FOUR MODELS FOR DEALING WITH WIFE ASSAULT/ABUSE
The American home is said to be possibly the most dangerous place for women and children. Excluding wars and riots, violence between family members occurs more often than it does between any other individuals (Anderson, 1984). How wifebeating is viewed influences the steps taken to prevent it. If wifebeaters are thought to be mentally ill, then psychotherapy would be needed. If men hit their wives due to their early learning and/or the very structure of society itself, then cultural rules and values may need to be examined. Biological factors may need to be addressed as an additional factor (Roy, 1977). This paper will review the dynamics of wifebeating within the context of four models: the Psychiatric and Psychodynamic Model; the Social/Feminist Model; the Social Learning Model; and the Biosocial Model.
Psychiatric and Psychodynamic Model
Early beliefs associated with wifebattering include that the female victim is to blame for her situation with comments such as "Why does she stay, if she doesn't like it?" or "What did she do to provoke him?" A classic example of victim blame can be found in "The Wifebeater's Wife" (Snell, Rosenwald & Robey, 1964, as cited by Perlman & Cozby, 1983). This study concluded that the family structure included the woman as "castrating" and "masochistic" and the man as "passive." Times when the husband assaulted the wife were seen as a way of holding the family together, providing a method for the husband to assert himself as male, and alleviating her feelings of guilt by punishing the wife for unfeminine behavior.
More recently, psychological characteristics of both partners are stated as conflicts over dependency and autonomy, and increasing power of women interacting with unconscious fear of women in men. Relationships that include beating are sometimes characterized as one partner being overly submissive and one being attacking, ...