Military Sexual Trauma and Intimate Partner Violence: Subtypes, Associations, and Gender Differences

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark R. Relyea ◽  
Galina A. Portnoy ◽  
Joan L. Combellick ◽  
Cynthia A. Brandt ◽  
Sally G. Haskell
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Sexual Trauma ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Military Sexual Trauma ◽  
And Gender

scholarly journals Intimate partner violence victimisation in early adulthood: psychometric properties of a new measure and gender differences in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e025621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexa R Yakubovich ◽  
Jon Heron ◽  
Gene Feder ◽  
Abigail Fraser ◽  
David K Humphreys
Keyword(s):  
Gender Differences ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Longitudinal Study ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Parents And Children ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Avon Longitudinal Study

ObjectivesTo evaluate the psychometric properties of a novel, brief measure of physical, psychological and sexual intimate partner violence (IPV) and estimate the overall prevalence of and gender differences in this violence.DesignData are from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), a birth-cohort study.SettingAvon, UK.Participants2128 women and 1145 men who completed the questionnaire assessment at age 21.Outcome measuresParticipants responded to eight items on physical, psychological and sexual IPV victimisation at age 21. Participants indicated whether the violence occurred before age 18 and/or after and led to any of eight negative impacts (eg, fear). We estimated the prevalence of IPV and tested for gender differences using χ2or t-tests. We evaluated the IPV victimisation measure based on internal consistency (alpha coefficient), dimensionality (exploratory factor analysis) and convergent validity with negative impacts.ResultsOverall, 37% of participants reported experiencing any IPV and 29% experienced any IPV after age 18. Women experienced more frequent IPV, more acts of IPV and more negative impacts than men (p<0.001 for all comparisons). The IPV measure showed high internal consistency (α=0.95), strong evidence for unidimensionality and was highly correlated with negative impacts (r=0.579, p<0.001).ConclusionsThe prevalence of IPV victimisation in the ALSPAC cohort was considerable for both women and men. The strong and consistent gender differences in the frequency and severity of IPV suggest clinically meaningful differences in experiences of this violence. The ALSPAC measure for IPV victimisation was valid and reliable, indicating its suitability for further aetiological investigations.

scholarly journals Sexual health (excluding reproductive health, intimate partner violence and gender-based violence) and COVID-19: a scoping review

2021 ◽  
pp. sextrans-2020-054896
Author(s):  
Navin Kumar ◽  
Kamila Janmohamed ◽  
Kate Nyhan ◽  
Laura Forastiere ◽  
Wei-Hong Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Health Disparities ◽  
Reproductive Health ◽  
Sexual Health ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Gender Based Violence ◽  
Gender Based ◽  
And Gender

ObjectivesThe COVID-19 pandemic has exposed and exacerbated existing socioeconomic and health disparities, including disparities in sexual health and well-being. While there have been several reviews published on COVID-19 and population health disparities generally—including some with attention to HIV—none has focused on sexual health (ie, STI care, female sexual health, sexual behaviour). We have conducted a scoping review focused on sexual health (excluding reproductive health (RH), intimate partner violence (IPV) and gender-based violence (GBV)) in the COVID-19 era, examining sexual behaviours and sexual health outcomes.MethodsA scoping review, compiling both peer-reviewed and grey literature, focused on sexual health (excluding RH, IPV and GBV) and COVID-19 was conducted on 15 September 2020. Multiple bibliographical databases were searched. Study selection conformed to Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Reviewers’ Manual 2015 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. We only included English-language original studies.ResultsWe found that men who have sex with men may be moving back toward pre-pandemic levels of sexual activity, and that STI and HIV testing rates seem to have decreased. There was minimal focus on outcomes such as the economic impact on sexual health (excluding RH, IPV and GBV) and STI care, especially STI care of marginalised populations. In terms of population groups, there was limited focus on sex workers or on women, especially women’s sexual behaviour and mental health. We noticed limited use of qualitative techniques. Very few studies were in low/middle-income countries (LMICs).ConclusionsSexual health research is critical during a global infectious disease pandemic and our review of studies suggested notable research gaps. Researchers can focus efforts on LMICs and under-researched topics within sexual health and explore the use of qualitative techniques and interventions where appropriate.

Neighborhoods and Intimate Partner Violence: A Decade in Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 155708512098763
Author(s):  
Emily M. Wright ◽  
Gillian M. Pinchevsky ◽  
Min Xie
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Structural Features ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Neighborhood Context ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Economic Disadvantage ◽  
The Past ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
And Gender

We consider the broad developments that have occurred over the past decade regarding our knowledge of how neighborhood context impacts intimate partner violence (IPV). Research has broadened the concept of “context” beyond structural features such as economic disadvantage, and extended into relationships among residents, collective “action” behaviors among residents, cultural and gender norms. Additionally, scholars have considered how the built environment might foster (or regulate) IPV. We now know more about the direct, indirect, and moderating ways that communities impact IPV. We encourage additional focus on the policy implications of the research findings.

scholarly journals Gender Differences in Witnessing and the Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence from the Perspective of Children in Finland

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (9) ◽  
pp. 4724
Author(s):  
Johanna Hietamäki ◽  
Marjukka Huttunen ◽  
Marita Husso
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Child Victim ◽  
Chi Square Test ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Gender Variations

Background—Intimate partner violence (IPV) has both direct and longer-term effects on children’s well-being. Much of the research thus far has relied on caregiver reports of IPV and clinical samples of children. By contrast, minimal research has examined violence between parents from the perspective of children using nationwide samples. Objective—This study explored the frequency of IPV witnessed by children and gender variations regarding the victims, perpetrators, and witnesses. Methods—The data were derived from a sample of 11,364 children from the Finnish Child Victim Survey 2013. The children were between 11 and 17 years old and were enrolled in the Finnish school system. The main methods of analysis included crosstabulation and the chi-square test. Results—The results indicate that children witnessed more IPV against their mother (4.9%) than their father (3.5%). Girls reported having witnessed more violence against both their mother (7.0%) and father (5.1%) than boys did (mothers 2.7%, fathers 1.8%). Girls’ reports of IPV against both parents were twice or more than twice as common as boys’ reports. Conclusions—The above differences might result from gendered expectations and boys’ and girls’ different relationships to violence, as well as differences in the recognition and interpretation of violent incidents. Therefore, practitioners should adopt a gender-sensitive approach as a precondition and practice for working with children in social and health care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document