Ambiguous but Crucial Boundaries - Professionals Differentiating Sibling Abuse from Sibling Quarrels

ABSTRACT

The subject of sibling violence is a blind spot in both social research and popular culture in Sweden, where we have conducted our empirical study. There is a normalizing discourse around sibling quarreling, with the act generally being seen as a natural part of children’s development. On the other hand, there is a problematizing discourse in an international context; violence perpetrated by and against a sibling has been highlighted as one of the most common forms of violence perpetrated against children. However, the difference between sibling quarrel (or rivalry) and sibling violence (or abuse) often does not come out clearly in existing studies. To put sibling violence on the map of existing societal problems, we need to both critically review definitions and examine how the phenomenon of sibling violence differs from related phenomena, such as sibling quarrels, in the experience of professionals who (potentially) meet victims in their work. The emphasis in the article is on social boundary work, analyzing interviews with social workers and psychotherapists regarding this phenomenon. The analysis shows that it is possible to define sibling violence, though complex, when it comes to how the boundaries are shaped and interpreted in concrete social and psychological work, as well as different situations and contexts.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

¹ In other articles, we will write from the victims’ perspective.

² Also, social workers are often significant decision makers regarding whether the violence is reported to law enforcement, what kind of treatment is provided for the children and their families, and children’s living arrangements.

³ Furthermore, Simonelli et al. (2002) found that 89% of boys and 98% of girls reported to have experienced emotional aggression from a sibling, which is uncritically referred to by Perkins and O ‘Connor as sibling violence (Perkins and O’Connor 2016).

⁴ They take as examples that sibling rivalry includes less serious conflicts over something (e.g., a toy) the other sibling also wants, according to their description, whereas sibling assault indicates repeated patterns of physical aggression with the intent to harm, humiliate, and defeat. As in Caffaro (2020), sibling assault it is said to often include the solidification of perpetrator-victim roles (i.e., an unequal power structure).

⁵ Few studies have tried to demarcate differences in the forms of sibling violence by severity. Eriksen and Jensen (2009) were influenced by the demarcation by Caffaro and Conn-Caffaro (2005) and studied sibling violence by distinguishing less serious forms and more severe forms that are likely to cause injury. They proposed that less severe forms are better understood as sibling aggression, which occurs to a majority of children in their age-related development, and that more severe forms of sibling behavior should be understood as sibling violence.

⁶ The absence of a uniform legal definition of sibling violence, apart from the law that prohibits child abuse in general, adds to the lack of clarity (Caffaro 2020).

⁷ Research project (2019) titled “Sibling Violence and Sibling Quarrels. A Study of the Meaning and the Consequences of the Demarcation Problem,” funded by Brottsoffermyndigheten (Swedish Crime Victim Authority).

⁸ To speak one at a time, to be honest and say what one thinks, to see all thoughts and comments as important and valuable, that everything that is said stays in the group, and that everyone shows basic respect and consideration.

⁹ Parental absence, poor parenting practices, differential treatment of siblings, and unclear family boundaries are thought to play an important role in increasing the hostility between siblings and the risk for sibling abuse (Caffaro 2020; Wiehe 1997).

¹⁰ It is relevant to ask if the particular national or cultural context might have impacted our findings. Unfortunately, there is not much research about the status of siblings in Sweden, but there is a bit more about the status of families and children in general (Markström et al. 2009). Meyers (2017), among others, has described sibling abuse occurring in a closed family system (in the United States and other western countries) that keeps the violence secret and hinders the victim’s access to potentially available resources. This seems to be an accurate description in a Swedish context as well.

¹¹ This subtheme was also found in our interviews with (adult) victims of sibling violence and in our observations in family centers – that an older sibling must take a responsibility, almost a parental role, toward their sibling that they are not mature enough to handle, which then turns into violent situations with no adults present that could stop it.

¹² The Swedish law (§ 1 Föräldrabalk [FB] [Children and Parents Code]§ 1 Föräldrabalk [FB] [Children and Parents Code] 1983: 47) says: “Children have the right to care, security, and a good upbringing. Children shall be treated with respect for their person and individuality and may not be subjected to corporal punishment or other abusive treatment.”

¹³ Instead of being called “violence,” the aggression is normalized. In that case, it is not the older age that complicates the attribution of liability, but similarities in terms of a complicated categorization of debt and liability remain.

¹⁴ Only once during an interview did a psychotherapist mention, a bit critically, a tendency of social workers to fail to see sibling violence in their cases, but some family counselors mentioned this about themselves in the focus group discussion.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Brottsoffermyndigheten

Notes on contributors

Anna Rypi

Anna Rypi is a senior lecturer at the School of Social Work at Lund University, Sweden. Her research focuses on crime victims and victimization from different perspectives, for example, violence between siblings, victim offender mediation, and young men’s exposure to violence.