Intimate Partner Violence Case Study

Ellen Pence, also known as the “mother of domestic violence intervention” and “rockstar of the battered women’s movement” was a social activist for battered women, helped build the foundation of batterer programming with the Duluth model (also known as the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (DAIP)), which assisted in connecting the concerns of criminal justice officials and advocates by developing a “Power and Control Wheel” (Gondolf, 2010, p. 992). She also created the Coordinated Community Response (CCR), which brings all community service providers to help victims of domestic violence, and created a shelter for battered women. In addition, Ellen is the founding director of Praxis International, a nonprofit corporation that aims to eliminate violence in the lives of women and their children.

There are usually not many reports made about same-sex violence because many were ashamed or thought their situation would not get heard. These individuals feel like their problems would be determined less serious over heterosexual abuse situations. “Lesbian and Gays are more reluctant to report abuse to legal authorities because they fear that they are showing a lack of solidarity among the gay and lesbian community. Many individuals may think there is a difference between the risk factor among heterosexual couples and same-sex couples, however there is no major difference. Also, according to Seccombe (2015) “The rate of abuse in gay and lesbian relationships is similar to or even higher than that in heterosexual relationships, around 25 to 30 percent” (p.322). As we look at the lesbian and gay community we see that they just want to fit in, so this is another reason their stories become unknown. There are many reason to think only woman get victimized, men are victimized, as well. To add, the individuals who describe themselves in the female role are victimized, based on the gender norms where woman should be unassertive and house labors instead of being in the workforce. So, therefore, there is not a major difference or any difference between the risk factors between the heterosexuals and the lesbian and gay intimate

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a type of abuse that occurs between people who are involved in a close relationship. “Intimate partner” is a term that is used to include both current and former spouses as well as dating partners. IPV exists along a continuum that ranges from a single episode of violence through ongoing battering.

We had a guest speaker from Mutual Ground that explained what programs and services Mutual Ground offers people who face Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Teaching us about the various forms of abuse people in a relationship face. Based on the various forms someone seeks power and control in a relationship. Such as using coercion and threats, intimidation, emotional abuse, economic abuse, male privilege, children, isolation and minimizing, denying and blaming their partner to suppress their partner and have power and control. Our guest speaker talked about some of the plans they have to help the LGBTQ community to provide the same services to help victims of sexual violence and domestic violence get the necessary help needed to protect everybody

How do you define, talk about, and understand domestic violence (DV) /interpersonal violence (IPV)? Ms. Latimore defines domestic violence as a pattern of physical, sexual, and/or psychological abuse or the threat of abuse used to get and maintain control over another person in a domestic setting. She says intimate partner violence (IPV) is violence in an intimate relationship by one spouse or a partner onto another spouse or partner. She says that no one ever knows that their relationship is going to become abusive from the beginning, as everything seems perfect during the early stages. She further states that controlling and possessive behaviors emerge as the relationship grows. Ms. Latimore concludes that although domestic violence may not look the same in every relationship, the one thing they all have in common is, the abusive partner wants power and control over his victim.

In terms of the topic of domestic violence, the issue can occur to any person, regardless of gender, racial ethnicity, socioeconomic background, etc. Yet, there are certain individuals in the population that are more susceptible to intimate partner violence, particularly minority women. For Black and Hispanic women, there have been little studies regarding their response to violent relationships, with a majority of studies being geared toward Caucasian females. Along with being more susceptible to domestic violence, minority women experiencing varying cultural beliefs and values that can determine whether they decide to leave or stay in an abusive relationship. In study conducted by Lacey (2010), she found out that “marital status, presence

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.

The discussion board topics have also assisted this student’s perspective as to who fits the criteria to be in an IPV situation. The truth of the matter is that intimate partner violence can happen to anyone including same sex relationships. Intimate partner violence perpetrators can also be female and although the abuser is a woman she can also use physical force along with emotional and verbal abuse. A perspective that has not changed, for this student, from the initial discussion board, would be the idea of the Battering Intervention and Prevention Program (BIPP) assisting abusers to unlearn their patterns of violence. Theoretically, based on social work theories a behavior can be unlearned; however, this student believes that it would take

The research design of this article is quantitative and further added to that it is also descriptive in its execution. How this is derived from this article is that it is attempting to show systematic information about the given phenomenon; in particular that of substance abuse and how it relates to the systematic variable that is being examined. The identified variable in this case is substance abuse, and how it relates to committing intimate partner violence

In the United States, approximately 1.5 million women report some form of intimate partner violence (IPV) each year and of those an estimated 324,000 are pregnant (Deshpande & Lewis-O'Connor, 2013). According to Deshpande and Lewis-O’Connor (2013), IPV is defined as abuse that may be actual or threatened by an intimate partner that can be physical, sexual, psychological, or emotional in nature. It is important for health care providers to realize IPV does not only include physical or sexual abuse but also includes name calling, financial control, constant criticism, and isolating women away from their families and friends (Deshpande & Lewis-O'Connor, 2013; Smith, 2008). There are 3 phases of abuse tension building

Everyone finds themselves in a relationship at some point in their life; no matter who you are. However, not all relationships are the same, in either the type of love or lifestyle. Most couple’s relationships will come to the ‘next step’, which could involve commitment. It is more common in today’s society that the couple could choose to either move in with each other (cohabiting lifestyle) or choose to get married. With every relationship, there will be ups and downs. Along with, every couple have fights. However, how far do these ups and downs and fights go. The co-authors of, Intimate Partner Violence in Young Adult Dating, Cohabitating, and Married Drinking Partnerships, correlated a research in intimate partner violence in couples; along

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

These acts provide the social context, in which a broader system of domination has been established, affecting women nationally and globally(McCue, 2008; Lockhart, Danis, 2010; Crenshaw 1994). On the other hand, the remaining 15 percent of the cases mentioned above, includes heterosexual intimate relationships, in which women are abusers and men their victims, as well as gay relationships (McCue, 2008). The numbers presented above illustrate the great debate in research on domestic, and more specifically intimate partner, violence. The debate is about gender and domestic abuse, as many researchers blames public opinion for taking into account only the one side of the domestic violence equation(Johnson, 2008; Cook, 2009).

The authors explained that Intimate Partner Violence or IPV is violent crimes committed against a person by a “current or former spouses, boyfriends, or girlfriends. (Morris, Shoffner, & Newsome, 2009) The statistics

“...Wilkinson Arrested for Domestic Dispute”, “...domestic violence features Dan “Big Daddy Wilkinson””, etc. These were the headlines that swarmed news sources in late 1995. Cincinnati Bengals defensive linemen, weighing in at an optimum 315 pounds, struck his girlfriend in the stomach. What would have been a typical domestic violence blow, except young Shawnda Lamarr was pregnant. His plead? Not guilty, and was simply instructed to obey a restraining order. “A 3 year study shows that while male student-athletes comprise 3.3% of the populations, they represent 19% of sexual assault perpetrators and 35% of domestic violence perpetrators” (NCAVA Benedict/Crosset Study). This statistic, along with many other stunning statements upset many involved in the college sports world. One of