhat flabbergasting. Consequently, the study of violence between intimate partners during this semester may hep me understand whether domestic violence is actually more present in the US than in any other western country or the American society exaggerates its frequency of occurrence and intensity. American society as a whole, from institutions to family and from theorists to interveners, should evaluate both the nature and the scope of courtship violence in the US to implement effective public policies, with a particular attention for preteens from families with a history of violence who are allegedly more at a higher risk.
First, public awareness as regards courtship violence has been made possible because, in spite of the relative unreliability of the previous studies, public and private interveners have already attempted to cope with this issue. Indeed, the growing concern for the creation and implementation of preventive and curative methods results from the interest that has been aroused in researchers, activists, and intervention services for both victims and per perpetrators of courtship violence for the closing decades. One could chastise the inconsistence of the methodologies that have been employed or one castigate the irrelevance of the data that have been utilized, nonetheless one should acknowledge that that awkward attempts have had the merit to arouse interest in the public for the painful situation of all actors involved in courtship violence. Furthermore, the emergence of that field of study has also allowed the conception of educational materials, the enhancement of the general knowledge of law enforcement and criminal justice agents, the implementation of high school and college policies, and the expansion of education, counselling and social work professions. However, this burgeoning field of research must develop the scope of its activities in addition to adopt models integrating various psychological paradigms to reach its maturity. Both private and public sectors could lend credibility to this domain on condition that theoretical and practical efforts were made. For instance, private and public organizations should fund research focusing on the detection of the most significant causal variables or on the improvement of the theoretical framework currently in use, and especially through the adoption of the evolutionary psychology to understand the potential phylogenic functions of violence between intimate partners.
Second, American families are the crux of the courtship violence matter as the cradle of the emergence of this issue and as tanks of resources for fighting this scourge. On the one hand, no research can be conducted as long as families do persist to put a veil on the problem of courtship violence. Intimate violence during the pre-marriage phases can be studied providing victims and witnesses disclose the nature and scope of the violence to the authorities and relief agencies. Indeed, the main difficulty perceived by researchers is that available data do not meet the reality of the facts because victims and witnesses apprehend to unravel acts of victimization due to cultural, economic or institutional factors. Consequently, such behaviour harms the production of efficient preventive and curative policies and, therefore, checks the end of the sufferance for all the actors involved. On the other hand, in my opinion, American families are undoubtedly the richest sources of emotional and financial support for both children and adults implicated in courtship violence. Actually, victims need comforting from loving ones when plagued with their partner's violent behaviour. Later, these victims will need a psychological and economic support from their family to reconstruct their life, whatever their choice (i.e. with the same partner or without him/her), as well. Finally, as regards the particular cases of courtship violence during the high-school years, families must keep in mind that they are legally and morally responsible for the behaviour of their offspring. Subsequently, adults should teach their children their rights and duties when they woo a partner, namely in the words of French revolutionaries in the fourth article of The Declaration of the Human Rights (1789): "Liberty consists in being able to do anything that does not harm others".
Third, the possible causal connection between the preteens' experiences in families with a history of violence and these children's possible involvement in courtship violence still remains undemonstrated to say the least. Among the tree main models that serve to apprehend the delicate issue of courtship violence, the family dysfunction approach especially emphasizes the intergenerational transmission (IGT) theory. According to the theorists who sponsor this perspective, violent behaviour are deeply rooted in the children's observation and imitation of their parents' violent behaviour to settle issues in their own lives, and notably with their intimate partners. Offspring's' preference for violence as a means to resolve conflicts gives rise to courtship violence and then domestic violence. However, some scholars disagree with this vision because their studies have challenged that intergenerational transmission of violence, owing to, among other things, the lack of accuracy of the methodologies employed. Indeed, they often do not differentiate defensive and aggressive behaviours that are experienced, either directly or indirectly, such as with Strauss's Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). Moreover, the intergenerational transmission theory has not been backed by reliable and rigorous multivariate statistical techniques yet. Furthermore, the intergenerational transmission theory is also highly debatable since it cannot explain why most violent daters do not primarily come from violent homes or why children who experienced or witnessed domestic violence in their household of origin do not systematically engage in violent relationships with their partners. Besides, scholars underpinning intergenerational transmission theory are still unable to explicate whether an individual's behaviour is attributable to the appurtenance to the same gender that the one of the violent parent. Finally, these scientists cannot elucidate whether violent daters have been more influenced by their parents or other role models, such as close peers, partners, or prominent figures in the mass media.
Finally, courtship violence can seemingly be eliminated thanks to the involvement of numerous actors, from the individuals to the state. First, the commitment of the American society as a whole to eradicate courtship violence in the USA could stem from the practical implementation of reliable findings resulting from theoretical studies that could be of use to the healthcare and criminal justice systems in their endeavours to implement valuable policies of prevention and cure intended for victims, perpetrators and their families. Besides, American families could turn into the keystone of successful recoveries and cures instead of being systematically the source of plaguing violence during courtship on condition that families assume responsibility for acting to curtail courtship violence and not ignore it. In addition, the family dysfunction approach and its intergenerational transmission of violence is far from substantiating the hypothesis assuming that preteens from families with a history of violence could be particularly exposed to courtship violence as either victims or perpetrators. That conclusion does certainly not, in any way, excuse violence between spousal and even less curbs the detrimental consequences on a child's development on account of violence between parents, but, rather provides hope for those who could have endured such pains during their childhood. Consequently, previous experiences do not constitute an indestructible straitjacket: those who have experienced or witnessed violence in their parent's couple are not obliged to reiterate violent behaviours when they woo an individual.
Could you please read my essay and give me some feedback?
The prompt is:
Discuss your thoughts about courtship violence in the year 2007. The text discusses that this is evidenced as young as 12years old, what are we as a society doing to address this? What are families doing to address this issue and do you believe that courtship violence is at a higher risk for preteens from families with a history of violence?
Thank you in advance
Frederic
-------------
At first sight, from a French point of view, the most surprising element as far as courtship violence is concerned, is that violence seems so deeply ingrained in the American culture that researchers, activists, and intervention services feel the need to tackle this issue because of its prevalence in the USA. From a French point of view, the fact that violence could be so prevalent in the American society and that violent acts could be so horrendous is somewhat flabbergasting. Consequently, the study of violence between intimate partners during this semester may hep me understand whether domestic violence is actually more present in the US than in any other western country or the American society exaggerates its frequency of occurrence and intensity. American society as a whole, from institutions to family and from theorists to interveners, should evaluate both the nature and the scope of courtship violence in the US to implement effective public policies, with a particular attention for preteens from families with a history of violence who are allegedly more at a higher risk.
First, public awareness as regards courtship violence has been made possible because, in spite of the relative unreliability of the previous studies, public and private interveners have already attempted to cope with this issue. Indeed, the growing concern for the creation and implementation of preventive and curative methods results from the interest that has been aroused in researchers, activists, and intervention services for both victims and per perpetrators of courtship violence for the closing decades. One could chastise the inconsistence of the methodologies that have been employed or one castigate the irrelevance of the data that have been utilized, nonetheless one should acknowledge that that awkward attempts have had the merit to arouse interest in the public for the painful situation of all actors involved in courtship violence. Furthermore, the emergence of that field of study has also allowed the conception of educational materials, the enhancement of the general knowledge of law enforcement and criminal justice agents, the implementation of high school and college policies, and the expansion of education, counselling and social work professions. However, this burgeoning field of research must develop the scope of its activities in addition to adopt models integrating various psychological paradigms to reach its maturity. Both private and public sectors could lend credibility to this domain on condition that theoretical and practical efforts were made. For instance, private and public organizations should fund research focusing on the detection of the most significant causal variables or on the improvement of the theoretical framework currently in use, and especially through the adoption of the evolutionary psychology to understand the potential phylogenic functions of violence between intimate partners.
Second, American families are the crux of the courtship violence matter as the cradle of the emergence of this issue and as tanks of resources for fighting this scourge. On the one hand, no research can be conducted as long as families do persist to put a veil on the problem of courtship violence. Intimate violence during the pre-marriage phases can be studied providing victims and witnesses disclose the nature and scope of the violence to the authorities and relief agencies. Indeed, the main difficulty perceived by researchers is that available data do not meet the reality of the facts because victims and witnesses apprehend to unravel acts of victimization due to cultural, economic or institutional factors. Consequently, such behaviour harms the production of efficient preventive and curative policies and, therefore, checks the end of the sufferance for all the actors involved. On the other hand, in my opinion, American families are undoubtedly the richest sources of emotional and financial support for both children and adults implicated in courtship violence. Actually, victims need comforting from loving ones when plagued with their partner's violent behaviour. Later, these victims will need a psychological and economic support from their family to reconstruct their life, whatever their choice (i.e. with the same partner or without him/her), as well. Finally, as regards the particular cases of courtship violence during the high-school years, families must keep in mind that they are legally and morally responsible for the behaviour of their offspring. Subsequently, adults should teach their children their rights and duties when they woo a partner, namely in the words of French revolutionaries in the fourth article of The Declaration of the Human Rights (1789): "Liberty consists in being able to do anything that does not harm others".
Third, the possible causal connection between the preteens' experiences in families with a history of violence and these children's possible involvement in courtship violence still remains undemonstrated to say the least. Among the tree main models that serve to apprehend the delicate issue of courtship violence, the family dysfunction approach especially emphasizes the intergenerational transmission (IGT) theory. According to the theorists who sponsor this perspective, violent behaviour are deeply rooted in the children's observation and imitation of their parents' violent behaviour to settle issues in their own lives, and notably with their intimate partners. Offspring's' preference for violence as a means to resolve conflicts gives rise to courtship violence and then domestic violence. However, some scholars disagree with this vision because their studies have challenged that intergenerational transmission of violence, owing to, among other things, the lack of accuracy of the methodologies employed. Indeed, they often do not differentiate defensive and aggressive behaviours that are experienced, either directly or indirectly, such as with Strauss's Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). Moreover, the intergenerational transmission theory has not been backed by reliable and rigorous multivariate statistical techniques yet. Furthermore, the intergenerational transmission theory is also highly debatable since it cannot explain why most violent daters do not primarily come from violent homes or why children who experienced or witnessed domestic violence in their household of origin do not systematically engage in violent relationships with their partners. Besides, scholars underpinning intergenerational transmission theory are still unable to explicate whether an individual's behaviour is attributable to the appurtenance to the same gender that the one of the violent parent. Finally, these scientists cannot elucidate whether violent daters have been more influenced by their parents or other role models, such as close peers, partners, or prominent figures in the mass media.
Finally, courtship violence can seemingly be eliminated thanks to the involvement of numerous actors, from the individuals to the state. First, the commitment of the American society as a whole to eradicate courtship violence in the USA could stem from the practical implementation of reliable findings resulting from theoretical studies that could be of use to the healthcare and criminal justice systems in their endeavours to implement valuable policies of prevention and cure intended for victims, perpetrators and their families. Besides, American families could turn into the keystone of successful recoveries and cures instead of being systematically the source of plaguing violence during courtship on condition that families assume responsibility for acting to curtail courtship violence and not ignore it. In addition, the family dysfunction approach and its intergenerational transmission of violence is far from substantiating the hypothesis assuming that preteens from families with a history of violence could be particularly exposed to courtship violence as either victims or perpetrators. That conclusion does certainly not, in any way, excuse violence between spousal and even less curbs the detrimental consequences on a child's development on account of violence between parents, but, rather provides hope for those who could have endured such pains during their childhood. Consequently, previous experiences do not constitute an indestructible straitjacket: those who have experienced or witnessed violence in their parent's couple are not obliged to reiterate violent behaviours when they woo an individual.
