Intimate Partner Violence Flashcards
domestic violence
any violence occurring between family members
Intimate partner violence
any violence occurring between intimate partners who are living together or are separated
- also called spousal violence
how IPV differs from general violence
targeted at specific individuals
- primary (current or former IP), secondary (children, new partner, etc.) victims
close relationship between creates more opportunities for violence to occur
- repetitive and may increase in frequency or severity over course of a relationship
types of IPV
verbal psychological/ emotional financial physical sexual
measuring IPV
conflict tactics scale (CTS) or CTS2
- 39 items into 5 scales
criticisms:
1. Does not include all potential violent acts
2. does not take into account different contexts or consequences of same act for men and women
- ex 40% of women report injury vs 24% men
3. does not access motivation for violence, therefore initiated and responding to violence are treated equally
Straus 2012
CTS/CTS2
research should be on reducing all violence not just violence by men
Carney et al., 2007
female partner violence occurs at the same rate as male partner violence
Brown (2004)
female partner injured - males charged 91%
male partner injured - females charged 60%
no injury, males 52%, females 13%
history of IPV reform
14th century roman catholic church - encouraged husbands to beat wife out of concern for "spiritual well being" before 1945 - Rule of Thumb - rod no bigger than base of man's right thumb - legal and socially acceptable 1970s - battered women's movement - exposed failures of law, medicine and society to respond to female victims - first shelters for battered women 1980s - change in marital rape laws - husband could no longer legally rape wife - charter of rights and freedom 2010s - other protections - provincial legislation changes
IPV and Canada
1993 - 51% of women 2018 - 30% of all violent crime - 45% of violent crime against females 79% of victims are female - 25-29 at highest risk - 2x as likely if LGBTQ - lesbians and bisexual women, 4x more likely than heterosexual 19% of cases reported to police
IPV and pregnancy
- 10% of female victims report violence during pregnancy
- more likely to escalate and experience all and more severe forms of violence
- increased risk for pregnancy complications
- alienation from positive support, increased dependence on perpetrator, increased stress, increased risk for violence
IPV and aboriginal populations
report 2x amount of IPV
- aboriginal women more likely to be victimized
- more childhood abuse and witness abuse
- women more likely to contact police than non aboriginal women
is IPV a gendered problem
interactive/ mutual violence is common
- 45.5% of IPV
- men underreport victimization
- men more likely to seriously injure female partners
- women more likely to report fear
- men more likely to continue or escalate abuse after separation
Minority stress model
potential explanation for IPV in LGBTQ populations
- due to stigma, stress, prejudice, discrimination experienced
- more stress than other individuals - leads to more instances of violence
IPV and Covid 19
caused spike in IPV
- ability to escape abusive situations has reduced
IPV and University students
- female less likely to be perpetrators of serious assault and sexual coercion
- 29.8% any assault
- 5.8% serious assault
- 21.5% any sexually coercive act
- substance use strongly linked to perpetrating
patriarchy
broad set of cultural beliefs and values that support male dominance of women
observational learning
learning through watching others
intigators
in social learning theory, these events in environment act as stimulus for acquired behaviors
- aversive - produce emotional arousal
- incentive - perceived awards for engaging in aggression
regulators
in social learning theory, these are consequences of behaviors
evolutionary psychoogy
takes evolutionary history of a species into account when understanding a psychological trait and what led to it’s origination, development, and maintenance
Social learning theory and IPV
Bandura, then Dutton
- IPV learned through observation, modeling, and reinforcement
instigators
- regulators - external and self punishment
intergenerational transmission of violence hypothesis
– IPV result of observational learning
background situational model
- background factors + proximal factors (instigators) influence expression of IPV
Gondolf (1985)
male-emotional funnel system
- aversive instigators
- male batters tend to label many emotional states as anger
selective pressure
environmental circumstance that presents an opportunity for new genes to develop that give a survival and or reproductive advantage to the individual with the genes
Evolutionary theory for IPV
violence to control females and sexual fidelity
- females with higher mate value than partners are at increased risk for IPV due to superior capacity for leaving relationship, males put at risk for rivals
- genetics and epigenetics
- gene that causes stress reactivity and poor self regulation
- more likely to perpetrate violence towards partners
nested ecological model
Dutton
social learning theory
- focuses on relationships between multiple levels and how to operate together to initiate expression of IPV
IPV theory solution
best understood as result of accumulation of different risk factors in multiple domains
why do IPV victims stay
environmental barriers
- fear of retaliation
- lack of alternative means of economic support
socialization barriers
- concern for children
- lack of support from family and friends
- fear of losing custody of children associated with divorce
psychological factors
-learned helplessness
- hope that partner will change
also:
- safer as know what to expect
- low self esteem
Cycle of abuse
phase 1: tension building
- anger, blaming, arguments and fighting
phase 2: explosion
- yelling, threats, physical violence, destroying objects, sexual abuse
phase 3: honeymoon phase
- saying sorry, making excuses, promising to change
returning to abuser IPV
-70% of women who leave return at least once reasons: -31% sake of children - 24% to give another chance - 17% promise of change - 9% lack of money or place to go - 22% felt safer as knew what to expect
family violence and animal maltreatment
- 41% of men arrested for IPV also commit at least one act against animals
- 1.5% of men general public
- 72% threatened or harmed pet
- 54% pets hurt or killed by partner
R v. Lavallee
1990 batters women syndrome used as murder defense - self defense
Flynn (2000)
battered women and pets
- 90% of pet abused were considered emotional support
- 65% of pet abuse group worried about pets safety
family only batterer
Male spousal batterer who is typically not violent outside home, does not show much psychopathy and does not possess negative attitudes supportive of violence
Dysphoric/ borderline batterer
male spousal batterer who exhibits some violence outside family, is depressed, has borderline personality traits, and has problems with jealousy
generally violent/ antisocial batterer
male spousal batterer, violent outside of home, engages in other criminal acts, has drug and alcohol problems, has impulse control issues, and possesses violence supportive beliefs
IPV typologies and research
not all perpetrators are same in characteristics and nature of IPV they engage in
- characterological violence
- situational violence
Psychopathology - Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart
Behavioral - Johnson
characterological violence
stems from desire for power and control
situational violence
stems from emotional dysregulation and conflict
Psychological IPV typology
Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994)
- family only batterer - 50%
- dysphoric/borderline - 25%
- antisocial - 25%
Behavioral IPV typology
Johnson (2008)
- coercive control/ intimate terrorism
–chronic, more severe IPV, escalates over time
— more likely to result in injury
–isolation, intimidation, minimization
Situational couple violence
- arguments escalate into occasional violence
- low frequency IPV
- minor violence
- more likely to be reciprocal and sporadic
separation instigated violence
- moderate to severe
self defense/ violence resistance
- response to coercive control by other partner
- may or may not cause injury
Limitations of IPV typologies
can aid treatment matching to address specific offender needs
problems with stability
- individuals can change perpetration types and thus ability to inform treatment can be limited
Babcock et al., 2003
female batterers typology
- partner only (PO)
- use reactive violence out of fear and self defense
- Generally violent (GV)
- more instrumental violence
- more traumatic symptoms
- more abuse from mothers
mandatory charging policies
gives police authority to lay charges against suspect where there are reasonable and probable grounds to believe domestic assault has occurred
- can be done without victim consent
Sherman and Berk (1984)
police responses separation, mediation, arrest - recidivism rates: separation 26-28% mediation 18-37% arrest 13-19%
- arrest only works for employed men - only if have something to lose
Duluth Model/ derivative
domestic abuse intervention project
- violence by men on women
- grounded in theory of patriarchal dominance
- goal is to change behavior via psychoeducation and in group processing and modeling healthy relationships and conflict resolution
- limited effectiveness, likely due to lack of addressing psychiatric and or substance abuse and trauma history
- based on feministic model
- 75% drop out rate
couples therapy
IPV treatment to improve communication
- only recommended in situational common-couple violence
- effective with substance abuse using couples
- multi-couple group therapy
- demonstrated success with mild to moderate situational common couple violence
group therapy
- group CBT
- most common
- battered/ abuse intervention programs
- violence is learned behavior
- anger management, communication skills, relaxation techniques
- most effective if comorbid psychiatric and substance use are also addressed
- success with CBT and motivational interviewing modalities and in conjunction with individual therapy
other interventions for IPV
- medication or hospitalization
- interpersonal, anger and vocational skills program
- legal crisis employment counselling
- restrictions on activity, movement, association or communication for perpetrators
criminal harassment
crime that involves repeatedly following, communicating with, watching, or threatening a person directly or indirectly
restraining order effectiveness
low to medium risk of IPV less likely to recidivist if had restraining order than high risk
risk assessment for IPV
decision making process through which the best course of action is determined by estimating, identifying, qualifying or quantifying risk tools: - Danger assessment (DA) -DVSI-R (actuarial) - ODARA -B-SAFER -DVRAG (actuarial) -SARA-V3 (SPJ)
DVARG
- predicts future male to female IPV
SARA-V3
- predicts future IPV for males or females over 18 years old
intimate partner homicide
IPH
- more common among female victims
- 30-60% of homicides annually
- 10-25% involve additional victims
- 30-40% involve perpetrator suicide
IPH lethality factors
acute conflict - stalking, ultimatum capacity for serious violence - use of weapons serious inhibition -mental state, substance abuse, suicidal thoughts
Shaffer et al., 2018
young offenders in greater Vancouver and IPV
- SAVRY, YLS/CMI, and psychopathy
- problems with tools for IPV - none accurate for youth
- 62.5% of SARA-V3 empirically supported for youth, 8% promising, 30% possible
- risk factors missing (parenting, low school safety, neighborhood crime etc.)
- no protective factors
- created Youth intimate partner abuse Risk assessment guide (YIPA)
- SARA-V3 with things added and taken out
stalking prevalence
men (4%) women (7%)
- women 15-24 highest rates
- higher for university students
- females (9-30%), males (11-17%)
- women more likely to be harassed by former partners, men acquaintances
Kropp, Hart, Lyon (2002)
described 4 types of stalkers
ex-intimate stalker
most common
- engages in stalking after intimate relationship breakup
love obsessional stalker
rare
- intense emotional feelings for the victim but who has never had an intimate relationship with them
delusional stalker
rare
- suffers from delusions and wrongly believes they have relationship with victim
- often have delusional disorders, schizophrenia, or bipolar disorder
grudge stalker
rare
- knows and is angry at the victim for some perceived injustice
