| The dilemma of sexual abuse-effects research has often been viewed in the context of whether the repercussions of sexual abuse are most devastating when considering the severity of traumatic violation events per se or when focusing on deficits and disruptions in nurture of the primary caregiver-child relationship and the family environment involved. Prior research in the field has evidenced the tendency to over-pathologize sexual abuse outcomes due to extreme case focus, without due consideration of nonclinical, nonpsychiatric effects for survivors in the general population. This study investigated the separate and interaction effects of childhood/adolescent sexual abuse and detrimental family environment on the long-term outcomes of traumatic distress and internal object representations for a population of nonclinical, middle-class, working women between the ages of 30 and 55 years. Participants included 38 women who reported sexual abuse and 135 women who did not recall or report sexual abuse. Participants completed four retrospective self-report questionnaires: a background information questionnaire, the Trauma Symptom Inventory (Briere, 1995), the Family Environment Scale-Form R (Moos & Moos, 1974, 1986, 1994), and the Early Memories Questionnaire, based on established early memory query guidelines, ratings, and descriptors (Bruhn, 1992; Fowler, Hilsenroth, & Handler, 1995; Mayman, 1968; Mayman & Farris, 1960). The unique contribution of this study lies in its investigation of the impact of sexual abuse and detrimental family environment upon adult object representations of nonclinical, middle-class women survivors, utilizing early memories of self, maternal and paternal caregiver, and family unit. An exploratory focus investigated the contribution of environmental supports and internal resources. The results of the study indicated that (a) severity of sexual abuse exhibited virtually no effect on long-term traumatic distress or object representations, with the notable exceptions of impaired self-reference and family object representations; (b) emotional abuse exhibited consistent strength for predicting adult traumatic distress; (c) family environment showed significant capacity for influencing adult object representations; (d) no significant interaction effects were found for sexual abuse and detrimental family environment on traumatic distress or object representations; and (e) external supports evidenced sufficient beneficial impact to indicate this is an area deserving further study. |
