Predictors of family violence through the COVID-19 pandemic: Structural equation modeling.

There has been much talk, globally and locally, about family violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. Family violence has received increasing interest from the researchers in many different fields, while family violence during the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak still needs researchers' attention to investigate its predictors and detect the prevalence among family members through this health crisis. This study aimed to investigate the spread of family violence and detect the predictors of it with the applied advanced statistical procedure, structural equation modeling (SEM). The researchers prepared the family violence scale that consisted of 21 items, and applied it in a random sample that consisted of (312) individual. The finding indicated that there are high levels of family violence, violence between spouses, violence from parents to children, and sibling violence. As well as, the findings found that the years of marriage are statistically significant of violence between spouses, violence from parents to children, and sibling violence, and the total score of the family violence. As well as, sex is a statistically significant predictor of violence between spouses. While the educational level, age, and income level did not predict violence (total score or dimensions). Based on the results of the current study, counseling programs to reduce family violence and psychotherapy programs to reduce the negative effects of family violence on parents and children must be planned. Therefore, the role of traditional and online family counseling and psychotherapy must be activated in light of the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

Major crises often create increasing stresses, especially in some groups in society. The measures taken by the government to reduce the spread of the COVID‐19 in the country, such as curfews, restrictions on freedom of movement, and home commitment, have raised questions about the fate of battered women during this exceptional period. At a time when individuals must remain in their homes to maintain public safety, many women find themselves trapped in the homes with men with a history of family violence, which may lead to an increase in cases of family violence against them (Arnout, 2020; Parkinson, 2019; Zhang, 2020).

The COVID‐19 pandemic threatens the right to home peace because it transforms it at a time of quarantine at the same time in prison, school, park, cinema, theater, exercise hall, or electronic games. It is not surprising that in such circumstances members of the same family turn into opponents, or at least into people who can resort to violence, which sometimes leads to tragedies that leave their mark on several generations of the same family. Family violence has increased with the COVID‐19 crisis, especially in families with less education and culture, and on the weakest groups, women, and children, because they focus on male anxiety and stress.

Thus, there has been much talk, globally and locally, about the rise in the phenomenon of FV during this period, as a result of the perpetrator's perpetual presence with victims in closed places. In France, for example, within 1 week, the rate of family violence rose to 32%, which prompted the World Health Organization, which is facing today the COVID‐19 pandemic, to issue a publication a few days ago refuting the causes of increased family violence during this period, and provides a review of the most prominent types of this violence. The report issued by the organization mentioned the role of governments, political leaders, health institutions, medical bodies, humanitarian and feminist societies, and members of society. The report indicates that before the spread of the virus, one of three women was exposed to family violence, but the stresses posed by the spread of the virus raised this percentage (Arnout, 2020; Zhang, 2020).

Violence in the family through COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak

International reports have warned of high levels of family violence during the period of family quarantine due to the spread of the COVID‐19 virus. The facts also indicate an increase in violence against women and children in particular in Arab countries. While calling on the authorities and societies to commit individuals to their homes and adopt social separation as a way to limit the spread of COVID‐19, the concerns of many workers and social groups rise to the surface to remind that the commitment of homes is not a luxury, not even safe for everyone. Among the groups most affected, women who are subjected to family violence imposed on them instead of isolation are two: isolation resulting from a forced stay at home and separation from the outside world, and isolation resulting from their staying alone with husbands who abuse them and control their destinies, and they now take control of all of them and movement for 24 h.

The Secretary General of the United Nations stated that the combination of economic and social stresses caused by COVID‐19, as well as restrictions on movement, all led to a significant increase in the number of women and girls facing abuse, in almost all countries, noting that statistics showed, even before the deployment, as a result of the emerging global coronavirus, a third of women worldwide have experienced some form of violence in their lives. The Secretary General of the United Nations said that this problem affects both developed and poor economies, with nearly a quarter of female university students in the United States of America reporting that they have experienced sexual abuse or misconduct, while partner violence has become a reality for 65% of women in parts of sub‐Saharan Africa. Physical violence has many ramifications, including depression and miscarriage. The Secretary General addressed the research conducted by the World Health Organization, which details the disturbing effects of violence on the physical, sexual, reproductive, and mental health of women. Women who are subjected to physical or sexual abuse are likely at twice the risk of miscarriage, and the experience almost doubles their risk of depression. In some regions, they are 1.5 times more likely to be infected with HIV, and there is evidence that women who are sexually abused are 2.3 times more likely to develop alcohol‐related disorders (Arnout, 2020; Arnout & Al‐Qadimi, 2019; Hardesty et al., 2012; Zhang, 2020).

FV is also known by several names: family abuse or marital abuse. The latter can be defined as a form of abusive behavior issued by one or both partners in the marital or family relationship. Family violence has several forms, including physical assault (beating, kicking, biting, and slapping. Throwing things, etc.), or psychological threat such as sexual assault, emotional abuse, control, tyranny, intimidation, or stalking and stalking, or negative passive abuse such as neglect, or economic deprivation, and family violence may be accompanied by conditions such as alcoholism and mental illness, awareness is among the things that help in treating and reducing family violence (Arnout, 2020; Hardesty et al., 2012; Weitzman & Behrman, 2010).

Motives for FV

Social motives are the customs and traditions that children inherit from parents and grandparents, and among these inherited cultural beliefs that a man has the right to control his life partner, giving the head of the family a high degree of prestige, and the belief that the amount of his manhood is managed by his ability to control his family with violence or strength, while these motives decrease as the percentage of culture and awareness increases in society, but some individuals do not believe in these traditions but the social stress around them pushes them to abuse their families, as other motives for violence arise from the main social changes that the family is going through, such as pregnancy or the illness of a family member, which necessitates one of the individuals who were neglected because of these changes to commit violence to control the situation and show oneself (Campbell et al., 2018; Parkinson, 2019; Zahran et al., 2009).

The types of social motives leading to violence vary according to the level of religion, or the level of the affected a family in the external environment, and according to the form of actions, traditions, and customs, the degree of violence will be either large or small, with the extent of the prevalence of images of social motives leading to violence, including different intellectual, age, religious, social, and cultural levels between spouses, instability of marital life, and polygamy, as well as conflicts between family members and the family of the couple's interference in its dissolution, the occurrence of divorce or the loss of one of the parents, and the wrong formation of one or both parents and the weakness of religious faith from the images of motives for family violence, as well as the loss of the language of communication and dialogue between family members, and the weak ties Family and ongoing conflicts over methods of raising children (Arnout, 2020; Schumacher et al., 2010; Zhang, 2020).

Economic drivers are the deteriorating economic situation in a family's life, resulting from losing a job, accumulating debts, or resorting to foreclosure drives the individual to violence toward his family members, as a result of feelings of disappointment and high levels of tension due to the state of poverty in which he lives. It is worth noting that the economic problems that lead to violence take different forms, including the following: The family's inability to provide for the needs of living, due to the lack of resources and the low level of income. Conflicts occur between family members, for lack of agreement on how to manage family resources. Conflicts between spouses arise from how the wife's salary is managed, and the possibility of adding it to the family budget (Arnout, 2020).

According to Arnout (2020), Enarson (1999), and Weitzman and Behrman (2010), the deteriorating economic conditions of a sudden accident of a family member, or the family's unexpected financial loss. Self‐motivated and psychological motivations: Self‐motivated are defined as the impulses that originate from within the human being and pushes him toward violence, and these motivations can be summarized in the difficulty of controlling anger, low self‐esteem, feelings of deficiency, personality disorders, alcohol, and drug abuse, and can also be divided into two types, as follows:

The first type: The motives that emerged due to external factors that a person has lived in since his childhood and may have been accompanied during his life, such as negligence or exposure to abuse, so he resorted to violence within the family, as these motives may appear due to watching a person in the childhood age of family violence, and its belief over time that the means of violence to set things family.

The second type: The motives that have emerged within the human, since its formation as a result of genetic factors, or as a result of illegal acts issued by the parents and influenced the behavior of the child. Victims of family violence is a phenomenon that spreads to all layers of society regardless of economic level, gender, or age. Therefore, the victims of violence category include all abused men, women, children, and the elderly, especially since the most vulnerable group to family violence in the category of women, as it appears that violence is usually intentional behavior, but sometimes it is practiced unintentionally and is often the result of individuals' inability to adapt to their families.

Types of family violence

Physical violence

Arnout (2020), Sharma and Borah (2020), and Zhang (2020) reported that violence, Physical violence, is defined as causing harm or causing bodily injury to a family member. Physical violence is achieved by the availability of two conditions; the first: that the individual does or refrains from doing a certain thing that results in physical harm, but the second condition: that this act is from previously, insistence on causing physical harm, while the two conditions are not required to occur simultaneously, as a period separates them as a state of neglect of parents to follow their children, which causes physical harm, and the motives of physical violence are not seen as a justification for the act of violence, whether motivated by revenge, breeding, or control of loss alive or obtaining money, as long as the two preceding conditions are met, the situation is considered as physical violence.

Psychological violence

Psychological violence is one of the most prevalent types of violence in society, but it is one of the most difficult types to be able to distinguish it or know the extent of its impact, because there are no visible physical effects on the victim, as it is difficult to prove if the victim reported to complaining for the concerned authorities, one of the forms of psychological violence is exposure to harmful words that causes contempt for the same victim, such as insulting, slandering, or notifying a family member that he is an unwanted person, or ignoring him, diminishing his role, and not taking his opinion on matters about the family (Arnout, 2020; Kaukinen, 2020; Weitzman & Behrman, 2010; Zhang, 2020).

Sexual violence

Sexual violence is defined as any act or statement that violates human dignity and breaks into the privacy of the body, whether it is physical sexual violence; And sexual prejudices and sexual violence are also a form of forcing children to engage in some practices, or exploiting them to make money, or other goals. The perpetrator of sexual violence is reserved for most societies to talk about these matters (Arnout, 2020).

Effects of family violence

Studies on the effects of violence against women conducted by the World Health Organization at the global level indicated that 30% of married women around the world are subjected to physical or sexual violence and that 7% of women aged 15 years and over are also subjected to sexual violence, but these vary the proportions according to the community in which they live. Some women who have experienced family violence need health care to treat the impact of violence, but doctors face difficulty in dealing with these cases because woman does not respond to disclosing her experience in exposure to violence or seeking help from the relevant authorities, this is due to the commons the fear and shame that the victim possesses, or the feeling of guilt, or the consideration of family concepts and traditions that prevent them from this, and therefore the necessary awareness must be provided to medical professionals on ways to deal with victims of women who have been subjected to violence, and the effects of violence against women can be classified (see Arnout, 2020; Hardesty et al., 2012; Parkinson, 2019; Zahran et al., 2009) to three types, which are as follows:

Long‐term physical effects: Long‐term physical and sexual violence leads to health problems such as arthritis, asthma, heart problems, stomach ulcers, colon syndrome, stress, problems with the immune system, sleep problems, nightmares, headache, and migraines, Unhealthy eating patterns, drug addiction, or alcohol.

Effects on mental health: Represented by physical and sexual abuse. Several symptoms appear as a result of exposure to violence, including loss of consciousness, vomiting, nausea, memory loss or difficulty in remembering and concentrating, and sleep disturbance, and this may be accompanied by psychological disorders such as anxiety and depression, and the acquisition of negative thoughts, as well as exposure to a post‐traumatic stress disorder, which results in feelings of stress. The victim is obliged to seek the help of a mental health professional, and many cases of abuse can lead to bad habits such as alcohol and drug use (Arnout, 2020; Enarson, 1999; Sharma & Borah, 2020; Zhang, 2020).

Effects of violence against men are subjected to violence in all its forms, but the reporting of the cases of violence among men is less than that of women, just as men who have been subjected to violence are more likely to abuse alcohol, drugs, and intoxicants, and older men who have been subjected to violence suffer symptoms of severe depression, and post‐traumatic symptoms have appeared in men greatly, and its impact varied according to location, race, and culture. Studies conducted by British police records in 2012 showed that 54% of victims of violence against men suffer from a deterioration in health Mentality, and they have a constant fear. Also, 29% of men who have experienced FV suffer from severe fear from their partner, and they have lost power over their families (Parkinson, 2019; Schumacher et al., 2010).

Hardesty et al. (2012) mentioned that the children of families suffering from emerging FV witness parents have a state of constant fear and anxiety in preparation for any violent situation that they may witness or be exposed to, so children are affected in different ways according to their different ages as follows:

Preschool‐age children: The effects of violence are the emergence of habits that appeared to them at an early age, such as bedwetting suck the finger, as they are showing signs anxiety, such as constant crying and groaning, signs of terror, such as stuttering and trying to hide, as well as difficulties in sleeping.

School‐age children: A child who witnesses cases of family violence at school age begins with a sense of guilt and blames himself, becomes more introverted, so his participation in school activities decreases, the numbers of his friends decrease, his respect for himself decreases, and a decrease in his school grades is observed, as well as health effects like headache and stomach pain.

Adolescents: The effects of violence on adolescents are unethical behavior, such as alcohol and drug abuse, as they have problems in making friends, their self‐esteem decreases, as well as their bullying of others, and they also show signs of depression and isolation that are usually more than girls than boys.

The effects of family violence on society (see Arnout, 2020; Enarson, 1999; Hardesty et al., 2012; Zahran et al., 2009; Zhang, 2020): Family violence is a cause of social impacts and a negative family as a result of the assault and threat, and among these effects are the following:

Family disintegration: Whereas the use of parents by force and violence in dealing with their wives and children deprives them of living in peace and stability, which leads to family disintegration.

Divorce: The separation of the spouses resulting from conflict and psychological maladjustment leads to separation of family members, increases the possibility of children being displaced, and exposes them to delinquency.

Social hostility: A child who lives in a family exposed to family violence is more likely to acquire aggressive behavior, so he becomes aggressive in defending himself, in dealing with his schoolmates and brothers at home, and his aggressive behavior also appears in sabotaging public property and in solving difficult situations facing him.

Juvenile delinquency: Delinquency is defined as a behavior that is contrary to the traditions of society. Psychologists and sociologists have found that the intensity of conflicts and family stresses creates children who tend toward deviant behavior.

Community security disorder: A free society that is not exposed to violence does not suffer from its members from any levels of tension and turmoil, so it is a safer and more stable society, while the spread of violence in society leads to its disorder and instability.

Explanation theories of family violence

Several theories of the phenomenon of family violence are explained. Freud sees the world that violence results from the inability of the ego to reconcile the innate tendencies that call for demolition and destruction, and the values and traditions of society whether ethical, or spiritual, religious, or social, dominate the aggressive and lustful tendencies expressed by individual violence. In the light of cognitive theory, violent behavior arises from a negative self‐perception, a negative interpretation of life's experiences and events, and a dark, futuristic view of the future. Negative feelings, such as sadness, depression, anxiety, disappointment, and loss of motivation, may make individuals vulnerable to violence from others (Arnout, 2020). FV, according to behavioral theory, is an innate response to frustration (Arnout, 2020; Arnout & Al‐Qadimi, 2019; Catalá‐Miñana et al., 2017; Hardesty et al., 2012; Zhang, 2020). Socialization based on racial, religious, or cultural discrimination is a reason for acquiring violence, just as male societies justify violence by men, in addition to the presence of several societies that consider violence to be part of the custom and culture prevailing in it. Functional constructivism theory considers violence in society results from a lack of community guidelines, or a lack of proper community control, or disturbance in some social values or patterns, whether economic, social, family, or political.

THE CURRENT STUDY

Parkinson (2019) found 17 women gave accounts of new or increased violence from male partners that they attribute to the disaster. Parkinson recommends investigating the relation between increased domestic violence and disasters. Therefore, the current study seeks to study family violence during the COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak, which contributes to the psychological empowerment of the family members, and to promote their mental health and psychological well‐being.

METHODOLOGY

Population and sample

A random sample consisted of 312 married persons (167 males and 144 females), their ages ranged between 28 and 53 years.

Tools

FV scale (FVS‐21)

The self‐report family violence scale was prepared by the researchers, which consisted of 21 items distributed on three dimensions, and each of them contains 7 items (see Table 1). The individual responds with a five‐point Likert scale (acceptance = 5 to not fully acceptance = 1). The correlations between FVS‐21 and the total score of the scale were calculated and the correlation coefficients ranged from 0.561 to 0.881 with significance at 0.01 level (2‐tailed). As well as, Cronbach's Alpha for the FVS‐21 was 0.907, Spearman–Brown coefficient for unequal length was 0.820. These results indicated that FVS‐21 is validated and reliable.

TABLE 1

The correlations between FV items and the scale

Items	Correlation	Items	Correlation	Items	Correlation
1	0.670**	8	0.765**	15	0.773**
2	0.813**	9	0.669**	16	0.652**
3	0.581**	10	0.821**	17	0.832**
4	0.769**	11	0.743**	18	881**
5	0.732**	12	0.801**	19	0.561**
6	0.832**	13	0.798**	20	0.832**
7	0.852**	14	0.835**	21	0.783**

**Correlation significant at (0.01) level.

Research design

A cross‐sectional design was used in this study to detect the prevalence of the family violence and to investigate the predictors of the family violence during the COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak.

Data analysis

All analyses were performed with SPSS 21.0 (statistics package for social sciences) and Amos (v.21) by maximum likelihood method to find the predictors of FV.

RESULTS

The prevalence of FV in light of the COVID‐19 pandemic

To determine the level of the FV through the COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak, the t‐test value of one sample was calculated to detect the differences between the test value and the mean of sample study scores in the scale of family violence. The results are shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2

One‐sample statistics

	N	Mean	Test value	SD	t	Sig. (two‐tailed)
Violence between spouses	312	23.192	21	5.748	6.737	0.000
Violence from parents to children	312	22.147	21	7.157	2.832	0.005
Sibling violence	312	24.814	21	5.509	12.229	0.000
Violence	312	68.391	63	16.556	5.752	0.000

The results shown in Table 2 indicate that there are high levels of family violence, violence between spouses, violence from parents to children, and sibling violence. The differences for one sample (5.752, 6.737, 2.832, and 12.229) were statistically significant at the level (0.000, 0. 005, 0.000, and 0.000), respectively.

The results about predictors of family violence during COVID‐19

The researcher drew a model of the relationships between the study variables (see Figure 1). And to test this proposed model, the structural equation modeling was used by the maximum likelihood estimation method to find out the predictors of family violence through the COVID‐19 pandemic outbreak

FIGURE 1

The structural equation model for the family violence predictors

To verify the conformity of the model, the researcher applied several indicators (Table 3) such as Chi‐square divided in Degree of Freedom CMIN/DF (1.198), which is not an insignificant value, and a Goodness Fit Index GFI (0.98), the Root Mean Square Error of Approximation RAMSEA (0.025), ECVI (Default = 0.255, Independence = 1.525), which indicates that the proposed model is good and appropriate with the data. The results shown in Figure 2 indicate that all paths of the model are statistically significant.

TABLE 3

Fit indices of the default model of the predictors of FV

Indicators	Values in this study
CMIN/DF	1.198
GFI	0.98
RAMSEA	0.025
NFI	0.970
RFI	0.924
IFI	0.955
CFI	0.995
AIC	Model	Value
	Default	79.183
	Independence	474.163
BCC	Model	Value
	Default	81.149
	Independence	475.117

FIGURE 2

The structural equation model for the predictors of family violence

In Table results about regression, indicated that:

TABLE 4

Regression weights: (Group number 1—Default model)

Paths			Estimate	SE	CR	P	Label
Violence from parents to children	←	Sex	0.516	0.785	0.657	0.511	par_1
Violence from parents to children	←	Marriage years	2.269	0.603	3.762	***	par_2
Violence from parents to children	←	Age	0.280	0.417	0.672	0.502	par_3
Violence from parents to children	←	Educational level	−0.376	0.591	−0.637	0.524	par_4
Violence from parents to children	←	Income	−0.137	0.751	−0.183	0.855	par_5
Violence between spouses	←	Sex	1.457	0.691	2.109	0.035	par_6
Sibling violence	←	Sex	−0.381	0.606	−0.630	0.529	par_7
Violence between spouses	←	Marriage years	1.219	0.531	2.298	0.022	par_8
Violence between spouses	←	Educational level	0.007	0.520	0.014	0.989	par_9
Violence between spouses	←	Income	−0.441	0.660	−0.668	0.504	par_10
Sibling violence	←	Income	−0.977	0.579	−1.688	0.091	par_11
Sibling violence	←	Educational level	−0.087	0.455	−0.190	0.849	par_12
Sibling violence	←	Age	0.250	0.378	0.660	0.509	par_13
Sibling violence	←	Marriage years	1.522	0.465	3.271	0.001	par_14

***P value significant at (0.001) level.

Sex is not a statistically significant predictor of violence from parents to children. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.657 in absolute value is 0.511. In other words, the regression weight for sex in the prediction of violence from parents to children is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Marriage years are statistically significant for violence from parents to children. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 3.762 in absolute value is less than 0.001. In other words, the regression weight for marriage years in the prediction of violence from parents to children is significantly different from zero at the 0.001 level (two‐tailed).

Age is not a statistically significant predictor of violence from parents to children. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.672 in absolute value is 0.502. In other words, the regression weight for age in the prediction of violence from parents to children is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Educational level is not a statistically significant predictor of violence from parents to children. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.637 in absolute value is 0.524. In other words, the regression weight for educational level in the prediction of violence from parents to children is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Income is not a predictor of violence from parents to children. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.183 in absolute value is 0.855. In other words, the regression weight for income in the prediction of violence from parents to children is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Sex is a statistically significant predictor of the violence between spouses. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 2.109 in absolute value is 0.035. In other words, the regression weight for sex in the prediction of violence between spouses is significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Marriage years is a statistical predictor of violence between spouses. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 2.298 in absolute value is 0.022. In other words, the regression weight for Marriage years in the prediction of violence between spouses is significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Educational level is not a statistically significant predictor of violence between spouses. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.014 in absolute value is 0.989. In other words, the regression weight for an educational degree in the prediction of violence between spouses is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Income is not a statistically significant predictor of violence between spouses. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.668 in absolute value is 0.504. In other words, the regression weight for income in the prediction of violence between spouses is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Income is not a statistically significant predictor of sibling violence. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 1.688 in absolute value is 0.091. In other words, the regression weight for income in the prediction of sibling violence is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Educational level is not a statistically significant predictor of the probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.19 in absolute value is 0.849. In other words, the regression weight for an educational degree in the prediction of sibling violence is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Age is not a statistically significant predictor of sibling violence. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.66 in absolute value is 0.509. In other words, the regression weight for age in the prediction of sibling violence is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

Marriage years are a statistically significant predictor of sibling violence. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 3.271 in absolute value is 0.001. In other words, the regression weight for marriage years in the prediction of violence is significantly different from zero at the 0.001 level (two‐tailed).

Sex is not statistically significant in sibling violence. The probability of getting a critical ratio as large as 0.63 in absolute value is 0.529. In other words, the regression weight for sex in the prediction of violence is not significantly different from zero at the 0.05 level (two‐tailed).

DISCUSSION

The results of the current study showed that there are high levels of family violence, violence between spouses, violence from parents to children, and sibling violence. As well as, the findings found that the years of marriage are statistically significant of violence between spouses, violence from parents to children and sibling violence, and the total score of the family violence. As well as, sex is a statistically significant predictor of violence between spouses, while the educational level, age, and income level do not predict violence (total score or dimensions). These results coordinate with the findings of the previous studies (such as, Campbell et al., 2018; Enarson, 1999; Kaukinen, 2020; Parkinson, 2019; Schumacher et al., 2010; Weitzman & Behrman, 2010; Zahran et al., 2009; Zhang, 2020) that found a correlation between family violence and crisis. Moreover, found a high level of family violence.

In these stresses caused by COVID‐19, the basis for the emergence of problems between the spouses is the loss of understanding of the mutual needs of the other party. The man is looking for a wife who will have a residence and a secret that will lead her to the possibility of himself, and is expected to be understood as it is, and not as it should be to any man. The wife also dreams of someone who understands her in person and her privacy and gives her consideration, respect, and satisfaction for all her intimate desires that only appear with him within the legitimate marital relationship. In these stressful circumstances of COVID‐19, if the husband fails to understand his wife's needs, and is determined to treat her according to stereotypes prevalent on the woman, we will find him offering her things he envisions that she will be happy with, while she was waiting for him to provide her with other things, and vice versa from the woman's side to the man, this increases the distance between the spouses and may lead to divorce (Arnout, 2020; Parkinson, 2019; Zhang, 2020).

The decision of several countries around the world to prohibit curfews to prevent the spread of COVID‐19 has put thousands of women and children in front of the possibility of increasing family violence against them, while experts expected the emergence of new cases of family violence, as China recorded a rise in the number of cases of violence, which in some places reached three times the previous rate, after only weeks of strict isolation procedures.

The FV that has returned to the forefront with the imposition of family quarantine cannot be ignored, and this time it affects not only the wife or husband but also children. What is before Corona will not be the same. This bitter truth is understood by all of us, and it may not only destroy families but societies and an entire generation, while part of the solution is in our hands. Let us turn a little to our mental health and preserve it as much as we fear what COVID‐19 might do to our bodies (Arnout, 2020; Parkinson, 2019; Zhang, 2020).

The Secretary General of the United Nations stated, “For many women and girls, the most threatening place of violence is the place where the oasis of safety is supposed to be for them. It is at home. So I make a new call today for peace, in homes all around the world.” “Over the past weeks, and with increasing economic and social stresses and growing concerns, we have witnessed a horrific global surge in FV,” the UN Secretary General said. He urged all governments to “make the prevention of violence against women and the reparation for the harm caused by this violence, a key part of their national plans to address COVID‐19,” and called on judicial systems to continue to “prosecute aggressors,” calling in particular for “the creation of emergency warning systems” (Arnout, 2020; Parkinson, 2019; Sharma & Borah, 2020; Zhang, 2020).

The Director General of the World Health Organization has warned that women in abusive relationships are more likely to experience violence, such as their children, as family members spend more time in close contact, and families deal with additional pressure and potential economic or job losses, stressing that “often In those circumstances, women are less connected to family and friends who may be protected from violence,” he said. And at the invitation of the United Nations Secretary General forever to countries to put prevention and therapy plans within their development plans to end violence against women, which has become one of the main effects of the emerging epidemic of the COVID‐19. This is because situations of violence and crises exacerbate society's disparities and emphasize the need to focus on the people most affected by responses.

The methods of treating family violence are represented in several forms, such as if the victim and the perpetrator resort to a specialized therapist who is provided with assistance to raise the level of self‐confidence, and to provide treatment to the aggressor by training him in methods of anger management, and to stop blaming and criticizing others, as well as my past can be studied by the aggressor, knowing the reasons that contributed to his violent behavior as an adult, and treating it to stop the practice of abuse against others. As for the abused children, the therapist can offer them several games and activities that build their confidence and increase their confidence in others (Arnout, 2020).

Future directions

Based on the current study results, counseling programs to reduce family violence and psychotherapy programs to minimize family violence's adverse effects on parents and children must be planned. Therefore, the role of traditional and online family counseling and psychotherapy must be activated in light of the outbreak of the COVID‐19 pandemic. Future studies must direct toward studying the efficiency of the online family counseling and psychotherapy intervention programs during the COVID‐19 pandemic, and also toward drawing the decisions about the family violence cases in societies during disasters and crises like COVID‐19.

Limitations

This study is limited by its methodology, it was applied the descriptive design method; thus we need to conduct experimental studies to investigate the effect of the psychotherapy interventions. Moreover, it applied the quantitative method; therefore, we need future qualitative studies to understand deeply the family violence causes, motives, and results during COVID‐19.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The author declares that she has no conflict of interest.

ETHICS STATEMENT

The author of this manuscript has complied with APA ethical principles in their treatment of individuals participating in the research, program, or policy described in the manuscript.