Published for the British Institute of Learning Disabilities
Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 2015
Physical Punishment, Mental Health and Sense of Coherence Among Parents of Children with Intellectual Disability in Japan Miyako Kimura* and Yoshihiko Yamazaki† *Department of Preventive Medicine, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Miyamae-ku, Kawasaki-ski, Kanagawa, Japan; †Department of Social Welfare, Faculty of Social Welfare, Nihon Fukushi University, Mihama-cho, Chita-gun, Aichi, Japan
Accepted for publication 19 January 2015
Background Although sense of coherence (SOC) moderates parental stress, the relationship between SOC, parental mental health and physical punishment of children with intellectual disabilities remains uncertain. The present authors describe parental physical punishment towards children with intellectual disabilities and investigate its related demographic characteristics, SOC and parental mental health. Materials and Methods With the cooperation of Tokyo’s 10 special needs schools, the present authors obtained 648 questionnaire responses from parents of children with intellectual disabilities. Results Of the parents, 69.7% reported having physically punished their children with intellectual disabilities.
Introduction Researchers worldwide have reported that parents experience a variety of negative effects when caring for children with intellectual disabilities, including higher levels of stress and a higher likelihood of depression and anxiety than parents of non-disabled children (Emerson 2003; Gallagher et al. 2008). Mothers, especially, are more likely to be unemployed, feel socially isolated and stressed, and develop depression (Shearn & Todd 2000; Singer 2006). In addition, when children show behaviour problems, parental stress is elevated. For example, the parents of children with autism showed more behaviour problems and parental stress than did those of children with Down syndrome (Eisenhower et al. 2005). Such stress burdens parents and has a severely negative impact on children. Accumulating evidence suggests that children with intellectual disabilities are at risk for violence. Jones et al. (2012) undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 studies in Western countries and © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
This was positively associated with parents’ younger age, poorer mental health, lower SOC, children’s younger age, birth order (firstborns) and disability type (autism/pervasive developmental disorder). Conclusions This is the first study supporting the relationship between SOC, mental health and physical punishment use among parents of children with intellectual disabilities. It may assist the development of strategies to prevent physical abuse of children with disabilities. Keywords: children with intellectual disability, mental health, physical punishment, sense of coherence
found that children with disabilities are almost four times as likely to experience violence as non-disabled children are, and children with intellectual disabilities are at higher risk of experiencing violence than are children with other disabilities. In seven of 15 developing countries, UNICEF and the University of Wisconsin (2008) reported that children with disabilities were significantly more likely to experience severe physical punishment than other children were. Although child abuse has been prohibited in most countries, physical punishment in the home is lawful in many countries, including the USA, the UK and Japan (The Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, 2012a). This legal status may be related to allowing physical punishment in the home, which threatens the health of children with intellectual disabilities. Using physical punishment may create vicious cycles even though it may seem unavoidable to some parents. The difference between physical (corporal) punishment and physical abuse is that behaviours which do not cause significant physical injury (e.g. spanking, slapping) are 10.1111/jar.12198
2 Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities
regarded as the former, and behaviours that risk injury (e.g. punching, kicking, burning) are regarded as the latter (Gershoff 2002). According to Clement & Chamberland (2009), approval of physical punishment was associated with parental stress related to the child’s temperament, the mother’s sensitivity to the consequences of violence and the mother’s experience of childhood violence. In addition, Gershoff (2002, 2008) lists a variety of risk factors for the use of physical punishment as follows: the type and severity of children’s misbehaviours; the parents’ responsibility, emotional state, age (young), gender (mothers), genetic contributions, sociocultural context (acceptance and expectations by the community) and social support; the child’s age (young) and gender (boys); and the legal status and public policy. Furthermore, punishment is often asserted to be ‘for children’s own good’; for children who have disabilities, the disabilities themselves could be used as an excuse for physical punishment (The Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, 2012b). However, physical punishment may result in undesirable consequences such as increasing children’s aggressive/antisocial behaviour, decreasing the quality of childhood mental health, decreasing the quality of parent/child relationships and increasing risk of parental physical abuse, despite its relationship with immediate compliance (Gershoff 2002). In Japan, the first survey for child abuse by the Japanese government was performed in 1990, and 1101 consultation cases were reported. However, the rate of child abuse in Japan has increased dramatically, and 73 765 cases were reported in 2013 (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 2014). Increasing nuclear families and declining social ties have reduced nurturing skills among families and communities (e.g. new parents have less experience with communication/care of children and find it difficult to obtain other’s support). Increasing media coverage of tragic child abuse incidents and the law prohibiting child abuse that was implemented in 2000 have increased social awareness of child abuse (e.g. the law requires the general population to make compulsory reports of child abuse when detected; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 2011). According to Hosokawa & Homma (2002), there were 13 983 child abuse cases reported in 2000, of which 1008 (7.2%) involved disabled children; 788 of these involved children with intellectual disabilities. However, taking into account national population data, the estimated number of abused children was 5.4–7.0 per 1000 disabled children (
Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities 2015
Physical Punishment, Mental Health and Sense of Coherence Among Parents of Children with Intellectual Disability in Japan Miyako Kimura* and Yoshihiko Yamazaki† *Department of Preventive Medicine, St. Marianna University School of Medicine, Miyamae-ku, Kawasaki-ski, Kanagawa, Japan; †Department of Social Welfare, Faculty of Social Welfare, Nihon Fukushi University, Mihama-cho, Chita-gun, Aichi, Japan
Accepted for publication 19 January 2015
Background Although sense of coherence (SOC) moderates parental stress, the relationship between SOC, parental mental health and physical punishment of children with intellectual disabilities remains uncertain. The present authors describe parental physical punishment towards children with intellectual disabilities and investigate its related demographic characteristics, SOC and parental mental health. Materials and Methods With the cooperation of Tokyo’s 10 special needs schools, the present authors obtained 648 questionnaire responses from parents of children with intellectual disabilities. Results Of the parents, 69.7% reported having physically punished their children with intellectual disabilities.
Introduction Researchers worldwide have reported that parents experience a variety of negative effects when caring for children with intellectual disabilities, including higher levels of stress and a higher likelihood of depression and anxiety than parents of non-disabled children (Emerson 2003; Gallagher et al. 2008). Mothers, especially, are more likely to be unemployed, feel socially isolated and stressed, and develop depression (Shearn & Todd 2000; Singer 2006). In addition, when children show behaviour problems, parental stress is elevated. For example, the parents of children with autism showed more behaviour problems and parental stress than did those of children with Down syndrome (Eisenhower et al. 2005). Such stress burdens parents and has a severely negative impact on children. Accumulating evidence suggests that children with intellectual disabilities are at risk for violence. Jones et al. (2012) undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of 17 studies in Western countries and © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
This was positively associated with parents’ younger age, poorer mental health, lower SOC, children’s younger age, birth order (firstborns) and disability type (autism/pervasive developmental disorder). Conclusions This is the first study supporting the relationship between SOC, mental health and physical punishment use among parents of children with intellectual disabilities. It may assist the development of strategies to prevent physical abuse of children with disabilities. Keywords: children with intellectual disability, mental health, physical punishment, sense of coherence
found that children with disabilities are almost four times as likely to experience violence as non-disabled children are, and children with intellectual disabilities are at higher risk of experiencing violence than are children with other disabilities. In seven of 15 developing countries, UNICEF and the University of Wisconsin (2008) reported that children with disabilities were significantly more likely to experience severe physical punishment than other children were. Although child abuse has been prohibited in most countries, physical punishment in the home is lawful in many countries, including the USA, the UK and Japan (The Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, 2012a). This legal status may be related to allowing physical punishment in the home, which threatens the health of children with intellectual disabilities. Using physical punishment may create vicious cycles even though it may seem unavoidable to some parents. The difference between physical (corporal) punishment and physical abuse is that behaviours which do not cause significant physical injury (e.g. spanking, slapping) are 10.1111/jar.12198
2 Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities
regarded as the former, and behaviours that risk injury (e.g. punching, kicking, burning) are regarded as the latter (Gershoff 2002). According to Clement & Chamberland (2009), approval of physical punishment was associated with parental stress related to the child’s temperament, the mother’s sensitivity to the consequences of violence and the mother’s experience of childhood violence. In addition, Gershoff (2002, 2008) lists a variety of risk factors for the use of physical punishment as follows: the type and severity of children’s misbehaviours; the parents’ responsibility, emotional state, age (young), gender (mothers), genetic contributions, sociocultural context (acceptance and expectations by the community) and social support; the child’s age (young) and gender (boys); and the legal status and public policy. Furthermore, punishment is often asserted to be ‘for children’s own good’; for children who have disabilities, the disabilities themselves could be used as an excuse for physical punishment (The Global Initiative to End All Corporal Punishment of Children, 2012b). However, physical punishment may result in undesirable consequences such as increasing children’s aggressive/antisocial behaviour, decreasing the quality of childhood mental health, decreasing the quality of parent/child relationships and increasing risk of parental physical abuse, despite its relationship with immediate compliance (Gershoff 2002). In Japan, the first survey for child abuse by the Japanese government was performed in 1990, and 1101 consultation cases were reported. However, the rate of child abuse in Japan has increased dramatically, and 73 765 cases were reported in 2013 (Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 2014). Increasing nuclear families and declining social ties have reduced nurturing skills among families and communities (e.g. new parents have less experience with communication/care of children and find it difficult to obtain other’s support). Increasing media coverage of tragic child abuse incidents and the law prohibiting child abuse that was implemented in 2000 have increased social awareness of child abuse (e.g. the law requires the general population to make compulsory reports of child abuse when detected; Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, 2011). According to Hosokawa & Homma (2002), there were 13 983 child abuse cases reported in 2000, of which 1008 (7.2%) involved disabled children; 788 of these involved children with intellectual disabilities. However, taking into account national population data, the estimated number of abused children was 5.4–7.0 per 1000 disabled children (
