Violence in Societies - Essay Example

VIOLENCE IN SOCIETIES Violence in its simplest and basic terms can best be defined as an act of aggression against a person or the property of being turbulent or wild. This state can result to injuries or even destruction (Giddens, Duneier, Appelbaum & Carr, 2000). According to the world report on violence and health, violence has been defined as the intentional use of power or physical force against oneself, another individual or against a group or community that results in or has the possibility of manifesting into injury, psychological harm, mal-development, deprivation, or even death. Violence manifests itself in various forms and can be witnessed in various spheres of life. Therefore violence can end up taking interpersonal, societal, or even cultural forms of violence. These forms of violence are becoming a worldwide concern because of their profound effects on the physical health, mental health, and social wellbeing of victims and their families, as well as the perpetrators of these violent actions. Cultural form of violence entails abuses perpetrated in various spheres of life that touch on aspects such as race, ethnicity, traditions, perceptions, beliefs and values of a community. For example in health and social care, cultural violence can manifest or be perpetrated to victims in the form of discrimination on the basis of color, or propagating traditions that advocate for male dominance over women or regard women as secondary or inferior to men. It can also be on the basis of religion or variation in the beliefs and values of a people (Browne & Hamilton, 2005). Societal violence on the other hand refers to the violent acts or abuses perpetrated to individuals by social structures and institutions. This normally takes the form of deprivation or neglect by the authorities. For example societal violence can manifest in health and social care through deprivation of basic medical services by social and medical workers. The other typology of violence which will be the main focus of this paper is interpersonal violence. Interpersonal refers to anything that takes place or occurs among persons or involves several people. Interpersonal violence which this paper will critically examine and explore refers to a form of violence that occurs between or among individuals. This type of violence offers the opportunity to understand the context in which violence takes placed and hoe the various forms of violence interact. This type of violence highlights and distinguishes the four modes in which violence may be perpetrated or inflicted in individuals. It asserts that violence can be inflicted sexually through sexual harassment of either children or adults. It can also take physical form where injuries are inflicted on the victim (Coker, Smith, Bethea, King & McKeown, 2000). Deprivation and neglect of individuals is also another form of interpersonal violence. Finally psychological attack is also another form of violence which involves abuse of individuals in the form of mental torture. This form of violence can result to mental injury or even illnesses. Interpersonal violence further goes ahead to categorize violence into other sub types which include self-directed violence, interpersonal violence and collective violence. Self-directed violence is the type of violence in which the assailant or the perpetrator and the victim are the same person or individual. It is further divided into other forms of individual violence which are self-abuse and suicide. Interpersonal violence on the other hand is violence between persons or individuals. It is further subdivided into other forms of violence like family and intimate partner violence and community violence (Giddens, Duneier, Appelbaum & Carr, 2000). The family violence entails abuses such as elder abuse, child mistreatment, and intimate partner violence. Community violence is further subdivided into acquaintance and stranger violence. It includes violence in the work place and institutions, property crimes, and youth violence. Collective violence is the type of violence that involves groups or is committed by a large group of individuals. This can further be subdivided into political, social, and economic violence. In health and social care the victims of violence or assailants may be service providers or the customers. The service providers in this case are the nurses, doctors, security guards, therapists, doctors, receptionist, technicians, drivers, and social workers. The clients are those after the services of these professionals and may include those who are mentally ill or those who are after medical treatment (Krug, Mercy, Dahlberg & Zwi, 2002). Violence and abuses can occur in various health and social care settings like hospital, residential treatment, non-residential treatment or services, community care and field work which encompasses home health care and social services. Forms of abuses are likely to be witnessed in areas like waiting rooms, hall way, treatment rooms, dining area, vans, cars, kitchens, and bedrooms. The activities that are most likely used to perpetrate violence in the health and social care include; scanning for weapons by security guards, patient intake, transferring of patients, bathing, feeding patients, driving patients, administering medicine, interacting with the clients family and conducting therapy to patients. The form of violence likely to be witnessed may manifest in the form of sexual harassment for example by a patient to staff who is attending to them at home. Physical violence can also be witnessed especially when dealing with clients who are mentally disturbed or are ill (Szaflarski, 2006). Psychological abuse or violence can also be experience especially when dealing with arrogant and unwelcoming individuals who can harass and mistreat or discriminate. This can be detrimental especially to vulnerable individuals who may end up suffering psychologically. Interpersonal violence is regarded as an outcome of interaction of many factors that exist in levels. The levels include individual level, relationship level, community, and societal level. At the individual level biological factors and personal history of individuals are implicated in determining how individuals behave and increase their likelihood of becoming an assailant or victim of violence. Among the factors in this level are psychological or personality disorders of individuals, child mistreatment, alcohol and substance abuse and history of behaving aggressively or having experienced abuse. All these factors influence the personality of individuals. Personal relationships such peers, intimate partners, family, and friends also influence the risk of becoming an assailant of violence or victim. For example having violent friends or being raised in a harsh background may influence the personality of an individual whether the person engages in violence or becomes a victim. Existence of local drug trade, population density, and level of unemployment also influence violence. And this is in the community context that involves schools, neighborhoods, and workplaces. Societal factors which influence occurrence of violence include social and economic policies that determine the socioeconomic inequalities between individuals. Cultural and social norms like those that support male dominance over women, dominance of children by their parents and norms that endorse violence as a way of conflict resolution may also promote violence in health and social care. Various theories have been developed to try and explain the different forms of violence. Theories tend to explain occurrence of violence and how violence is an inevitable act in the human society. Theory therefore seeks to define violence in a holistic manner. One of the theories that tend to explain violence in the society is culture of violence theory. This theory postulates that in large pluralistic societies some subcultures usually develop norms that allow the use of physical violence to a greater extent than the dominant culture (Resnick, Ireland & Borowsky, 2004). Therefore violence tends to be prevalent in violent societies than in peaceful societies. Another theory is the ecological theory. This theory tends to link violence in the family to the wider social environment. The broader environment includes the formal and informal social networks of the family, culture, family history and the closer family setting and circumstances present. The framework offers a basis for a risk- theory of domestic violence. In this case it tends to explain the risk and occurrence of violence in the society. Another theory is the evolutionary theory. This theory suggests that with the evolution of societies from simple to complex, families have continued to grow smaller and nuclear in form. Thus social relations have also become more structured and somehow more ambiguous. This change of events has therefore lead to emergence of different styles of parenting. And this has been demonstrated in tighter family networks where punishment has been the tool used to secure obedience from the children. In these families less independence is granted to children. This theory therefore suggests that obedience is valued in highly structured hierarchical societies. Feminist theory is also another theory that tends to explain domestic violence in respect to wife abuse. From the perspective of wife abuse the theory explains the phenomena using four common strains (Jewkes, 2002). One of the strains suggest that as men are the dominant class, they tend to have access to both material and symbolic resources while women are disregarded and viewed as inferior. Another strain suggests that intimate partner violence is a common and predictable factor of normal life in families. Another strain also propose or postulate that the experiences of women are often defined as inferior due to male domination in almost every sphere of life. Finally feminist perspective tends to advocate a lot for women. Other theories that integrate biological, sociological, and psychological perspectives in explaining the occurrence of violence include bio psychosocial perspective. This theory tries to link biological factors such as testosterone levels, social factors such as quality of relationship, income and psychological factors like hostility and egocentrism in explaining the causative model of violence in the society. Exchange theory postulates that individuals perpetrate violence and abuse others because it they stand to gain from it. In this case the benefits of abuse always tend to outweigh the cost. This is common with men when they want their control to be felt by women. Social learning theory suggests that family violence arises from both contextual and situational factors. Contextual factor entails aggressive personality, violence in the family, stress, and the characteristics of an individual or couples. Situational on the other hand entails such things like financial difficulties and substance abuse. It also stretches these factors onto the influence of children being brought up within a combination of these factors. Public health has also had to deal with the consequences of violence. The abuse is usually between service providers and clients. In this case either of them can be the perpetrator or assailant and the other the victim of violence. Violence has impacted negatively in this sector. For example to the health service providers, violence has increases absenteeism of the staff to work. When the workers are threatened by the work environment or face risks of being violated they tend to skip work and this result into high cases of absentees at work. Demoralization of workers is also another negative impact that violence present in the public health sector. When workers sense risk of violation at their work places or stations they will be discouraged and this may make them to be less enthusiastic about their jobs. This can lead to boycotting of duties or even go slows in the place of work hence frustrating service delivery. Violence and especially one that result into physical injury or death can reduce the number of health care personnel causing shortages (Garcia, 2002). This causes strains on the available human personnel hence compromising delivery of health services. Management of this injuries and damages can increase the cost of operation hence shifting attention from service delivery to treatment of health workers. On the other hand patients or clients also have high chances of becoming victims. Post-traumatic stress is one of the negative impacts likely to be experienced by abused clients by healthcare staff. Violence also tends to frustrate recovery process hence reducing the healing time of individuals. Violence also increases cases of illnesses and injuries to abused individuals. This can be in the form of sexual abuse, physical injury, or psychological torture that results into mental illness. Neglect is also another consequence of violence in the public health sector. This occurs when the healthcare staff feels threatened by the conduct of the patients hence stay away from them. This leads to neglect of patients which may in turn worsen their condition which require maximum attention at the moment. In conclusion violence is real in the public health sector. Victims and assailants of violence come from both sides. Even though some form of violence is hidden, the other bit which is evident and widely observed in the public domain has proved detrimental and is adversely impacting on both the health of service providers and clients or patients. If not checked, the objectives of the public health sector are bound to fail. Part two: assignment two http://www.who.int/violenceprevention/approach/en This source is a world health organization report on the prevention of violence. Societal violence in the world report on violence and health has been categorized under interpersonal violence according to victim perpetrator relationship. It therefore defines societal violence as abuse or violence between individuals in a society or violence perpetrated by larger groups of individuals. This form of violence can take place between acquaintances or strangers. The forms of violence in this category include among others; violence in institutions and work places, youth violence, violence related to property crimes and assault committed by strangers (www.who.int). Some of the factors that have been implicated as being the causes of societal violence according to this source are cultural norms that support violence. This may refer to those cultures that propagate violence as means of conflict resolution or those that support values that undermine the female gender and further support gender violence. Poor rule of law in the society is also another cause of societal violence as it tends to propagate inequality in the society. Poverty and weak economic safety nets in the society has also been linked to societal violence because some individuals engage in violence for survival hence committing crimes of survival (Moser, 2004). Gender, social and economic inequalities have also been pointed in fuelling violence in the society. This entails lack of respect for the opposite sex, societal stratification according to social and economic status. Rapid social change has also been highlighted as a causal factor of violence in the society and this entail changes that come with modernity. The public health approach of addressing violence in the society according to this source is categorized into four steps. The steps involve identification of the problem, which entail systematic collection of data in order to arrive to the violence problem (García, Jansen, Ellsberg, Heise & Watts, 2005). The subsequent steps involve identifying the risks and protective factors of violence.in this step, identification of the causes of violence, assailants, or perpetrators of violence and victims are identified and defined. The next step involves development and evaluation of interventions for the perpetrators and victims of violence. This is where the interventions are tested to find out to which audience or group they are relevant to. The final step is the implementation stage which involves evaluation of the impacts and cost effectiveness of the intervention for managing violence in the society. This source has also used a framework to explain how violence is the outcome of interaction of other factors that result into societal violence. These factors are represented in levels. For example at the individual level, it advance the argument that biological factors and personal history influence the behavior of individuals and this can explain their fate of either becoming victims or perpetrators of violence. Another argument put forth is the type of relationships that exist between individuals. The type of relationship an individual has between his family or friend can influence their behavior. For example when one has violent friends he will tend to be violent and vice versa. The community level of interaction represents the context in which the various relationships between individuals exist. This is mostly influenced by population density, and the existence of illegal activities which can have adverse effects on the behavior of individuals (Herrenkohl, Maguin, Hill, Hawkins, Abbott & Catalano, 2000). The societal level on the other hand entails social and economic policies that determine whether violence will exist or become absent if not reduced in the society. It advance the argument that bad policies will increase social and economic inequalities and this is recipe for violence it also include norms that subjugate women and children and also those that endorse violence in conflict resolution. The gaps present in this source in their effort to address societal violence are failure to use theoretical perspectives in addressing societal violence. There is only one theory used. This is ecological theory that tends to explain the interrelationship of factors that cause societal violence. It ought to have addressed other theories that involve explanation of domestic violence and societal violence (Funk, Baldacci, Pasold & Baumgardner, 2004). Another gap is tendency to focus and emphasizing too much on the preventive approach rather than concentrating on the causes of societal violence. Causes of violence have been briefly addressed and more focus put on prevention approach. It also fails to identify the settings in which this form violence takes place. There is too mush generalization of information. For example it ought to have narrowed down to specific institutions and individuals who are likely to be victims or perpetrators of violence. Statistical representation of cases is also lacking. The source ought to have used figures to quantify the scope of this type of violence to the society. This source also emphasized too much on the societal form of violence and ignored or failed to capture other forms of violence like cultural violence which is also prevalent. www.cpha.ca/en/programs/policy/violence.aspx This source is from the Canadian public health association, a public health perspective on violence in the society. According to this source violence is slowly taking other forms other than the previous one which focused on physical infliction of injuries. Other forms of violence that are increasingly becoming prevalent in our society are neglect, sexual assault, harassment, verbal attacks, and insults. Women and children are the most likely victims of violence and the forms of violence committed to them are usually perpetrated by people known to them. Most of these violations are normally calculated or planned. These violent actions tend to affect those who experience the ordeal directly and even the onlookers or by standers. The effects of these abuses can end up having both short or long term effects on the spiritual, physical, and mental welfare of individuals. This source also suggests an approach that can be used to address the issue of violence in the society. It advocates for thorough understanding of information regarding the epidemiology of violence, social values underlying human relationships and effective strategies that can be adopted to prevent violence from occurring and reducing its adverse effects (Surratt, Inciardi, Kurtz & Kiley, 2004). This source outlines the following strategies in addressing the issue of violence. First is building a healthy public policy. This entails formulation of reform policies in various disciplines and sectors across the society. One of the sectors that will require policy reforms in this case is the justice system. These policies will protect members of the society for being violated and also help prosecute perpetrators of violence. Other reforms include fiscal and social policies that prevent social inequalities (www.cpha.ca). Health reforms can also help in early intervention and prevention of violence. Another strategy is reorientation of health services which involves a shift of perception from a curative aspect to a preventative aspect. The final strategy is strengthening community action to achieve a violent free society. This ensures full participation of community members regardless of their social status in setting priorities, making decisions, planning and implementing strategies that help reduce the incidences of violence in the society. The source has also gone ahead to suggest recommendations for those involved in changing our perceptions of violence in the health sector. This could include policy makers or even decision makers. It could also be borrowed by the health care staff and clients or health care seekers. Some of the recommendations include acknowledging violence as a priority issue in the health sector. This would entail government and non-governmental organizations addressing the issue of violence by addressing the society’s tolerance to violence and factors that favor its existence in the society. Another recommendation involves setting national priority goals to eradicate violence in the society (Simon, 2007). Developing programs to address social and economic inequality could also be another option that helps kick violence out of the society. This involves funding of projects or programs by the government and promoting community based programs that would help eliminate violence in the society. Refresher courses for those in the health care profession could also help in violence detection, early intervention, and management of the increasing cases of violence in the society. Public education could also be conducted to the masses in order to sensitize them on matters related to violence. Documentation of the existing cases, effects, and extent of violence in the society would also help in addressing violence. Finally effective treatment and promotion of violence free society has also been suggested by the source as a way to reduce and prevent the prevalent cases of violence. The gaps evident in this source are widespread generalization without emphasis on specific aspects of violence. For example under sexual assault there is no evidence on the type of sexual assault or the specific gender likely to be victim. There is also lack of theories to explain the occurrence of violence in the society. There is too much emphasis on preventive approach than violence identification approach. Another gap is the lack adequate intervention measures for perpetrators (Rutherford, Zwi, Grove & Butchart, 2007). Most interventions are focusing on the victims of violence. There is also little information on men facing violence in the society. Most information is on children and women abuse. A lot of information is also not based on research. Most of the information is based on narrative and observational approach of research which does not provide an accurate state of affairs on the ground. Application of appropriate methodologies in research could help reveal the accurate information on the extent and effects of violence in the society. References Browne, K. D., & Hamilton-Giachritsis, C. (2005). The influence of violent media on children and adolescents: a public-health approach. The Lancet, 365(9460), 702-710. Coker, A. L., Smith, P. H., Bethea, L., King, M. R., & McKeown, R. E. (2000). Physical health consequences of physical and psychological intimate partner violence. Archives of family medicine, 9(5), 451. Funk, J. B., Baldacci, H. B., Pasold, T., & Baumgardner, J. (2004). Violence exposure in real-life, video games, television, movies, and the internet: is there desensitization?. Journal of adolescence, 27(1), 23-39. García-Moreno, C., Jansen, H. A. F. M., Ellsberg, M., Heise, L., & Watts, C. (2005). WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence against women. Geneva: World Health Organization, 204. Garcia-Moreno, C. (2002). Dilemmas and opportunities for an appropriate health-service response to violence against women. The Lancet, 359(9316), 1509-1514. Giddens, A., Duneier, M., Appelbaum, R. P., & Carr, D. (2000). Introduction to sociology. New York: WW Norton. Herrenkohl, T. I., Maguin, E., Hill, K. G., Hawkins, J. D., Abbott, R. D., & Catalano, R. F. (2000). Developmental risk factors for youth violence. Journal of Adolescent Health, 26(3), 176-186 Jewkes, R. (2002). Intimate partner violence: causes and prevention. The lancet, 359(9315), 1423-1429. Krug, E. G., Mercy, J. A., Dahlberg, L. L., & Zwi, A. B. (2002). The world report on violence and health. The lancet, 360(9339), 1083-1088. Moser, C. O. (2004). Urban violence and insecurity: an introductory roadmap. IIED International Institute for Environment and Development. Rutherford, A., Zwi, A. B., Grove, N. J., & Butchart, A. (2007). Violence: a priority for public health?(part 2). Journal of epidemiology and community health, 61(9), 764-770. Resnick, M. D., Ireland, M., & Borowsky, I. (2004). Youth violence perpetration: what protects? What predicts? Findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Journal of adolescent health, 35(5), 424-e1. Szaflarski, M. (2006). The impact of inequality: how to make sick societies healthier. Preventing Chronic Disease, 3(1). Simon, J. (2007). Governing through crime. Unpublished manuscript. Surratt, H. L., Inciardi, J. A., Kurtz, S. P., & Kiley, M. C. (2004). Sex work and drug use in a subculture of violence. Crime & Delinquency, 50(1), 43-59. Online sources http://www.who.int/violenceprevention/approach/en www.cpha.ca/en/programs/policy/violence.aspx Read More