4.7 Article

Does history of childhood maltreatment make a difference in prison? A hierarchical approach on early family events and personality traits

期刊

PSYCHIATRY RESEARCH
卷 220, 期 3, 页码 1064-1070

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.psychres.2014.10.019

关键词

Child abuse; Aggression; Impulsivity; Smoking; Alcohol; Drug abuse; Suicidality

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study attempts to assess childhood maltreatment in prison through a hierarchical approach. The hierarchical approach principally aims to disentangle the independent effects of childhood maltreatment upon psychiatric morbidity/personality traits, if any, from the burden that the adverse family conditions have already imposed to the mental health of the maltreated individual-prisoner. To this direction, a conceptual framework with five hierarchical levels was constructed, namely: immutable demographic factors; family conditions; childhood maltreatment (physical abuse, neglect and sexual abuse); personality traits, habits and psychiatric morbidity; prison-related variables. A self-administered, anonymous set (battery) of questionnaires was administered to 173 male prisoners in the Chalkida prison, Greece; 26% of prisoners disclosed childhood maltreatment. Psychiatric condition in the family, parental alcoholism and parental divorce correlated with childhood maltreatment. After adjustment for immutable demographic factors and family conditions, childhood maltreatment was associated with aggression (both in terms of Lifetime History of Aggression and Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire scores), illicit substance use, personal history of psychiatric condition, current smoking, impulsivity and alcohol abuse. In conclusion, childhood maltreatment represents a pivotal, determining factor in the life course of male prisoners. Delinquents seem to suffer from long-term consequences of childhood maltreatment in terms of numerous mental health aspects. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据