农村遭受性侵儿童家庭亲密度与适应性研究

邵丽晶; 曾婧; 何邱平; 蔡丽; 杨梅; 向兵

doi:10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2021.02.021

农村遭受性侵儿童家庭亲密度与适应性研究

doi: 10.16835/j.cnki.1000-9817.2021.02.021

邵丽晶¹,
曾婧²,
何邱平¹,
蔡丽¹,
杨梅²,
向兵^2, ,

1.
武汉科技大学医学院，湖北 430065
2.
武汉科技大学妇女儿童健康促进中心

基金项目:

2015年国家社会科学基金项目 15BSH057

详细信息

作者简介:
邵丽晶(1997-)，女，湖北武汉人，在读硕士，主要研究方向为儿少卫生与妇幼保健

通讯作者:
向兵，E-mail：397126318@qq.com

中图分类号: G 78 R 179 R 193
计量
- 文章访问数: 602
- HTML全文浏览量: 338
- PDF下载量: 25
- 被引次数: 0
出版历程
- 收稿日期: 2020-07-11
- 修回日期: 2020-09-24
- 网络出版日期: 2021-04-06
- 刊出日期: 2021-02-25

Family cohesion and adaptability among rural children with sexual abuse experience

1.
School of Medicine, Wuhan University of Science and Technology, Wuhan (430065), China

摘要

摘要: 目的了解农村儿童性侵害发生状况及其与家庭亲密度和适应性的关系，分析可能影响受害儿童家庭功能的因素，为该类人群的创伤后干预提供科学依据。方法采用分层整群抽样方法, 在湖北省汉川市和郧西县抽取1 666名农村中学生进行问卷调查，应用多因素Logistic回归分析受害儿童家庭功能的影响因素。结果有175人(10.50%)遭受过非接触性性侵，44人(2.64%)遭受过接触性性侵。与正常儿童相比，受害儿童的家庭亲密度(F=8.97)和适应性均较低(F=4.09)(P均 < 0.05)。在性侵害受害儿童中，母亲离家(OR=0.20)与家庭亲密度较差呈正相关，看护人文化水平较高以及恰当的教育方式与家庭亲密度和适应性较低呈负相关(P均 < 0.05)。结论农村性侵害儿童的家庭功能不容乐观，其中母亲离家、看护人文化水平较低和采用不合理教育方式家庭中的受害者家庭功能显著较差。应加强对此类儿童的重视，尽可能减小性侵等负性事件对孩子造成的影响。
- 性 /
- 暴力 /
- 家庭 /
- 适应，心理学 /
- 回归分析 /
- 儿童 /
- 农村人口
Abstract: Objective To understand the prevalence of sexual abuse among rural children and its association with family cohesion and adaptability, and to explore factors that may affect household functions of the victims. Methods A total of 1 666 rural middle school students in Hanchuan and Yunxi, Hubei were recruited with stratified cluster sampling method, multivariate Logistic regression was used to analyze associated factors of the household functions of the victims. Results A total of 175 (10.50%) reported non-contact sexual abuse and 44 (2.64%) reported contact sexual abuse. Compared with control group, sexual abuse victims reported lower scores of family cohesion (F=8.97, P < 0.01) and adaptability (F=4.09, P=0.02). Among the victims, maternal absence was a risk factor for poor family cohesion(OR=0.20, P < 0.01), higher parental educational level and appropriate parenting methods(P < 0.05) were protective factors for family cohesion and family adaptability. Conclusion Household functions of children sexual abuse victims in rural areas are generally poor, especially for victims with mothers absence, low parental education and improper parenting style. More attention should be paid to such children to minimize the impact of negative events such as sexual abuse.
- Sex /
- Violence /
- Family /
- Adaptation, psychological /
- Regression analysis /
- Child /
- Rural population

HTML全文

表 1 不同人口统计学特征农村儿童遭受性侵报告率比较

Table 1. Comparison of sexual abuse among rural children with different demographic characteristics

人口统计学指标	组别	人数	遭受性侵经历人数	χ²值	P值
年龄/岁	≤12	266	28(10.53)	2.23	0.33
	13~15	934	124(13.28)
	≥16	466	67(14.38)
性别	男	910	151(16.59)	20.88	< 0.01
	女	759	68(8.99)
留守类型	非留守	605	65(10.74)	4.86	0.18
	父亲离家	290	41(14.14)
	母亲离家	105	15(14.29)
	双亲离家	606	98(14.71)
看护人文化程度	小学及以下	546	69(12.64)	0.31	0.86
	中学	991	134(13.52)
	大专及以上	129	16(12.40)
教育方式	放任	90	13(14.44)	8.51	0.01
	打骂	264	49(18.56)
	说理	1 312	157(11.97)
注：()内数字为报告率/%。

下载: 导出CSV

表 2 有无性侵中学生家庭亲密度与适应性得分比较(x±s)

Table 2. Comparision of family cohesion and adaptability between students with/without sexual abuse(x±s)

组别	人数	亲密度	适应性
无性侵经历	1 447	68.25±10.98	45.16±9.56
非接触性性侵	175	65.10±11.52	43.18±10.01
接触性性侵	44	64.30±11.16	43.14±10.32
F值		8.97	4.09
P值		< 0.01	0.02

下载: 导出CSV

表 3 性侵犯受害者家庭亲密度与适应性影响因素的多因素Logistic回归分析(n=219)

Table 3. Multivariate Logistic regression analysis of influencing factors of family cohesion and adaptability of sexual abuse victims(n=219)

影响因素	选项	亲密度		适应性
影响因素	选项	OR值(OR值95%CI)	P值	OR值(OR值95%CI)	P值
留守类型	非留守	1.00		1.00
	父亲离家	1.18(0.60~2.35)	0.63	1.47(0.74~2.93)	0.27
	母亲离家	0.20(0.07~0.52)	0.00	0.49(0.18~1.31)	0.10
	双亲离家	1.03(0.59~1.80)	0.92	1.36(0.79~2.36)	0.27
看护人文化程度	小学及以下	1.00		1.00
	中学	1.69(1.00~2.84)	0.05	2.11(1.24~3.59)	0.01
	大专及以上	3.23(1.19~8.76)	0.02	4.35(1.62~11.70)	0.00
教育方式	放任	1.00		1.00
	打骂	1.42(0.47~4.34)	0.54	1.01(0.34~3.00)	0.99
	说理	4.17(1.47~11.87)	0.01	3.30(1.20~9.09)	0.02

下载: 导出CSV

参考文献(24)

[1]	BARTH J, BERMETZ L, HEIM E, et al. The current prevalence of child sexual abuse worldwide: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Int J Public Health, 2013, 58(3): 469-483. doi: 10.1007/s00038-012-0426-1
[2]	STOLTENBORGH M, VAN IJZENDOORN M H, EUSER E M, et al. A global perspective on child sexual abuse: meta-analysis of prevalence around the world[J]. Child Maltreat, 2011, 16(2): 79-101. doi: 10.1177/1077559511403920
[3]	BUTCHART A, HARVEY A P, MIAN M, et al. Preventing child maltreatment: a guide to taking action and generating evidence[M]. Geneva: WHO, 2006: 7-16.
[4]	FERGUSSON D M, MCLEOD G F H, HORWOOD L J. Childhood sexual abuse and adult developmental outcomes: findings from a 30-year longitudinal study in New Zealand[J]. Child Abuse Negl, 2013, 37(9): 664-674. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.03.013
[5]	PORTS K A, FORD D C, MERRICK M T. Adverse childhood experiences and sexual victimization in adulthood[J]. Child Abuse Negl, 2016, 51: 313-322. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.08.017
[6]	庞晓华, 黄艳. 儿童性侵犯对受害者的影响及其调节因素[J]. 山西高等学校社会科学学报, 2018, 30(9): 37-41, 49. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SXGD201809008.htm PANG X H, HUANG Y. The impact of child sexual abuse on victims and its regulatory factors[J]. Soc Sci J U Shanxi, 2018, 30(9): 37-41, 49. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SXGD201809008.htm
[7]	赵会杰, 马梅, 朱克修, 等. 当前儿童性侵犯研究现状及进展[J]. 国外医学(医学地理分册), 2018, 39(1): 85-88. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8883.2018.01.027 ZHAO H J, MA M, ZHU K X, et al. A review of current status and progress of child sexual abuse[J]. Foreign Med Sci(Sect Medgeogy), 2018, 39(1): 85-88. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-8883.2018.01.027
[8]	GODBOUT N, BRIERE J, SABOURIN S, et al. Child sexual abuse and subsequent relational and personal functioning: the role of parental support[J]. Child Abuse Negl, 2014, 38(2): 317-325. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2013.10.001
[9]	MACKENBACH J D, RINGOOT A P, VAN DER E J, et al. Exploring the relation of harsh parental discipline with child emotional and behavioral problems by using multiple informants. The generation R study[J]. PLoS One, 2014, 9(8): e104793. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104793
[10]	段成荣, 周福林. 我国留守儿童状况研究[J]. 人口研究, 2005, 29(1): 29-36. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6087.2005.01.004 DUAN C R, ZHOU F L. A study on children left-behind[J]. Popul Res, 2005, 29(1): 29-36. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-6087.2005.01.004
[11]	於珊珊, 王撬撬, 苏燕, 等. 儿童性侵害的影响、成因与预防对策[J]. 科教文汇(上旬刊), 2020(6): 159-160. DOI: 10.16871/j.cnki.kjwha.2020.06.070. YV S S, WANG Q Q, SU Y, et al. The influence, causes and preventive measures of children's sexual abuse[J]. Sci Educ Art, 2020(6): 159-160. DOI: 10.16871/j.cnki.kjwha.2020.06.070.
[12]	杨素萍. 农村留守女童性侵害防范调查研究: 广西样本[J]. 南宁师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2019, 40(5): 148-154. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYXI201905024.htm YANG S P. An Investigation of guarding against sexual harassment imposed to the left-behind rural girls: samples from Guangxi[J]. J Nanning Normal University, 2019, 40(5): 148-154. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYXI201905024.htm
[13]	廖琴香. 我国农村留守儿童性教育现状与对策研究[J]. 农村经济与科技, 2019, 30(13): 208-210. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-7103.2019.13.086 LIAO Q X. Research on the current situation and countermeasures of sex education for left-behind children in rural China[J]. Rural Econ Sci Tech, 2019, 30(13): 208-210. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-7103.2019.13.086
[14]	张赛, 路孝琴, 杜蕾, 等. 家庭功能评价工具家庭亲密度和适应性量表的发展及其应用研究[J]. 中国全科医学, 2010, 13(7): 725-728. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2010.07.013 ZHANG S, LU X Q, DU L, et al. Development and Application of FACES[J]. Chin Gen Pract, 2010, 13(7): 725-728. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1007-9572.2010.07.013
[15]	刘玲, 王静, 狄艳. 高血压性脑出血患者术后家庭亲密度、家庭适应性与自我感受负担的相关性分析[J]. 护理实践与研究, 2019, 16(24): 82-84. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HLSJ201924035.htm LIU L, WANG J, DI Y. Correlation analysis of postoperative family intimacy, family adaptability and self-perceived burden in patients with hypertensive cerebral hem-orrhage[J]. Nurs Pract Res, 2019, 16(24): 82-84. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-HLSJ201924035.htm
[16]	彭淋, 张思恒, 杨剑, 等. 中国儿童期性虐待发生率的Meta分析[J]. 中华流行病学杂志, 2013, 34(12): 1245-1249. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XIWS201409025.htm PENG L, ZHANG S H, YANG J, et al. Meta-analysis on the incidence rates of child sexual abuse in China[J]. Chin J Epidemiol, 2013, 34(12): 1245-1249. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XIWS201409025.htm
[17]	陈晶琦, 韩萍, 连光利, 等. 中国6省市2 508名大学生儿童期性虐待经历回顾性调查[J]. 中华流行病学杂志, 2010, 31(8): 866-869. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-6450.2010.08.007 CHEN J Q, HAN P, LIAN G L, et al. Prevalence of childhood sexual abuse among 2 508 college students in 6 provinces of China[J]. Chin J Epidemiol, 2010, 31(8): 866-869. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-6450.2010.08.007
[18]	PAPALIA N, LUEBBERS S, OGLOFF J R P. Child sexual abuse and the propensity to engage in criminal behaviour: a critical review and examination of moderating factors[J]. Aggres Viol Behav, 2018, 43: 71-89. DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2018.10.007.
[19]	周伽, 向兵, 杨梅, 等. 湖北省农村小学生对性侵犯的认知情况及影响因素分析[J]. 中国健康教育, 2018, 34(10): 887-889, 901. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGJK201810005.htm ZHOU J, XIANG B, YANG M, et al. Prevalence of child sexual abuse and its influencing factors among rural primary school students in Hubei Province[J]. Chin J Health Educ, 2018, 34(10): 887-889, 901. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGJK201810005.htm
[20]	费立鹏, 沈其杰, 郑延平. "家庭亲密度和适应性量表"和"家庭环境量表"的初步评价: 正常家庭与精神分裂症家庭成员对照研究[J]. 中国心理卫生杂志, 1991(5): 198-202, 238. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZXWS199105001.htm FEI L P, SHEN Q J, ZHENG Y P, et al. Preliminary evaluation of the family intimacy and adaptability scale and the family environment scale: a controlled study of normal and schizophrenic family members[J]. Chin J Ment Health, 1991(5): 198-202, 238. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZXWS199105001.htm
[21]	ROSENTHAL M Z, HALL M L R, PALM K M, et al. Chronic avoidance helps explain the relationship between severity of childhood sexual abuse and psychological distress in adulthood[J]. J Child Sex Abuse, 2005, 14(4): 25-41. doi: 10.1300/J070v14n04_02
[22]	上官霜月. 母亲外出与农村儿童健康: 来自CFPS数据的证据[J]. 西部经济管理论坛, 2018, 29(1): 63-71. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-1124.2018.01.009 SHANGGUAN S Y. Mother's migration and children's health: evidence from CFPS data[J]. West Forum Econ Manag, 2018, 29(1): 63-71. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.2095-1124.2018.01.009
[23]	许琪. 父母外出对农村留守儿童学习成绩的影响[J]. 青年研究, 2018, 423(6): 43-55, 96. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-1789.2018.06.007 XU Q. The influence of parents' going out on the academic performance of left-behind children in rural areas[J]. Youth Stud, 2018, 423(6): 43-55, 96. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-1789.2018.06.007
[24]	李雪. 家庭教育方式对儿童个性形成影响的探究[J]. 科教文汇(上旬刊), 2019(7): 127-128, 170. DOI: 10.16871/j.cnki.kjwha.2019.07.058. LI X. Study on the influence of family education on the formation of children's personality[J]. Sci Educ Art, 2019(7): 127-128, 170. DOI: 10.16871/j.cnki.kjwha.2019.07.058.