Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Violence: A Comparison of Antisocial and Family-Only Perpetrators

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 219-239 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joakim Petersson ◽  
Susanne Strand ◽  
Heidi Selenius
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Risk Management ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Interpersonal Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Swedish Version ◽  
Male Perpetrators ◽  
Risk Management Strategies

Subtyping male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) based on their generality of violence could facilitate the difficult task of matching perpetrator subtype with efficient risk management strategies. As such, the aim of the present study was to compare antisocial and family-only male perpetrators of interpersonal violence in terms of (a) demographic and legal characteristics, (b) risk factors for violence, and (c) assessed risk and the importance of specific risk factors for violence. A quantitative design was used in this retrospective register study on data obtained from the Swedish police. Risk assessments performed with the Swedish version of the Brief Spousal Assault Form for the Evaluation of Risk (B-SAFER) and police registers were used. A sample of 657 male alleged IPV perpetrators were classified as antisocial ( n = 341) or family-only ( n = 316) based on their generality of violence. The results showed that the antisocial perpetrators were significantly younger, as well as more psychologically abusive. Antisocial perpetrators also had significantly more present risk factors for IPV, and were assessed with a significantly higher risk for acute and severe or deadly IPV, compared with the family-only perpetrators. The subtypes also evidenced unique risk factors with a significant impact on elevated risk for acute and severe or deadly such violence. Key findings in the present study concerned the subtypes evidencing unique risk factors increasing the risk for acute and severe or deadly IPV. Major implications of this study include the findings of such unique “red flag” risk factors for each subtype. To prevent future IPV, it is vital for the risk assessor to be aware of these red flags when making decisions about risk, as well as risk management strategies.

The characteristics and violence risk management of women arrested by the police for intimate partner violence

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. 636-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer E. Storey ◽  
Susanne Strand
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Police Officers ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Violence Risk ◽  
Male Victims ◽  
Female Perpetrators ◽  
Risk Management Strategies

Research and management efforts in the area of intimate partner violence (IPV) have primarily focused on male perpetrators and female victims, resulting in more limited knowledge of female IPV perpetrators and their male victims. In the current study the violence risk assessments of police officers were examined in order to outline the characteristics of female perpetrators of IPV and their male victims. In addition, the officers’ assessments of violence risk and proposed risk management strategies are presented. Results reveal some similarities between the female perpetrators and male victims and their more studied counterparts. However, differences appear to be present in the perceived violence risk posed by the perpetrators and the violence risk management strategies proposed to reduce that risk and protect the victim. The results suggest a need for further research in the area, particularly with respect to the violence risk assessment and management of female IPV perpetrators.

Persistence and Potential Lethality in Intimate Partner Violence: Evaluating the Concurrent and Predictive Validity of a Dual Risk Assessment Protocol

2021 ◽  
pp. 107780122098834
Author(s):  
Kirk R. Williams ◽  
Richard Stansfield ◽  
Jacquelyn Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Predictive Validity ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Assessment Protocol ◽  
Risk Management Strategies ◽  
Domestic Violence Screening

This study seeks to determine the concurrent and predictive validity of a dual risk assessment protocol. It combines the risk of persistence in intimate partner violence (IPV) measured via the Domestic Violence Screening Instrument–Revised (DVSI-R) with supplemental items from the Danger Risk Assessment (DRA) bearing on the risk of potential lethality. We further test whether this assessment protocol reproduces disparities by race and ethnicity found in the larger population. Using a sample of 4,665 IPV male defendants with a female victim, analyses support both types of criterion validity. The DRA risk score is associated with felony charges, incarceration at the initial arrest, and the frequency of subsequent dangerous behavior. Results also suggest minimal predictive bias or disparate impact by race and ethnicity. Incorporating supplemental items bearing on potential lethality risk adds important information concerning the risk management strategies of those involved in IPV.

Intimate partner violence: treating abuser and abused

2007 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 376-383 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison M. Heru
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Psychiatric Comorbidity ◽  
Alcohol Misuse ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Diagnosis And Treatment ◽  
Male Violence ◽  
Male Perpetrators ◽  
Limited Success

Intimate partner violence is associated with significant psychiatric comorbidity. Treatment has focused on male perpetrators but recent studies indicate that this is of limited success in reducing male violence. This article reviews the current available treatments from three perspectives: that of the victim, the perpetrator, and the couple who wish to remain together. It also provides guidelines to assist the general psychiatrist in determining what treatment to offer patients who present with intimate partner violence. Guidelines emphasise the need for assessment of risk factors that indicate a potentially lethal relationship and the importance of the diagnosis and treatment of comorbidity, especially alcohol misuse and dependence.

Evaluating Community Factors Associated With Individually Held Intimate Partner Violence Beliefs Across 51 Countries

2021 ◽  
pp. 088626052110501
Author(s):  
Elyse J. Thulin ◽  
Justin E. Heinze ◽  
Marc A. Zimmerman
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Interpersonal Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Logistic Models ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Neighborhood Disorder ◽  
Structural Factors ◽  
Community Factors ◽  
Female Literacy

Globally, one in three women will experience intimate partner violence (IPV) within her lifetime. IPV attitudes are highly predictive of IPV. While a wealth of literature on risk factors related to IPV exist, an overarching critique in the field is the lack of studies examining risk factors across the socioecological framework. Using data from multiple administrative and individual surveys, this study fills a gap in the literature by evaluating the effect of meso-influences on physical IPV attitudes (i.e., permissibility of a man beating his wife) while accounting for known micro- and macro-risk factors in 64,466 individuals across 51 low-, middle- and high-income countries. Mixed-effects modeling was used to evaluate factors and identify comparative contributions of each factor representing the socio-ecological levels. We tested five multivariate logistic models. The final model indicated that greater perceived neighborhood disorder and less perceived neighborhood security were associated with physical IPV attitudes, while individual endorsement of interpersonal violence, belief in corporal punishment of children, holding greater patriarchal beliefs, being male, being separated from a significant partner, reporting greater household hunger and nationally lower levels of female literacy were associated with beliefs that IPV is acceptable. Overall, the findings of this study support that IPV is a complex behavior, influenced by factors across socio-ecological domains. However, data on neighborhood structural factors (i.e., exosystem) would help unpack the mechanisms between macro-, meso- and micro-level factors and may be important for protecting women from violence.

Intimate Partner Violence, Stalking, and Femicide

2021 ◽  
pp. 189-209
Author(s):  
P. Randall Kropp ◽  
Alana N. Cook
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Threat Assessment ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
Promising Practices ◽  
Post Secondary ◽  
Risk Management Strategies ◽  
Structured Professional Judgment

Professionals are commonly asked to address the risk of intimate partner violence (IPV) in criminal justice, civil court, health care, workplace, and post-secondary settings. This chapter reviews the literature addressing risk factors for IPV and the state of the art for threat assessment tools for this form of violence. Special attention is given to the topics of stalking and killing of intimate partners. While these issues are related to the more general problem of IPV, they require some unique considerations in conducting threat assessments. The chapter concludes that there remain difficulties in the field in defining “threat,” determining the role of the victim in threat assessment, and implementing effective risk management strategies. Promising practices in assessing and managing stalking are presented along with a model for formulating risk in high-lethality situations. Finally, a case study is presented to illustrate a structured professional judgment (SPJ) approach to threat assessment in this context.

Severe versus less severe intimate partner violence: Aggressors and victims

2021 ◽  
pp. 147737082199514
Author(s):  
Raúl Aguilar Ruiz ◽  
María José González Calderón ◽  
Abel González García
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Risk Management Strategies ◽  
History Of ◽  
Violence Severity ◽  
Controlling Behaviour

In order to study the differences between severe intimate partner violence (S-IPV) and less severe intimate partner violence (LS-IPV), reports by 16,385 women who had suffered some type of abuse in 2016 and 2017 were analysed by means of the Police Risk Assessment Questionnaire. Chi-square tests indicate that S-IPV aggressors present criminological features to a significantly greater extent and are more likely to perpetrate various types of violence against their partners (for example, sexual aggression, death threats, degrading treatment, and controlling behaviour). Their behaviours seem to depend more on their beliefs and attitudes than on any possible psychopathological disturbance. Likewise, the victims of S-IPV are significantly more likely to report substance abuse, isolation from their environment, and vulnerability due to a mental disorder or disability; furthermore, they are less likely to report their abusers and continue with the judicial process. Therefore, efforts must be focused on fighting isolation, guaranteeing access to assistance and support services, and protecting victims during the processing of the criminal investigation. Professionals must also be alert to conflicts between partners linked to emotional breakdown and apply the relevant risk-management strategies, especially in cases with a history of mistreatment of women and an increase in violence severity.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document