This morning Laura McCloskey, also well known in the field of domestic violence, delivers an invited address on breaking the cycle of family violence. While the presentation is well delivered and the data interesting, she is criticized for taking a gendered approach to the data collection. Such an approach has meant that she (and her colleagues) have not asked women in their sample about their own perpetration of violence. As a result, the study is not able to track the true cycle of violence over time. The presentation highlights an underlying tension that is currently gripping the field between so-called gendered researchers (who believe partner violence to be a problem specific to women and girls) and researchers who promote a gender-neutral view (indeed, the data suggest that women are often more violent than men, see for example Straus 2007). It sits in sharp contrast to yesterday’s panel exploring the symmetry of violence in relationships.

My second session of the day is led by researchers from the University of New Hampshire and looks at the concept of resilience, explored using the NSCAW data (see above). While the data point to the fact that the majority of children coming to the attention of child protection services for reports of maltreatment or neglect do not show long-term resilience (indeed most children show difficulty in at least one developmental domain, at least at one point in time during the longitudinal study) the data also suggest that decisions about mental health services are being made based on resiliency status at one point in time (baseline or at the point of investigation). While I raise the danger of using resiliency status to withhold services form children who may actually require them in time, the researchers do not appear to appreciate the importance of their data for policy and practice application.

A session in the afternoon is focused on physiological and neurological reactions to trauma. Related to the ESRC proposal we are putting together although once again focused on extremes. It will be interesting to see if the findings are similar when the stressors are more normative, i.e. common couple conflict and violence rather than high-end domestic violence.

We meet at lunch to discuss the start-up of an exciting new society – the International Family Aggression Society (IFAS) – spearheaded by Nicola Graham-Kevan at the University of Central Lancashire. The society would bring together family conflict and violence researchers and practitioners with a more international focus than that achieved by the Institute for Violence Abuse and Trauma (IVAT), with a focus on recruiting more European and developing nation researchers and a biennial conference to promote networking and partnership. The fist conference is scheduled for March 2008 in the UK.

Heading home I am filled with information and inspiration for how I can improve my own work and with ideas for how we can move the prevention work in Ireland forward. The US has much to offer regards innovative research and intervention activity but it is also clear that it will take the commitment and hard work of the people on the ground in ROI to make this happen for children and families there.