NUR 640

Reply from Geslande Dessalines

Culture and family violence

Family violence is understood and addressed very differently across cultures, and my cultural background as a Haitian American strongly shapes how I interpret family roles, authority, and conflict. In many Haitian households, the father figure is traditionally viewed as the dominant authority and overarching protector of the family. He is often responsible for maintaining order, discipline, and safety within the home. When conflict or violence occurs, the expectation is frequently that the father will intervene, de-escalate, or discipline as needed. This dynamic can make it difficult to distinguish between culturally sanctioned discipline, inter- sibling conflict, and behavior that crosses into abuse. As a result, family violence may not be openly named as a problem, especially if it aligns with traditional gender roles, particularly between male children, or parental authority structures.

From a clinical perspective, this cultural framework presents both challenges and opportunities for family therapists. According to Corey (2023), effective family therapy requires clinicians to approach families with cultural humility, recognizing that values around authority, discipline, and protection are deeply embedded and often unquestioned. When abuse or violence is not identified by family members as a presenting concern, directly confronting it too early or without cultural sensitivity can lead to resistance, rupture, or premature termination of therapy.

In my opinion, the most effective way for a family therapist to bring up issues of abuse or violence in such situations is through a gradual, relational, and context-informed approach. Rather than labeling behaviors as “abusive” from the outset, therapists can begin by exploring family roles, communication patterns, and definitions of safety and protection. Wheeler (2020) emphasizes that advanced practice clinicians must assess for violence continuously and subtly, especially in cultures where hierarchical family structures normalize certain aggressive behaviors. Asking open-ended questions such as, “How does your family handle conflict when emotions run high?” or “What does discipline look like in your household?” allows the therapist to gather critical information without immediately triggering defensiveness.

Another key strategy involves reframing the conversation around shared values. In Haitian culture, protecting the family and maintaining respect are central values. A therapist can align concerns about violence with these values by framing safety as an extension of protection rather than a critique of authority. For example, discussing how fear or physical harm can undermine respect and long-term family cohesion can open space for reflection. Corey (2023) notes that reframing is especially powerful in family systems therapy because it allows families to view problematic patterns through a new, less threatening lens.

Psychoeducation is also essential but must be delivered thoughtfully. Research suggests that families are more receptive to discussions of violence when therapists normalize stress

responses and explain the impact of aggression on emotional regulation and relational trust (Douglas & Walsh, 2021). Instead of focusing on blame, therapists can highlight how chronic exposure to conflict affects children’s mental health, attachment, and coping skills over time. This approach is consistent with trauma-informed care, which prioritizes safety, empowerment, and collaboration (Wheeler, 2020).

Importantly, therapists must remain attentive to ethical and legal obligations, particularly when violence poses immediate risk. However, even mandated reporting can be handled in a culturally responsive manner by being transparent, supportive, and respectful of the family’s dignity. Studies show that when therapists clearly explain their role and responsibilities while maintaining empathy, families are more likely to stay engaged in treatment (Fontes & Plummer, 2022).

In conclusion, addressing abuse and violence in families that have not identified these issues requires patience, cultural humility, and clinical skill. For Haitian American families, acknowledging the father’s role as protector while gently challenging harmful expressions of authority can foster meaningful dialogue. By using open-ended assessment, value-based reframing, and trauma-informed psychoeducation, family therapists can bring hidden issues of violence into the therapeutic space in a way that promotes safety, insight, and long-term change.

Reply Alejandro Llanes Module 5 Discussion

Like all assumptions about family violence, mine are culture-bound. The US dominant culture encourages a preoccupation with autonomy, family privacy, and individual and collective resilience. Families subscribing to these principles tend to have low tolerances for violence, view it as normal and minimal, or otherwise frame it as conflict. Secrecy in the family and the avoidance of wider community involvement are valued. Victims may remain silent about abuse due to a desire to protect the family from shame, fear of legal or child protective services involvement, financial dependency, fear of stigma. Nevertheless, most cultures also stress safe, respectful, and nurturing treatment of family members, which creates a tension between ensuring the family remains intact, and protecting the victim.

Culture does not appear to cause family violence, but influences how violence is interpreted, responded to, and represented. For example, gender roles, authority, spirituality, and hierarchy may determine the power relationships in families, or who can speak up. Thus, family therapists should discuss the topic with cultural humility and without assumption. Trauma- and violence-informed care requires understanding the stigma, social barriers, and cultural context for a particular family in regard to their response to violence in the home. This allows for safety,

empowerment and mutuality to be prioritized, understanding that past harm can influence whether individuals disclose to the system (Wathen & Mantler, 2022).

If violence is not identified as the presenting problem, it is best to ask about it routinely and in a nonjudgmental way. Therapists can explain that they ask all families about conflict and safety because stress in relationships can affect mental and physical health. This universal framing reduces stigma, normalizes the experience, and communicates that the therapist is available to help if the concern changes. It relieves the family of the responsibility for deciding whether or not their experience was "serious enough" to talk about.

Brief opportunities should be provided for one-on-one contact with individual family members alone, and therapists must discuss confidentiality and mandated reporting with the family in a straightforward and forthright manner when asking sensitive questions. One of the most common reasons for resistance is fear of the unknown, which transparency seeks to counter, restoring a sense of control and trust in the therapeutic relationship.

Violence questions can be worded to avoid using labels, asking about fear, physical harm, threatening behavior, or controlling someone. These questions ease survivor determination or identifying violence in ways that are meaningful to survivors. Screening should not be done in isolation; it is recommended that screening for intimate partner violence be done in conjunction with assessment, referral, and access to support services (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, 2025). Without follow-up resources, disclosure may worsen distress and not lead to feelings of safety.

Clinicians should carefully consider the risks of situational couple violence and patterns of coercive control and whether conjoint family therapy could aggravate the risks of intimidation, severe violence and chronic fear. In those cases, safety planning, individual advocacy and coordination with community resources may be ethically warranted. Other cultural support systems, such as extended family and faith communities, should only be included with survivor consent and as a means to improve safety, not silence.

Reply from Geslande Dessalines

Culture and family violence

Family violence is understood and addressed very differently across cultures, and my cultural background as a Haitian American strongly shapes how I interpret family roles, authority, and conflict. In many Haitian households, the father figure is traditionally viewed as the dominant authority and overarching protector of the family. He is often responsible for maintaining order, discipline, and safety within the home. When conflict or violence occurs, the expectation is frequently that the father will intervene, de-escalate, or discipline as needed. This dynamic can make it difficult to distinguish between culturally sanctioned discipline, inter- sibling conflict, and behavior that crosses into abuse. As a result, family violence may not be openly named as a problem, especially if it aligns with traditional gender roles, particularly between male children, or parental authority structures.

From a clinical perspective, this cultural framework presents both challenges and opportunities for family therapists. According to Corey (2023), effective family therapy requires clinicians to approach families with cultural humility, recognizing that values around authority, discipline, and protection are deeply embedded and often unquestioned. When abuse or violence is not identified by family members as a presenting concern, directly confronting it too early or without cultural sensitivity can lead to resistance, rupture, or premature termination of therapy.

In my opinion, the most effective way for a family therapist to bring up issues of abuse or violence in such situations is through a gradual, relational, and context-informed approach. Rather than labeling behaviors as “abusive” from the outset, therapists can begin by exploring family roles, communication patterns, and definitions of safety and protection. Wheeler (2020) emphasizes that advanced practice clinicians must assess for violence continuously and subtly, especially in cultures where hierarchical family structures normalize certain aggressive behaviors. Asking open-ended questions such as, “How does your family handle conflict when emotions run high?” or “What does discipline look like in your household?” allows the therapist to gather critical information without immediately triggering defensiveness.

Another key strategy involves reframing the conversation around shared values. In Haitian culture, protecting the family and maintaining respect are central values. A therapist can align concerns about violence with these values by framing safety as an extension of protection rather than a critique of authority. For example, discussing how fear or physical harm can undermine respect and long-term family cohesion can open space for reflection. Corey (2023) notes that reframing is especially powerful in family systems therapy because it allows families to view problematic patterns through a new, less threatening lens.

Psychoeducation is also essential but must be delivered thoughtfully. Research suggests that families are more receptive to discussions of violence when therapists normalize stress

responses and explain the impact of aggression on emotional regulation and relational trust (Douglas & Walsh, 2021). Instead of focusing on blame, therapists can highlight how chronic exposure to conflict affects children’s mental health, attachment, and coping skills over time. This approach is consistent with trauma-informed care, which prioritizes safety, empowerment, and collaboration (Wheeler, 2020).

Importantly, therapists must remain attentive to ethical and legal obligations, particularly when violence poses immediate risk. However, even mandated reporting can be handled in a culturally responsive manner by being transparent, supportive, and respectful of the family’s dignity. Studies show that when therapists clearly explain their role and responsibilities while maintaining empathy, families are more likely to stay engaged in treatment (Fontes & Plummer, 2022).

In conclusion, addressing abuse and violence in families that have not identified these issues requires patience, cultural humility, and clinical skill. For Haitian American families, acknowledging the father’s role as protector while gently challenging harmful expressions of authority can foster meaningful dialogue. By using open-ended assessment, value-based reframing, and trauma-informed psychoeducation, family therapists can bring hidden issues of violence into the therapeutic space in a way that promotes safety, insight, and long-term change.

Reply Alejandro Llanes Module 5 Discussion

Like all assumptions about family violence, mine are culture-bound. The US dominant culture encourages a preoccupation with autonomy, family privacy, and individual and collective resilience. Families subscribing to these principles tend to have low tolerances for violence, view it as normal and minimal, or otherwise frame it as conflict. Secrecy in the family and the avoidance of wider community involvement are valued. Victims may remain silent about abuse due to a desire to protect the family from shame, fear of legal or child protective services involvement, financial dependency, fear of stigma. Nevertheless, most cultures also stress safe, respectful, and nurturing treatment of family members, which creates a tension between ensuring the family remains intact, and protecting the victim.

Culture does not appear to cause family violence, but influences how violence is interpreted, responded to, and represented. For example, gender roles, authority, spirituality, and hierarchy may determine the power relationships in families, or who can speak up. Thus, family therapists should discuss the topic with cultural humility and without assumption. Trauma- and violence-informed care requires understanding the stigma, social barriers, and cultural context for a particular family in regard to their response to violence in the home. This allows for safety,

empowerment and mutuality to be prioritized, understanding that past harm can influence whether individuals disclose to the system (Wathen & Mantler, 2022).

If violence is not identified as the presenting problem, it is best to ask about it routinely and in a nonjudgmental way. Therapists can explain that they ask all families about conflict and safety because stress in relationships can affect mental and physical health. This universal framing reduces stigma, normalizes the experience, and communicates that the therapist is available to help if the concern changes. It relieves the family of the responsibility for deciding whether or not their experience was "serious enough" to talk about.

Brief opportunities should be provided for one-on-one contact with individual family members alone, and therapists must discuss confidentiality and mandated reporting with the family in a straightforward and forthright manner when asking sensitive questions. One of the most common reasons for resistance is fear of the unknown, which transparency seeks to counter, restoring a sense of control and trust in the therapeutic relationship.

Violence questions can be worded to avoid using labels, asking about fear, physical harm, threatening behavior, or controlling someone. These questions ease survivor determination or identifying violence in ways that are meaningful to survivors. Screening should not be done in isolation; it is recommended that screening for intimate partner violence be done in conjunction with assessment, referral, and access to support services (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, 2025). Without follow-up resources, disclosure may worsen distress and not lead to feelings of safety.

Clinicians should carefully consider the risks of situational couple violence and patterns of coercive control and whether conjoint family therapy could aggravate the risks of intimidation, severe violence and chronic fear. In those cases, safety planning, individual advocacy and coordination with community resources may be ethically warranted. Other cultural support systems, such as extended family and faith communities, should only be included with survivor consent and as a means to improve safety, not silence.