, the nature of the intended harm--physical pain and suffering--is unique" (16). Aside from the difference in the types of pain they cause, he also holds that simply regarding all forms of coercive behavior as a group makes the determination of the causes of particular behaviors much more difficult. Yet Gelles also feels that it is necessary to understand the broader context in which intimate violence takes place and makes room, whenever possible, for data, theories, and interventions relevant to other types of coercive behavior in families.
Gelles first addresses a number of myths and controversial positions surrounding the question of violence within families. This section is of primary importance because Gelles is concerned with those widely dispersed notions that most people accept as fact. Without being aware of it, therefore, health-care workers, social workers, and other professionals who come in contact with abusive families may fail to get a clear view of the situation because of biased assumptions. A prime example of such faulty thinking is the assumption that "family violence is confined to lower-class families and the families of racial and ethnic minorities" (6). This notion arises from the fact that there is more reported violence among these groups. This overrepresentation of lower-class families in the statistics of familial abuse stems in part from the fact that simply because they are lower class "families run a greater risk of being correctly and falsely labeled abusers if their children are seen with injuries" (7). Yet the complete dismissal of social factors in intimate violence works no better.
Researchers have found, of course, that significant amounts of violence exist within families at every social level. But the result has often been a trend toward assuming that since family violence occurs in all groups "social factors are not relevant" (7). Yet, as Gelles points out, this is just as mislead...