The term “cycle of abuse” is often used to describe two different patterns or models that commonly occur in situations of domestic violence. The first, and probably most frequent, use of the term describes the “circular” cycle of phases in the dynamics between an abuser and their victim. From the “honeymoon” phase, the tension builds until the abuser lashes out in an explosion incident of violence, verbal tirade, or other abusive act. There is then a phase of denial and reconciliation, bringing the cycle back to the honeymoon phase. Learn more details about this model, plus its uses and limitations in DVSN’s November 2022 blog post, “The Cycle of Abuse: Imperfect Model or Useful Tool?”. This post will focus on the other cycle of abuse, the “Intergenerational Cycle of Abuse”, which instead of addressing the one-on-one dynamics level, describes the patterns and effects of abuse that recur and remain throughout multiple generations of a family.
What is the Intergenerational Cycle of Abuse?
The intergenerational cycle of abuse is also known as intergenerational violence, transgenerational violence, and generational violence. This post will use “abuse” in place of “violence” to encompass a wider set of behaviors. Intergenerational abuse refers to abuse perpetrated or experienced by parents, caregivers, or siblings while children are growing up, that is then repeated by those children when they become adults. The intergenerational cycle is similar whether the children are victims of abuse themselves (child abuse) or if they witness abuse of and/or by a member of their family/household (childhood domestic violence). While many of these children do not repeat these patterns, they do have a higher risk of becoming abusers and/or victims of abuse as adults, especially when compounded by social factors. The term intergenerational abuse can also apply at a societal level with structural and/or cultural abuse of certain racial and ethnic groups, such as black people and Native Americans in the US. While this post discusses the intergenerational cycle of abuse on a single-family level, it should be noted that societal abuse often impacts the cycle on that smaller scale.
Generational Trauma
While most research on intergenerational abuse focuses on the repetition of the same abusive behaviors over multiple generations, some studies suggest that even if abuse is not repeated by subsequent generations, the trauma of that abuse may continue to negatively affect them in multiple ways. Trauma can have mental health and lifestyle effects that impact the entire family, such as anxiety, depression, addiction, poverty, diminished attachment, chronic stress, and unstable living environments. This may contribute to compromised parenting, such as struggling to provide consistent emotional security and support, and reinforcing harmful gender norms like “emotional vulnerability is ‘unmanly’” or “marital rape is impossible”. Per trauma therapist Elena Cherepanov, immediate survival reactions and coping strategies that helped parents through their experiences of abuse may have different impacts when taught (consciously or unconsciously) to their children. For example, parents who learned as children that asking for help was dangerous may pass on a general fearful or distrustful outlook on life and on helpful professionals, causing the next generation to avoid seeking support that may benefit them. Sometimes, even with loving, non-abusive parenting, trauma that is unresolved and/or avoided can have unintentional ripple effects. Children may sense there is something painful in their parent’s past that is not spoken about but still causes feelings such as shame, fear, and sadness, which can impact their wellbeing. (Dixon, MCR, NCACIA)
Statistics
While the majority of children who experience or witness abuse do not become abusers or victims as adults, and many actively oppose/try to stop it, growing up in an abusive home remains the single best predictor of domestic violence later in life (UNICEF, Equimundo). A German study found that parents who experienced early life maltreatment (ELM) were almost three times as likely to maltreat their own children compared to those who did not experience ELM. A Dutch research review found a 65% chance that parents who experienced maltreatment would go on to maltreat their own children (Meinck). Per a 6-year American study, childhood abuse and neglect also increase the likelihood of criminal offenses (49% of childhood victims vs 38% of the control group) and violent crime (18% vs 14%), with almost half of participants arrested for a nontraffic offence by the age of 32. A North American study found those exposed to violence in the home were 15 times more likely to be physically or sexually assaulted than the national average, noting that many worldwide studies confirm this correlation. While individuals of any gender can be either victims or abusers, boys who witness abuse are more likely to become abusers as adults, and girls who witness abuse are more likely to become victims as adults (Volpe). One study found boys who witness domestic violence are twice as likely to abuse their own partners and children when they become adults. Another study determined that over two-thirds of men charged with assaulting a female partner reported a history of child abuse or exposure to intimate partner violence.
Why Does Intergenerational Abuse Happen?
There are many different factors that contribute to the intergenerational cycle of abuse. These factors can be on an individual level, a familial level, a community level, a cultural level, or a national level. Various factors may be linked or compound each other to increase risk in a complicated web of causality.
Genetics & Epigenetics
As with many discussions of child development, there is a question of “nature vs nurture” with intergenerational abuse. While most theories and studies support “nurture” being more important, there is growing research and evidence of genetics also influencing the risk of intergenerational abuse. One British study of both biological and adoptive relations found strong familial aggregation of interpersonal violence among “first-degree relatives” (such as siblings), particularly women, and a lower aggregation for more distant relatives (such as cousins). Beyond potential genetic predispositions, an American study posits that mothers’ experiences of abuse and related psychopathology may partially negatively affect their children’s development, interactive behavior, psychopathology, and physiology through genetics and fetal and perinatal processes.
Clinical social worker Elizabeth Dixon suggests that an individual’s emotional history begins before they are conceived. “All the eggs a woman will carry form in her ovaries while she is a fetus in her mother’s womb,” she explains, “In other words, when your mother was in your grandmother’s womb, she carried, at that time, the egg that eventually became you. This means that a part of you, your mother, and your grandmother all shared the same biological environment. In a sense, you were exposed to the emotions and experiences of your grandmother even before you were conceived.” In this way, people may be directly exposed to the impacts of abuse on their mother and grandmother long before they are able to remember any impacts they themselves might experience as children. This biological intergenerational transmission is related to epigenetics, the study of how one’s environment and other factors change how genes are expressed. An individual’s genetic code does not alter; the “groundwork” or “instructions” for one’s physical and psychological development does not change. However, external factors can influence how these instructions are used or “expressed”, whether, for example, a particular gene is active or not, and thus whether particular proteins are produced. A study of PTSD and epigenetics found that significant parental trauma (particularly maternal) modified stress response genes and put their future offspring at increased risk of mental and physical illnesses, emotional dysregulation, and other trauma-related vulnerabilities (Black). The factors that influenced the expression of the parents’ genes were passed down biologically to their children.
Social Learning Theory
On the other side of the “nature vs nurture” coin, the most common and widely accepted explanation for the intergenerational cycle of abuse is known as “social learning theory”. Social learning theory was developed by Albert Bandura in 1977 as the idea that people learn by watching other people. Applied to intergenerational abuse, Dr. Sherry Hamby says, “It can explain why a child who grows up in a violent home might be a violent adult—they see adults use violence to get their way and social learning theory would suggest that kids will copy that behavior.”. Children who witness abuse not only learn that it is a normal, acceptable, and effective behavior for conflict resolution and/or getting what they want, but, conversely, often do not learn that any other, non-abusive behavior could be just as or even more effective. They only know the behavior their parent(s) modeled, and it encoded in their developing brain before they understand what is happening or even if they recognize it is wrong. “A little boy watches this happen to his mother and thinks, ‘This is something I would never do,’” explains professor and family therapist Dr. Sandra Stith, “But when they start to deal with anger in their own relationship, it easily becomes a pattern they can use again…” This may correlate with the “general aggressive model”, which suggests that children exposed to violence “form aggressive scripts” that they use to deal with stressors and frustrations in their relationships in the form of intimate partner violence.
Many studies have confirmed social learning theory as a primary method by which the intergenerational cycle of abuse is perpetuated. A study by Dr. Stith and colleagues found that it particularly correlates along gender/sex lines, with children mimicking the parent of their same sex/gender identity (ie. boys model their fathers’ behavior but not their mothers’, and girls model their mothers’ behavior but not their fathers’), and that this association is stronger for males. This correlates with the previously discussed statistic that boys are more likely to become abusers as adults and girls victims, as they imitate this dynamic in the previous generation. The observation, modeling, and imitation of social learning theory is not limited to individual parents/caregivers either. In the broader “cultural cognitive theory”, children may also mimic violence and abuse perpetrated by their peers, other role models, or their society in general. Multiple studies suggest that overall, males are more likely than females to model the behavior of their fathers, peers, and other men in their society. (Meinck, Equimundo)
Gender Norms
The societal level of social learning theory may be related to gender norms. Violence and abuse are connected to the long history of women’s perceived inferiority and men’s perceived superiority, where men use these behaviors to maintain power and control over women. Studies have shown that men exposed to intimate partner violence in childhood are more likely to display hostility toward women, to desire to control them, and to display anger or negative attitudes toward them, which increases the likelihood of gender-based violence. Similar research found that the status of women in society, the learned use of violence to resolve interpersonal conflicts, and men’s use of power over women may also contribute to intergenerational abuse. In societies with more traditional gender norms, men may react to any perceived “loss of manhood” by “performing their masculinity” through abuse of their less powerful family members, usually women and children. With these harmful perceptions reinforced on the familial and societal level, gender norms can contribute to the continuation of the intergenerational cycle of abuse. (Equimundo)
Socio-Ecological Systems/Person-Process-Context-Time Theory
Gender norms play a part in the “socio-ecological systems theory” developed by Urie Bronfenbrenner in 1979, which he updated in 2007 to the broader “person-process-context-time theory”. In relation to intergenerational abuse, this theory suggests that rather than the biological propensity or learned behavior of abuse being transmitted across generations, it is a wide range of societal and environmental risk factors that are transmitted, perpetuating a situation where abuse is more likely. These factors include things such as poverty, substance use, criminal behavior, rigid gender roles, disrupted family lives, single parenthood, unstable home environment, and poor physical and mental health. “Assortive mating theory”, where people tend to marry people with similar backgrounds to themselves, can compound and perpetuate these risk factors. Religious beliefs and communities can contribute positively or negatively by either protecting and supporting vulnerable people or by tolerating or encouraging harmful factors that align with traditional religious views. Protective factors such as support networks, community resources, and education can also influence intergenerational abuse in this theory, either positively by their presence, or negatively by their lack. Unlike other theories discussed, one study suggests that the intergenerational transmission of person-process-context-time theory is stronger from mothers (rather than fathers) to their offspring, as mothers are more likely to be primary caregivers. (Meinck, Yang, Kong)
Emotion Dysregulation
The effects of many of the factors contributing to intergenerational abuse discussed above can boil down to emotion dysregulation. Emotion dysregulation is when a person has a decreased awareness of, knowledge of, and/or ability to control their emotions. This may translate to poor impulse control, poor attention regulation, negative stress reactions, alienation and conflict in relationships, and an inhibited ability to adjust behavior and emotions to situational demands, all of which can lead to an increased risk of violence and abuse. Emotionally dysregulated parents are more likely to abuse their children and to exhibit poor parenting practices, either of which may contribute to their children’s learned experience and emotional dysregulation, increasing their risk of perpetrating or experiencing abuse as adults and continuing the cycle. Even if intergenerational abuse is not continued, emotion dysregulation can contribute to intergenerational trauma and mental health concerns in future generations.
People begin learning to regulate and control their emotions as infants and toddlers from their caregivers and household members. The earlier in life one is exposed to abuse or other contributors, the greater the chance they will develop emotion dysregulation and the more intense it may be. Children who witness abuse at an early age have fewer experiences of positive emotional interaction in relationships and are thus at increased risk of dating violence as adolescents and general youth violence, even more so than those who witness more continued abuse in middle childhood. Several studies have also suggested that beyond the “chronic and salient stress” of exposure to abuse impacting children’s cognitive control processes, genes and environmental interactions may also influence emotion dysregulation. Thus, emotion dysregulation may be a major mechanism of intergenerational abuse and trauma that brings together the various transmission theories. (Meinck, Yang)
ACEs – Adverse Childhood Experiences
All of the factors discussed in the theories above, from experiencing and witnessing abuse and neglect to poverty, divorce, death, and parents who are incarcerated, exhibit criminal behavior, are emotionally dysregulated, and/or have substance abuse, physical, or mental health issues, are known as “adverse childhood experiences” or “ACEs”. They can have severe and long-lasting effects on child development, including physical and mental health issues. The more ACEs a person has, the higher the risk of these issues and the higher the risk of continuing intergenerational violence. (Ahmed, Equimundo, IUH) Studies in Japan and Malaysia found that ACEs can contribute to multiple kinds of intergenerational abuse, including child abuse, intimate partner abuse, and elder abuse, both as perpetrators and victims, suggesting they have an incredibly wide-ranging significance in the intergenerational cycle of abuse.
Breaking the Cycle
While it can seem like everything is stacked against those experiencing intergenerational abuse and/or trauma, the cycle can be broken. Just because the next generation is at increased risk of becoming abusers or victims, it is by no means definitive that they will be. There has been a lot of research on interventions that can improve mental health and reduce the risk of intergenerational trauma after a child has been exposed to abuse. There is much less research and emphasis on interventions for high-risk families that may be able to help prevent this abuse in the first place, but experts suggest a combination of public awareness, policies that thoughtfully weigh punitive measures against rehabilitative support, and a shift of mindset from judgment to compassion, from seeing “bad parents” to seeing people who were once children at risk without protection could go a long way toward prevention. (Black, NCACIA, Equimundo)
Acknowledge & Address Abuse Early
Children are very observant and aware of what is happening in their home. In fact, a CDC study found that 80-90% of children can give detailed descriptions of abusers’ tactics even when parents were sure they know what was going on. If left unaddressed, children will draw their own conclusions about abuse, which may be completely wrong and detrimental to their wellbeing and development. They may believe the abuse is their fault, feel guilty that they should have done more to help the abused parent, or normalize abuse as acceptable and effective. Addressing these misconceptions early can help prevent them from becoming core beliefs and help mediate the trauma of the experience. (Dixon) Check out DVSN’s April 2025 blog post, “Discussing Domestic Violence with Children: Tips for Talking to Kids” for helpful suggestions to prepare for what could be difficult conversations.
Before acknowledging and addressing abuse with children, parent victims may need to do the same for themselves. Addressing their own feelings of shame, guilt, doubt, mistrust, resentment, and insecurity can help prevent them being passed down to the next generation. “Saying, ‘I screwed up, I ruined my kids’ lives’, that’s not a helpful thing,” says Dr. Stith, “You need to work through your own shame and trauma.” This is not to say that it isn’t perfectly valid and normal to have these feelings, but being aware of them and learning how they may impact oneself and others can help lessen that impact and reduce the risk of intergenerational cycle of abuse continuing. “Experiencing ACEs impacts how you parent and how you experience being a parent. Building awareness about that impact can help you do things differently,” explains child and adolescent clinical psychologist Amanda Broderick, suggesting “When you’re having a hard time as a parent or feeling stressed, does it evoke something about how you were parented? Before you repeat old habits, ask yourself: Do I need to take a moment for myself? Do I have the support I need? Do I have someone who can help me do things differently than how I saw a parent act?” Working through the pain and trauma of abuse for oneself and with one’s family can help break the cycle.
Transmission of Resilience
Acknowledging and addressing abuse is the first step in transmitting resilience. Just as traumatic experiences can affect subsequent generations, so to can the capacity to overcome trauma and build resilience. Loving and open communication is key to this transmission. Mark Wolynn, family trauma expert and author of It Didn’t Start With You, encourages parents to “tell [your children] the terrible things that happened to you and whatever you know about what happened to your parents and your grandparents. They could be the unwitting recipients of painful feelings from the past. When you tell them what tragedies smolder in the family history, it can come as a great relief to them—especially if they make the connection that they’ve been carrying what belongs to you or to your parents or grandparents.” Talking openly about abuse, be it one’s own experience or that of a family member, fosters connection and allows survivors and descendants alike the opportunity to deal with lingering effects of that trauma and further heal from them. (Dixon)
PCEs – Positive Childhood Experiences
The opposite of ACEs are PCEs, positive childhood experiences. Just like the more ACEs one has, the more at risk one is for intergenerational abuse, the more PCEs one has, the more one may be able to offset the effects of trauma and build resilience. Examples of PCEs are feeling safe and protected by adults in their home, feeling supported and heard by their family, feeling like they belong in their home/school/friend group, involvement in sports/clubs/other activities, having two or more non-parent adults who support and take an interest in them, and having someone who takes them to the doctor when needed. According to Dr. Broderick, “Positive childhood experiences matter. It can stop some of these unhealthy cycles when you have an adult who cares about you, whether it’s a parent, coach, teacher, or family member. ACEs don’t happen in isolation, and we’re starting to see how PCEs can help to disrupt them.” (IUH)
Therapy
Many studies have shown the benefits of therapy, particularly trauma-informed therapy, in disrupting the intergenerational cycle of abuse. Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is one of the most commonly cited beneficial approaches. CBT is based on the idea that faulty or unhealthy ways of thinking and behavior contribute to mental health issues. It focuses on actionable strategies to change these unhealthy thoughts and behaviors through recognition, understanding, learning problem-solving and coping skills, facing fears, and building confidence (APA). A systemic review of studies from 2000-2012 found that CBT with a trauma focus was the best treatment option for youth with a history of trauma. Regardless of length and inclusion of a trauma narrative component, CBT with a trauma focus improved children’s symptoms and safety skills, and enhanced parenting skills. CBT is flexible and can be undertaken one-on-one, with the child and protective parent together, or even in a group setting.
A different type of therapy that has been widely found effective is interpersonal therapy. Interpersonal therapy is a time-limited (12 sessions, for example) approach that focuses on dealing with issues in a social context. It can help with coping with resolving relationship conflict, adapting to changes in relationships, grief after the loss of a loved one, and handling difficult social situations and social isolation. It can be group therapy, with participants learning and practicing social skills to help reduce symptoms and improve life functioning. Similarly short, group programs focusing on mindfulness-based approaches, such as meditation, have also been shown to improve symptoms of PTSD, anxiety, and depression for adults and children who experienced abuse. Yoga may be particularly relevant to trauma survivors because it helps them to regain bodily awareness after the common PTSD symptom of physical dissociation. (Equimundo)
Child and family traumatic stress intervention (CFTSI) is another brief (4-8 session) type of therapy designed to help reduce trauma and prevent PTSD. Developed for children and their caregivers, CFTSI works best when implemented within 30 to 45 days after a traumatic event. It aims to improve communication between the child and their caregiver and teach coping skills to both parties that can help increase family support. CFTSI is an early intervention that may lead into longer-term therapy and/or treatments. A Yale study found that children receiving CFTSI were 65% less likely than comparison youth to meet the criterial for full PTSD and 73% less likely to meet the criteria for partial or full PTSD at a 3-month follow-up. CFTSI reduced symptoms of PTSD by 69% (Equimundo).
Another therapeutic technique that may help with trauma is eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR). Unlike other therapies, EMDR focuses directly on the memory of the traumatic event, aiming to change the way it is stored in the brain to reduce problematic symptoms. According to the theory of Adaptive Information Processing (AIP), the brain stores normal memories smoothly, networking them to connect to other memories. During disturbing events, the brain goes “offline”, and that networking doesn’t happen correctly, creating a disconnect or “wound” that didn’t heal, so the brain doesn’t receive the message that the danger is over and may connect newer experiences to the trauma, reinforcing the negativity. EMDR uses eye movements and other forms of rhythmic bilateral stimulation (such as tones or taps), along with guided instructions, to access traumatic memories in very specific ways to reprocess the event and “repair” the “mental injury”, resuming the brain’s natural healing process, so that the event is not “relived” and is more manageable. EMDR is relatively new but has been shown to be effective and can help a person faster than other methods. (APA, Cleveland)
Social Services
In line with the person-process-context-time theory of intergenerational abuse transmission, there is strong evidence showing that comprehensive child and family welfare services focusing on poverty alleviation and safe and stable housing helps reduce violence against children and women (Meinck, WHO). Community-level interventions, supportive community culture, and safe, nurturing community environments can help create or reinforce PCEs and give children different or further examples of positive relationships and problem solving to improve their social learning and development (Equimundo). There has been some small success with individual home visiting programs aimed at preventing child maltreatment in at-risk families, with services with higher quality training and supervision (especially a reflective supervision component) proving more effective (Dittmann). Interventions to improve parent mental health and parenting practices through emotional regulation have been shown to be effective in helping both parents and children (Meinck). Beyond in situ services, programs like Camp Hope America, a free, trauma-informed camping and mentoring program promoting hope and healing for children and teens impacted by domestic violence, can make a real difference in disrupting the intergenerational cycle of abuse.
In a different kind of social support, a CDC study on intergenerational transmission of violence found that living in a three-generational household played a protective role. Researchers posited that the sharing of family resources and childcare reduced economic pressures and parenting demands that contribute to the risk of intergenerational abuse and neglect. Acknowledging that some three-generation households actually increase the distress of adult children whose parents were abusive, they found that the majority of outcomes were positive, especially among single parents and, logically, adult children living with their non-abusive parent. Overall, three-generation co-residence offered social supports in the form of emotional, financial, informational, and instrumental assistance, which not only increased positive parent-child interactions through demonstrations of patience, sensitivity, and responsiveness, but also decreased abuse risk-factors such as parental psychological distress. (Kong)
School Intervention Programs
Schools are a particular community arena where interventions are possible and can be helpful. Therapy, (especially a variation on CBT, CBTIS or “cognitive behavioral therapy for use in schools”) has been effective in school environments. Group education activities focused on changing attitudes around gender equality, violence, and self-efficacy in relationships, as well as school-wide advocacy campaigns and those targeting key school stakeholders (governments and civil society organizations) have been shown to increase students’ knowledge and ability to navigate issues, control over their lives, self-confidence, and participation in action denouncing violence and supporting solidarity, while decreasing harmful gender norm attitudes and inter-student verbal and psychological abuse. One program found not only individual and inter-student improvements, but also that the likelihood of teachers reporting abuse increased from 88% to 100% and 100% of adolescent participants had begun to ask their parents about sexuality, relationships, and family plans. In another program, a greater focus on “trauma-informed” or “trauma-sensitive” schools and interventions for traumatized children led to an interruption in the “school-to-prison pipeline” and an increased student academic and emotional success and overall wellbeing. Multi-tiered approaches seemed to fare best, with both school-wide programing and targeted individual interventions for children with greater needs. (Equimundo)
A Complex Yet Breakable Cycle
The intergenerational cycle of abuse is a deeply ingrained, complicated issue, with a web of interconnected potential contributing factors. While it can seem like a trap people are born into and can never escape, there are many different interventions and opportunities at an individual, community, and national level that can make a significant difference in breaking the cycle. The more people are aware of these, the more families will be able to interrupt harmful patterns of abuse and trauma from prior generations and look to a future without abuse.
Please check this monthly blog to read updates about DVSN
and stay informed about domestic violence.
Or, join our mailing list to get the information sent conveniently to your inbox!