Home            Past Issues            About IP            About IAP           Author Information            Subscription            Advertisement              Search  

   
research paper

Indian Pediatr 2021;58:556-559

Interpersonal Violence Against Children and Adolescents: A Forensic Study From Greece

 

Konstantinos Katsos,1 Emmanouil I Sakelliadis,1 Eleni Zorba,1 Artemis Tsitsika,2 Nikolaos Goutas,1 Dimitrios Vlachodimitropoulos,1 Stavroula Papadodima,1 Chara Spiliopoulou1

From 1Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology; and 2Adolescent Health Unit, Second Department of Pediatrics, P. and A. Kyriakou Athens Children’s Hospital; Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Correspondence to: Dr Konstantinos Katsos, 75, Mikras Asias street, 11527, Athens, Greece.
Email: [email protected]

Received: June 13, 2020;
Initial review: July 10, 2020;
Accepted: August 04, 2020.

Published online: August 06, 2020;
PII:
S097475591600219

 

Objective: To investigate differences in victimization of minors after allegations of domestic violence and community violence. Methods: This retrospective study was conducted by reviewing the archive of clinical examinations after allegations for interpersonal violence against minors that were performed at the Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology of our Medical School from 2012 to 2016. Results: 216 cases of allegations for victimization of minors’ were referred to our department, representing 8.8% of all clinical forensic examinations. Boys community violence victims were affected mainly on the head, whilst girls mainly on the genital area. Upper limbs were the predominant site of injuries on domestic violence victims of both sexes. Conclusions: Adolescents were in greater danger of sustaining injuries than younger children. Upper limb injuries may prove to be a useful screening tool for domestic violence in school-age children and adolescents, while trunk injuries may indicate domestic violence in preschool children.

Keywords: Child abuse, Clinical forensic examination, Community violence, Domestic violence, Greece, Minors’ victimization.


W
orld Health Organization (WHO) defines violence as the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, mal-development or deprivation [1]. Whilst the definition provided by the WHO about child abuse/maltreatment includes mostly victimization by a parent or caregiver [1,2], minors may be also victimized in the community context by strangers or acquaintances (youth violence) [3].

According to a systematic analysis, 40-60% of boys and girls, aged between 2-14 years, have experienced physical abuse by a parent, another family member or caregiver, and approximately half of boys and girls, aged between 8-11 years, have experienced physical violence by a classmate [4]. Despite the amount of the existing literature on child abuse, very few studies have been published concerning the injuries in such cases. In Greece, studies concerning domestic abuse of children are extremely rare [5,6], whilst studies concerning minors’ victimization in the community context are practically non-existent.

One of the main goals of the forensic clinical examination of injured minors is to evaluate whether injures are accidental or intentional [7-9]. Aim of this study was to investigate differences in minors’ victimization in domestic (DV) and community violence (CV) incidents in Greek population, with emphasis on anatomic injury location, in an attempt to investigate its usefulness as a screening tool for identifying the perpetrators’ relation to the victim.

METHODS

The archives of the Department of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology of Medical School of National and Kapo-distrian University of Athens (NKUA) were reviewed concerning clinical examinations for non-lethal injuries conducted from 2012 to 2016, and cases of minors’ victimization were included in our study. Allegations originated from areas that cover approximately one tenth of the Greek population. All data were collected anonymously, and the study was approved by the Ethics Committee of our Medical School (NKUA).

Allegations were categorized into two groups: i) domestic violence cases, subjected to Greek Law about Domestic Violence (GLDV), and ii) community violence cases, subjected to the Greek Penal Code (GPC). Variables recorded for every case included victims’ and perpetrators’ demographic characteristics, clinician’s examination findings before the forensic clinical examination, mechanism of injuries (a) physical violence (when just a body part acted as a blunt force instrument), (b) use of a blunt force object only, (c) combination of a and b; (d) sharp force instrument; (e) sexual abuse; and (f) firearm injuries), type of injuries (a) external injuries affecting only soft tissue (e.g. bruises); (b) internal injuries (e.g. fractures); and (c) evidence of sexual abuse), affected body region (head, neck, trunk, upper and lower limbs), and characterization of injuries according to GLDV [10] and GPC [11].

Statistical analysis: Data are presented as proportions. Categorical data were analyzed using Pearson chi-square test. Data analyses were performed using the Statistical package for social sciences software (SPSS version 25.0, SPSS Inc. Chicago, Illinois). A P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixteen cases of minors’ victimization were referred to our department, representing approximately 8.8% of all clinical examinations [community violence (CV): 8.5%, domestic violence (DV): 9.4%]. Victimization of boys was less frequent in the domestic context (P=0.01) and concerned mainly adolescents (Table I). Victimization in the domestic context was more frequent for school-age boys (P=0.01). Most DV cases (91.0%) concerned allegations against a parent, whilst 6.4% concerned a grandparent and 2.6% a sibling. In 68.3% of the total cases, victims knew the perpetrator(s). There were no allegations for intimate partner violence in the adolescent age group, neither any allegation for physical violence by teachers.

Table I  Demographic Characteristics of Victims and Perpetrators in Children With Interpersonal Violence (N=216)
Community violence Domestic violence
Boys Girls Boys Girls
(n=85) (n=53) (n=34) (n=44)
Victim’s nationality        
Greek 76 (89.4) 42 (79.2) 29 (85.3) 39 (88.6)
Other 9 (10.6) 11 (20.8) 5 (14.7) 5 (11.4)
Victim’s age        
Infant (<1 y) 0 0 1 (2.9) 1 (2.3)
Preschool age (1-5 y) 3 (3.5) 4 (7.6) 4 (11.8) 9 (20.4)
School age (6-12 y) 15 (17.7) 19 (35.8) 22 (64.7) 15 (34.1)
Adolescent (13-17 y) 67 (78.8) 30 (56.6) 7 (20.6) 19 (43.2)
Age (y)a 14.1 (3.6) 12.6 (3.5) 9.2 (3.9) 10.4 (5.1)
Perpetrator’s sex        
Male 65 (76.5) 46 (86.8) 23 (65.6) 30 (68.2)
Male and female 0 2 (3.8) 0 0
Unknown 13 (15.3) 0 2 (7.9)b 3 (6.8)b
Perpetrator’s sex        
Under 17 y 28 (32.9) 7 (13.2) 1 (2.9) 0
Over 18 y 30 (35.3) 22 (41.5) 33 (97.1) 44 (100)
Unknown 27 (31.8) 24 (45.3) 0 0
Perpetrator’s nationality        
Greek 40 (47.1) 31 (58.5) 27 (79.4) 38 (86.4)
Other 5 (5.8) 10 (18.9) 4 (11.8) 3 (6.8)
Unknown 40 (47.1) 12 (22.6) 2 (8.8) 3 (6.8)
Data is presented as No. (%) except amean (SD). bfive allegations about domestic violence were against the parent but there was no information whether it was the father or the mother.

In 48.5% of CV allegations, the perpetrators were strangers. Girls knew the perpetrator(s) more frequently than boys (81.4% vs 58.8% for boys). Allegations against females were more frequent in DV allegations (P=0.016 for boys, and 0.032 for girls), whilst allegations against males were more frequent in CV allegations (P=0.001). A clinician examined 77 victims (35.6%) before the forensic examination. DV victims were less frequently examined by a clinician than CV victims (DV: 21.8%, CV: 43.5%, P=0.001).

Table II Body Region Injured in Children With Interpersonal Violence (N=216)
Community violence Domestic violence P value P value  
Boys (n=85) Girls (n=53) Boys (n=34) Girls (n=44) (for boys) (for girls)
None 10 (11.8) 16 (30.2) 10 (29.4) 13 (29.5) 0.02 0.05
Head 53 (62.3) 8 (15.1) 10 (29.4) 8 (18.2) 0.001 0.68
  Face 52 (61.2) 8 (15.1) 9 (26.5) 7 (15.9) 0.001 0.91
  Cranium 8 (9.4) 1 (1.9) 2 (5.9) 3 (6.8)
Neck 11 (12.9) 5 (9.4) 2 (5.9) 4 (9.1)
Trunk 19 (22.3) 15 (28.3) 9 (26.5) 13 (29.5) 0.62 0.89
  Thorax 12 (14.1) 5 (9.4) 7 (20.6) 3 (6.8) 0.38
  Abdomen 5 (5.9) 1 (1.9) 0 3 (6.8)
  Back 12 (14.1) 9 (17.0) 5 (14.7) 7 (15.9) 0.89
Genitalia 0 10 (18.9) 0 2 (4.5) 0.03
Upper limbs 28 (32.9) 11 (20.7) 12 (35.3) 17 (38.6) 0.81 0.05
  Arms 13 (15.3) 5 (9.4) 8 (23.5) 14 (31.8) 0.29 0.006
  Forearms 21 (24.7) 8 (15.1) 5 (14.7) 9 (20.4) 0.23 0.49
  Hands 11 (12.9) 1 (1.9) 5 (14.7) 8 (18.2)
Lower limbs 21 (24.7) 8 (15.1) 7 (20.6) 11 (25.0) 0.63 0.22
  Thighs 15 (17.6) 8 (15.1) 4 (11.8) 10 (22.7) 0.43 0.33
  Leg calves 16 (18.8) 4 (7.5) 6 (17.6) 5 (11.4) 0.88 0.52
  Feet 1 (1.2) 0 0 2 (4.5)
Data is presented as no. (%).

In 43 cases (19.9%), a single injury was assessed during the examination (CV: 18.8%, DV: 21.8%), whilst 144 victims (66.7%) sustained multiple injuries (CV: 55.1%, DV: 48.7%). Sexual assaults against girls com-prised 52.8% of the CV and 25.0% of the DV cases, whilst allegations of sexual abuse in boys were rare (CV: 2.3%, DV: 11.8%). Signs of sexual abuse were more frequent in allegations about sexual victimization in the community context (CV: 33.3%, DV: 20.0%, P=0.01). In most boys’ victimization, the perpetrator employed only physical force (CV: 68.2%, DV: 61.4%). Sharp force instruments were used by perpetrators only in CV (boys: 7.2%, girls: 3.8%). CV victims were more likely to sustain internal injuries, compared to DV victims (CV: 15.2%, DV: 3.8%, P=0.04). Anatomical distribution of injuries is depicted in Table II and Web Table I. Injuries inflicted in DV were more likely to be characterized as simple injuries (P=0.01)

DISCUSSION

According to our study, CV cases concern more frequently boys, especially adolescents, and DV affects equally both sexes. DV frequency was at comparable levels with a Netherlands study, whilst CV cases were significantly less [12]. This finding may suggest that CV, especially youth violence, occur less frequently or is reported less frequently to the Police in Greece than in other countries.

Physical violence was the most common mechanism that perpetrator(s) employed, which is in accordance with other studies [5,12]. According to an American study, injuries inflicted by weapon(s) were less frequent in girls than boys and were recorded only in CV incidents [13]. This finding probably means that DV perpetrators (mostly parents) employ just physical violence (by use of body parts) as punishment and disciplinary measures.

Another finding of our study was the smaller frequency of prior examination by a clinician for DV inci-dents, compared to CV frequency. Clinicians, especially pediatricians, can and should play an important role in the early diagnosis of abuse and victimization, especially in the domestic context. According to Joseph, et al. [14], boys admitted at emergency departments (EDs) were more likely to be DV victims than their female counterparts. Our results do not confirm this finding. Furthermore, according to our results, head was the predominant site of injury, which is in accordance to another Greek study [5]. Nevertheless, the latter depicts only male victims of CV, in contrast to other studies that reported head injuries in child abuse incidents more frequently [5,14]. These findings could possibly suggest a selection bias, as our study included forensic population (after allegations for inter-personal violence), whilst the studied populations by Joseph, et al. [14] and Petridou, et al. [5] represented patients admitted at EDs.

According to a UK study 65.6% of assaults were recorded only on EDs, 23.6% were reported only to the Police, and only 10.8% were reported both to EDs and the Police. Furthermore only 1 or 2 out of 10 minors have reported their victimization to both a police officer and a clinician, as up to 60-70% had mentioned the incident only at EDs [15]. These findings suggest that future research should combine records from EDs, forensic departments and the police department, to ascertain the true extent of minors’ victimization which seek medical care or judicial support.

Our study demonstrated that most DV and CV adolescent victims sustained injuries, suggesting that they are in greater danger of getting injured than younger children, especially than children at the preschool development stage. Furthermore, upper limbs injuries could possibly become a screening tool for domestic abuse in school-age children and adolescents, whilst trunk injuries could imply domestic abuse in preschool children, but these results should be verified by future large scale community studies.

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study in Greece that compared minors’ victimization in the community and the domestic context. High incidence and prevalence of exposure to physical violence (both domestic and community) reported by Petroulaki, et al. [6] compared to allegation rates in our Department suggest that minors’ victimization is underreported in Greece. Campaigns about child abuse and youth violence are needed, to eliminate or at least reduce these phenomena.

Ethics clearance: Ethics Committee of the Medical School of National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece; No. 5836 dated February 2, 2015.

Contributors: KK: concept and design of the study, collection, and interpretation of the data, drafting the article and revised it critically for important intellectual content; ES: Interpretation of the data, drafting the article and revised it critically for important intellectual content; EZ: analysis and interpretation of the data, revising the article critically for important intellectual content; AT,NG,DV, SP: concept and design of the study, drafting the article and revised it critically for important intellectual content; CS: concept and design of the study, drafting the article and revised it critically for important intellectual content. All authors approved the final version of manuscript, and agreed to be accountable for all aspects related to the study.

Funding: None; Competing interest: None stated.

What this Study Adds?

• In a Greek population, head injuries in boys and genital injuries in girls were associated with victimization in the community context, whereas arm injuries in girls were associated with domestic violence.

• Upper limb injuries in school-age children and adolescents, and trunk injuries in preschool children were associated with domestic abuse.

REFERENCES

1. Krug EG, Dahlberg LL, Mercy JA, Zwi AB, Lozano R. World Report on Violence and Health. World Health Organization, 2002. Accessed July 12, 2020. Available from: https://www.who.int/violence_injury_ prevention/violence/world_report/chapters/en/

2. Pinheiro PS. World Report on Violence against Children. United Nations & World Health Organization, 2006. Accessed July 12, 2020. Available from: https://digitallibrary.un.org/ record/587334

3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What is youth violence? Accessed July 12, 2020. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/definitions. html

4. Devries K, Knight L, Petzold M, et al. Who perpetrates violence against children? A systematic analysis of age-speci-fic and sex-specific data. BMJ Paediatr Open. 2018;2: e000180.

5. Petridou E, Moustaki M, Gemanaki E, Djeddah C, Trichopoulos D. Intentional childhood injuries in Greece 1996-97 - Data from a population-based Emergency Department Injury Surveillance System (EDISS). Scand J Public Health. 2001;29:279-84.

6. Petroulaki K, Tsirigori A, Zarokosta F, Nikolaidis G. Epidemiological characteristics of minors’ exposure to experiences of violence in Greece: The BECAN Study. Psychiatriki. 2013;24:262-71.

7. Stark MM. Clinical Forensic Medicine. A Physician’s Guide. 4th Edition. Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzer-land AG; 2020.

8. Madea B. Handbook of Forensic Medicine. New Jersey: Wiley Blackwell; 2014.

9. Tsokos M. Diagnostic criteria for cutaneous injuries in child abuse: Classification, findings, and interpertation. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 2015;11:235-42.

10. Hellenic Government Gazette. Law 3500/2006 about Domestic Violence. Accessed July 12, 2020. Available from: http://www.et.gr/idocs-nph/search/pdfViewerForm. html?args=5C7QrtC22wFGQ40gSLPFOXdtvSoClrL 8no yF6ARJ3CN5MXD0LzQTLWPU9yLzB8V68kCmTXKa O6fpVZ6Lx3UnKl3nP8NxdnJ5r9cmWyJWelDvWS_18k AEhATUkJb0x1LIdQ163nV9K—td6SIua-21KSe3EAb K8Hv5-nzLt1T2W0HKzl8QinxhatquxRm

11. Hellenic Government Gazette. Penal Code. Accessed July 12, 2020. Available from: http://www.et.gr/idocs-nph/sear ch/pdfViewerForm.html?args=5C7QrtC22wFqnM3e AbJ zrXdtvSoClrL8smx2PaOMA0btIl9LGdkF53UIxsx942 Cdy qxSQYNuqAGCF0IfB9HI6qSYtMQEkEHLwnFqmgJSA5 WIsluV-nRwO1oKqSe4BlOTSpEWYhszF8P8UqWb_zFij EvIo-96KN5QRhtXjIrtIsGCUfNEKdOeNlYed-CLu6M4

12. Reijnders UJL, Ceelen M. 7208 Victims of domestic and public violence: An exploratory study based on reports of assaulted individuals reporting to the police. J Forensic Leg Med. 2014;24:18-23.

13. Ranney ML, Mello MJ. A comparison of female and male adolescent victims of violence seen in the emergency department. J Emerg Med. 2011;41:701-6.

14. Joseph B, Khalili M, Zangbar B, et al. Prevalence of domestic violence among trauma patients. JAMA Surg. 2015;150:1177-83.

15. Sutherland I, Sivarajasingam V, Shepherd JP. Recording of community violence by medical and police services. Inj Prev. 2002;8:246-7.

 

 

Copyright © 1999-2021 Indian Pediatrics