But a majority of them will grow up with "lower morals," like low goals, using their parents as role models and not wanting to be better then them, in the sense of being a part of a "broken household." Throughout their lives during times of trouble and times of failure they in turn associate this with the "broken household" experience. A number of kids will in life turn to fit the typical stereotype of "bad kids." The other side of the coin would be those kids who take this experience and make their life better and exceed their parents. The effect of domestic violence is much deeper then a physical one on the victim. An effect on me that I can see for myself is when I wrestle around with my dad, I know his weak spot and it is the spot I go for just naturally and ironically this spot is his shoulder. So as a child, psychologically I was fixated with this area from viewing what I did.
Domestic violence if taught and handled correctly can be the learning stone to the next level decreasing the number of incidents, and put a halt in the cycle. But if not addressed it could be a breeding ground for future offenders, and the cycle will continue on or start over depending on how you look at it as the beginning or the end. .
The missing piece of the cycle is how they in turn act as adults based on the factors of income and education levels put into by their morals and the choices and subconscious inputs I mentioned earlier. The income level in which a child receives is based on by a standoff between which paths they take, the low morals, or their own choice path. The upper class income level has the fewest of the three classes of domestic violence situations. Why? Some would say the no stress comfort level is present due to having the good life, some would say because they.
are afraid of losing wealth by divorce due to violence, but maybe inside the parents have high morals, some higher then their parents and therefore don't want to tamper their child's morals by exposing them to violence.
