A Deeper Understanding of Child to Parent Violence (CPV): Personal Traits, Family Context, and Parenting

• Published date: 01 August 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X211065588
• Author: Keren Cuervo
• Date: 01 August 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X211065588

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2023, Vol. 67(10-11) 1079 –1105

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X211065588

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

A Deeper Understanding

of Child to Parent Violence

(CPV): Personal Traits, Family

Context, and Parenting

Keren Cuervo1

Abstract

The increase in the rate of child to parent violence is a concern for society in various

countries. Different psychological and personal characteristics tend to define the

profile of the minors who commit this type of offense. Various social factors have

been also related to this type of violence, including exposure to violence, the family

environment and parenting. The relationship between child to parent violence and

previous exposure to violence has yet to be clarified. Comparatively little research

on this crime involving samples from juvenile court has been undertaken. This study

uses a standardized measure (YLS/CMI) to determine the extent to which three of

the most extensively studied groups of factors in child to parent violence—the family

context, parenting and the adolescents’ psychological characteristics are relevant in

the predicting this type of violence. The sample consisted of a total of 342 juveniles

from a Juvenile Court in Eastern Spain, dealt with under the terms of Organic Law

5/2000 regulating the Criminal Responsibility of Minors. A child to parent violence

group is compared with a control group committing the entire range of offenses.

Personal variables, antisocial personality and exposure to violence play a clear role

in the commission of this type of crime. Parenting has a determinant influence even

when compared with family characteristics. What affects the commission of this type

of violence in the most serious cases is therefore not having been exposed to it, but

instead the individual’s upbringing and their current relationship with their parents.

Keywords

child to parent violence, parenting, YLS/CMI Inventory, exposure to violence, juvenile

offender

1Universitat Jaume I, Castelló de la Plana, España

Corresponding Author:

Keren Cuervo, Department of Developmental, Educational and Social Psychology and Methodology,

Universitat Jaume I, Avenida de Vicent Sos Baynat, s/n, Castellón 12071, Spain.

Email: Cuervo@uji.es

1065588IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X211065588International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyCuervo

research-article2021

1080 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology 67(10-11)

Introduction

Child to parent violence is one of the types of violence that causes the most concern in

our society today. Child to parent violence can be defined as any reiterative act com-

mitted by a son or daughter toward his or her parents, (or to the people performing that

role) which causes physical, psychological, or financial harm (Pereira et al., 2017).

One of the most used definition is the one provided by Cottrell (2003) who defines

child to parent violence as “any harmful act by a child intended to gain power and

control over a parent. The abuse can be physical, psychological or financial.” Other

authors such as Patterson and Fisher (2002), consider the CPV when others in the fam-

ily feel threatened, intimidated, or controlled by their son or daughter and if they

believe that must adjust their own behavior due to threats or violence.

Meanwhile, “battered parent syndrome” was described by Harbin and Madden

(1979) as physical assaults or verbal and nonverbal threats of physical harm and dis-

tortions in the hierarchy of generational authority. This involves various acts, such as

using real harm, threats of harm, intimidation, or different manipulative techniques,

which the child uses to consequently gradually gain power and control (Cottrell,

2001).

It is difficult to provide accurate data about the prevalence of this crime. The differ-

ent methodologies, procedures, and samples used in studies and even the definition of

the violence taken into account in each one hinders comparisons of results and rates,

and hampers accurate measurement of this phenomenon (Gallagher, 2008; Holt, 2012).

Nevertheless, the increase in the rate of occurrence of this violence in different coun-

tries seems to be a concern to society (Gallagher, 2008; Kennair & Mellor, 2007). The

rates range from 7% to 29% in the United States, Spain, Canada, France, and Australia

in some studies of its prevalence (Bobic, 2002; Cottrell & Monk, 2004; Romero et al.,

2007; Selwyn & Meakings, 2016). The differences in rates may be due to the difficul-

ties for parents in reporting the assaults. The differences in rates may be due to the

difficulties for parents in reporting the assaults, the differences in procedures men-

tioned above (methodologies, procedures, and samples), but also to differences in cul-

tures and the penal systems of the different countries. The minor has criminal

responsibility at a different age depending on the CPV legislation of each country.

Spain has a specific legislation that includes CPV (Circular 1/2010 from the Chief

Prosecutor on crimes by children toward relatives). Minors are criminally responsible

from the age of 14 as in Bulgaria for example, whereas in England and Ireland these

ages are 10 and 12 years, respectively. According to Condry and Miles (2014), in the

UK, adolescent to parent violence lacks of appropriate legislation or policies. If the

adolescent was under the age of 18, adolescent to parent violence was not officially

defined as domestic violence. This fact led to a lack of official figures regarding the

prevalence of the problem as well as to a deficiency in the support for families. In 2013

this age was extended to 16 years old, making visible the perpetrators of these age

groups.

The reluctance has been related to the parents’ feelings of stigma, shame and guilt

at having a child who abuses them. Parents tend then to avoid seeking help from