Causes And Consequences Of Intimate Partner Violence

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is described a psychological, emotional, sexual or physical harm to a person by their spouse or former partner (Breiding et al, 2015). National reports have revealed that about one in three women experience IPV (Sharron et al, 2015). Intimate partner violence is a growing epidemic in the United States. However, recent studies have focused on rural regions, such as Appalachia.

Domestic violence exists everywhere and affects all people regardless of socioeconomic status, sexual orientation, sex, ethnicity, or religion. Most times physical violence is accompanied by emotional abuse and controlling behaviors. The result of domestic violence includes physical injury, psychological issues, and death. Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) occurs in 1 of 4 women in the United States and can be correlated with a loss of emotional, social, physical and mental health. Intimate Partner Violence is an issue that does not receive a lot of recognition and is overlooked majority of the time. There is a lot of information on women in intimate partner violence relationships that explains how it affects women physically, mentally, and socially.

This section will discuss the topic intimate partner violence against women as discussed by other scholars and authors. Various books will be analyzed to understand the topic better. The section will also explain the main issues independently analyzing different literature and will also discuss the similarities and differences. The issue has emanated a lot of public concern as more young women continue to suffer in silence with the fear of speaking out against their partners. Some women, however, are courageous and have opted to speak about the issue in public without fear of being judged or criticized. Careful analysis of the different books will help to determine the different perspectives that different authors understand

United States social history has had many defining moments in which attitudes of domestic violence has changed. However, some of them did not make a huge impact or movement enough to change society’s views. Per class discussion, we learned that for many centuries women were seen as property of men and used as reproduction. There was a lack of respect and being beaten was part of them norm but at the same time men were considered the women’s “protectors”, which is ironic because women needed protection from their husbands. To top it all off, divorce was looked frown upon, leaving women no choice but to stay with their partners.

Violence against women is a substantial public health problem in the United States. According to data from the criminal justice system, hospital, and medical records, mental health records, social services, and surveys, thousands of women are injured or killed each year as a result of violence, many by someone they are involved with or were involved with intimately. Nearly one-third of female homicide victims are killed by an intimate partner (Federal Bureau of Investigation 2001). Throughout this, many will read about intimate partner violence also called

According to (Breiding, Smith, Basile, et al. (2014) , a national Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, conducted in the U. S. in 2011 revealed, The lifetime prevalence of physical violence by an intimate partner was an estimated 31.5% among women. An estimated 22 .3% of women experienced at least one act of severe physical violence by an intimate partner during their lifetime. The lifetime prevalence of physical violence by an intimate partner was an estimated 27.5% for men. An estimated 14 of men experienced at least one act of severe physical violence by an intimate partner during their lifetimes. Where the victim/offender relationship was known, female murder victims were almost 6

Females are the most highly affected by domestic abuse according to studies done around the world. Typically aggressive behavior at home is frequently more than simply physical misuse. It involves sexual, enthusiastic, monetary and mental savagery. At first, recognizing the indications of an injurious relationship can be troublesome, particularly if the abuser utilizes inconspicuous strategies to pick up force and control. It is normal for survivors to perceive the start of the misuse as the first run through when the abusers hit them, yet truly the cycle of violence may have begun at an opportune time in the relationship. Culprits have a tendency to fascinate and be exceptionally persuading when applying power and control strategies. People

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious, preventable public health problem that affects millions of Americans and is described as a type of harm caused by a current or former partner or spouse and may consists of physical, sexual, or psychological abuse; it does not discriminate, can occur among heterosexual or same-sex couples, and does not require sexual intimacy. The CDC administered a survey in 2010 called the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) to examine the frequency of intimate partner violence (IPV), sexual violence (SV), and stalking among women and men in the United States (administered annually to track

What is Intimate Partner Violence? If one has not lived through it, the meaning is unknown. When we hear the term, we tend to picture a woman covered in bruises. In reality, the damage is much worse. There is many long term effects that run deeper than the physical injuries (Giardino, 2010). Victims experience shame, isolation, detrimental physical and mental health consequences and financial stressor. This also causes dramatic effects on the families of the victims. This violence also affects the children who may be at an increased risk of physical abuse. Children who live through IPV suffer through the trauma of witnessing the violence and having feelings of fear, guilt, and shame.

What is Intimate Partner Violence and who does it affect? According to Wilcoxon, Remley, and Gladding (2013), “Domestic violence or intimate partner violence (IPV) have emerged in the professional literature as descriptors of chronic as well as episodic patterns of abuse, ranging from harsh criticism to aggressive brutality, between adults in intimate relationships” (p.105). IPV does not discriminate, it refers to both married and unmarried individuals. This type of violence affects men, woman, and children.

The roots of intimate partner violence (IPV) stem from unequal power, where men have been thought to be more superior to women. Women and children have long been looked at as the property of men and therefore violence has been used as control. Individuals have used scriptures from the Old Testament of the Bible to justify their reasoning behind beating their partner. Old laws have plagued the books in America that has given men permission to beat their wives. The “rule of thumb” saying stems from an old court case called State V. A.B Rhodes where a husband was found innocent because the judge stated that his wife was allowed to be “punished” with a stick that was no bigger than her husband’s thumb (Clark, 1929). Unequal power between men

Domestic violence at home is characterized as an example of damaging conduct in any relationship that is utilized by one accomplice to pick up or keep up force and control over another personal accomplice. Aggressive behavior at home can be exhibited from numerous points of view, for example, physical, sexual, enthusiastic, monetary, or mental activities or dangers of activities that impact someone else. Abusive behavior at home is at a higher rate with ladies than men. It is imperative to be liberal when reacting to local calls in light of the fact that each circumstance may not be as it appears.

McColgan et al, 2010 defines the Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) as the specific act of violence

Domestic violence, also more known as Intimate Partner Violence, affects individuals in all social classes and racial/ethnic groups is a statement that has been said and taught over again for many years. Yes that statement above holds logic and truth, but there is also an inverse relationship to it. One of the most consistent findings from research is a strong inverse relationship between social class and intimate partner violence (Renzetti, 2009). In other words, as social class status goes up, cases of domestic violence goes down, and vice versa for lower social classes. Analyses of large, national surveys, for example, show that women living in households with the lowest annual incomes were five times more likely to have experienced

of the men reported perpetrating intimate partner violence. Of those that did commit intimate partner violence 40.3% were either divorced or separated. Males that had children were also more likely to perpetrate intimate partner violence than those that had no children. Those that were native-born had the highest rates of intimate partner violence at 26%, followed by non-recent immigrants, 23.9%, and last was recent immigrants at 16.6%. Over a quarter (25.8%) of males that had low English-speaking ability committed intimate partner violence, which was twice as likely as those with high English-speaking ability. The results also showed that 32.9 of intimate partner violence committed by immigrants came from those were low English-speaking ability, non-recent immigrants and the high English-speaking ability, recent immigrants were the lowest at 6.7 %.