Journal 2 (Psychological Maltreatment)

     After reading my first article, there were a lot of questions that were left unanswered for me, and after changing my topic question to, "How is psychological maltreatment the real issue instead of child abuse?" I had to first understand what psychological maltreatment meant in-depth. I didn't know if psychological maltreatment was a form of child abuse, a complementary effect of child abuse, or just another name for child abuse. After researching, the article I found to be most helpful with these questions was titled "A Clinical Report of Psychological Maltreatment."

     The article was an informative one, with hints of argumentation. I decided to find a more informative article because I was very confused as to what psychological maltreatment actually was. The article tells in detail how psychological maltreatment is actually a form of child abuse, and one of the most difficult to deal with at that. It describes psychological maltreatment as "acts of omission (ignoring need for social interactions) or commission (spurning, terrorizing) that may be verbal or nonverbal, active or passive, and with or without intent to harm; and negatively affect the child’s cognitive, social, emotional, and/or physical development." (Hibbard). With that in mind, I began to wonder how psychological maltreatment can happen without the intent to harm. What makes me wonder this is that when there is a problem psychologically between two people that are in social interaction, I don't understand who gets to determine what is intended, and what is not. What I mean is, if the person who performs an act of psychological maltreatment does not believe that they are harming the other person involved, and the other person involved does believe the first person meant to harm, who is right? I think the article, and most articles in general, should make it more clear as to who is the person of interest when claiming psychological maltreatment, and also making their intentions clear. What is clear, however, is the standpoint that the article takes, being that psychological maltreatment is a dangerous form of child abuse that can not only harm that child's state of mind immediately, but can also have devastating long-term effects as children reach adulthood. While I agree with this statement, it seems pretty broad. Yes, psychological maltreatment is bad in my eyes, but how does one know when it occurs, and how can the specific effect of psychological maltreatment cause long-term problems? Even with this question in mind, however, I still heavily agree with the article main argumentative message.

    Still, more questions arise for me after reading the article. Now that I know the definition, I am curious as to what forms of psychological maltreatment can cause the most damage. Another question that still comes to mind after reading both of my articles is "How big of a difference does culture make to psychological maltreatment?" In my next article, I will be searching for an even more in-depth look at specific examples of psychological maltreatment, and the effects it can have on a developing child's psyche. Also, by understanding the psychological maltreatment is actually a form of child abuse, I am once again changing my topic question to, "Is psychological maltreatment the worst form of child abuse?" mainly because after reading two articles in, I firmly believe it is.