Difference between revisions of "Reciprocal partner violence"

From Wiki 4 Men
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(48 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
  +
[[Reciprocal partner violence]], also known as bi-directional partner violence, involves [[intimate partner violence]] (IPV) in which each person in the relationship is both a perpetrator and victim of IPV. Research shows a high proportion of IPV is reciprocal.
−
* http://www.domesticviolenceresearch.org/domestic-violence-facts-and-statistics-at-a-glance/
  
   
  +
One of the key indicators of whether a woman will be a victim of IPV is whether she is a perpetrator of DV/IPV. "Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women"<ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/</ref>. Women are more likely to be injured as a result of IPV so it follows one key way that women could avoid being a victim of IPV is to not be a perpetrator. This is not about provocation in the moment. Rather this a long term trend in which a man and a woman initiate IPV against each other.
−
This is PASK, one of the best sources we have, of course. I always
  
−
describe it as the largest meta-analysis of DV/IPV research ever
  
−
undertaken. It is not focussed on gender but rather analyses many
  
−
variables. When it looks at gender it finds near gender parity in IPV and
  
−
also finds a hight rate of reciprocal IPV, which is refers to as
  
−
bi-directional.
  
   
  +
== PASK ==
−
Look under "Bi-directional vs. Uni-directional"
  
   
  +
=== By Classification ===
−
The high rates of reciprocal IPV show that the Duluth model is wrong. IPV is not men trying to control women.
  
   
  +
The table below lists classifiations used in [[PASK]] as well as male-perpetrated and female-perpetrated IPV. These are listed as MFPV & FMPV respectively in the PASK ''Domestic Violence Facts and Statistics at a Glance''.<ref>https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/domestic-violence-facts-and-statistics-at-a-glance/</ref><ref>https://archive.is/jDfT1</ref>
−
* https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
  
   
  +
{| class="sortable wikitable"
−
This study analysed data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. 'Longitudinal studies' are generally more compelling than the more common 'cross-sectional studies'.
  
  +
!rowspan="2"|PASK Classification
  +
!colspan="3"|Partner violence (percentage)
  +
|-
  +
!Reciprocal
  +
!Male Perpetrated
  +
!Female Perpetrated
  +
|-
  +
|Among large population samples
  +
|57.9
  +
|13.8
  +
|28.3
  +
|-
  +
|Among school and college samples
  +
|51.9
  +
|16.2
  +
|31.9
  +
|-
  +
|Among respondents reporting IPV in legal or female-oriented clinical/treatment seeking samples not associated with the military
  +
|72.3
  +
|13.3
  +
|14.4
  +
|-
  +
|Within military and male treatment samples
  +
|39
  +
|43.4
  +
|17.3
  +
|-
  +
|}
   
  +
Of particular note is that 57.9% of all IPV is reciprocal in large population samples.<ref>https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/domestic-violence-facts-and-statistics-at-a-glance/</ref><ref>https://archive.is/jDfT1</ref>
−
The study examines differences in injury rates between reciprocal and non-reciprocal IPV. It finds that about half of all IPV is reciprocal. Note the similarity of rate to PASK. Interestingly women were more likely to admit to being perpetrators than their male partners were to nominate the women as perpetrators.
  
   
  +
=== By Race ===
−
Injury rates are higher in reciprocal IPV than non-reciprocal IPV. This means that both men and women involved in reciprocal IPV are more likely to be injured. Organisations like '''White Ribbon Australia''' and '''Our Watch''' completely ignore reciprocal IPV as they push a gendered narrative. Government in Australia is influenced by the Duluth model which asserts that IPV occurs as a result of men attempting to control women through the use of violence. By ignoring the prevalence of reciprocal IPV the government, White Ribbon Australia and Our Watch are preventing effective interventions as their approach discounts the need to intervene with violent women. This will contribute to the continuation of reciprocal IPV and actually make it more likely that the women involved will be injured. By ignoring reciprocal IPV the government, White Ribbon Australia and Our Watch are contributing to violence against women.
  
   
  +
{| class="sortable wikitable"
−
* http://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176%2Fpn.42.15.0031a
  
  +
!rowspan="2"|PASK Classification
−
* http://pb.rcpsych.org/content/35/1/33.1
  
  +
!colspan="3"|Total Partner Violence (percentage)
  +
|-
  +
!Reciprocal Partner Violence
  +
!Non-Reciprocal Partner Violence
  +
|-
  +
|White
  +
|50.9
  +
|49.1
  +
|-
  +
|Latino
  +
|49
  +
|51
  +
|-
  +
|African-American
  +
|61.8
  +
|38.2
  +
|}
   
  +
== Dunedin Study ==
−
These pages summarise the previous link. The 2nd one also talks about a separate study of university students.
  
   
  +
The [[Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study]], commonly called the ''Dunedin Study'' is a [[longitudinal study]] being undertaken in Dunedin, New Zealand.
−
* http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39011224
  
   
  +
The Dunedin Study found high rates of reciprocal IPV among study participants. The document “Findings About Partner Violence From the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study” released by the US National Institute of Justice found:
   
  +
<blockquote>When the data were analyzed, victimized women were 10 times more likely to be perpetrators than other women and male perpetrators also were 19 times more likely to be victims than other men."<ref>http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/170018.pdf</ref></blockquote>
   
  +
The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health also found that about half of all IPV is reciprocal IPV. The study examined differences in injury rates between reciprocal and non-reciprocal IPV and found that injury rates are higher in reciprocal IPV than non-reciprocal IPV.<ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/</ref>
   
  +
In 2017, 12 of 27 women who were killed by their intimate partner had previously been identified by police as perpetrators of IPV.<ref>https://theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/may/03/women-murdered-by-husbands-labelled-perpetrators-of-domestic-violence-by-queensland-police</ref><ref>https://theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/may/03/women-murdered-by-husbands-labelled-perpetrators-of-domestic-violence-by-queensland-police</ref>
−
* http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=8145801d-8fc5-4d3e-931d-f0ffcf3bffbc&subId=298676
  
   
  +
One of the key indicators of whether a woman will be a victim of IPV is whether she is a perpetrator of IPV.<ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/</ref> It follows then that one important way that a woman can avoid being a victim of IPV is to not be a perpetrator of IPV. Research by Capaldi has found that this holds true.<ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-sacks/researcher-says-womens-in_b_222746.html</ref>
   
  +
Models that ignore reciprocal IPV can inhibit violent women from receiving the support they need to stop their violence.<ref>http://pb.rcpsych.org/content/35/1/33.1</ref><ref>https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233119538_Intimate_Partner_Violence_in_Couples_Seeking_Relationship_Education_for_the_Transition_to_Parenthood</ref>
−
* https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3384540/
  
   
  +
Governments, domestic violence organisations and the wider community completely ignore reciprocal IPV. By ignoring the prevalence of reciprocal IPV these groups are preventing effective interventions as they discount the need to intervene with violent women. This will contribute to the continuation of reciprocal IPV and actually make it more likely that the women involved will be injured. Ignoring women's violence contributes to violence against women.
   
  +
== Response from Feminists ==
−
* https://www.hindawi.com/archive/2015/502703/
  
   
  +
Until recently feminists rejected RPV outright. With the wider community now recognising RPV feminists have shifted to attempting to excuse women's violence in relationships but their own research shows that women initiate partner violence. The Australian study [[Women who use force]] lists self-defence, retaliation, anger and stress as common reasons that women are violent in relationships.<ref>https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/women-who-use-force</ref><ref>https://archive.is/Kmrps</ref>
  +
<ref>https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-online-hate-for-amber-heard</ref><ref>https://archive.is/4dzfm</ref> The last three are not justifiable reasons to use violence in a relationship. Notably the study uses the word ''force'' rather than ''violence' when describing women's actions.
   
  +
== See Also ==
−
* https://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID41E2.pdf
  
   
  +
*[[PASK]]
  +
*[[Non-reciprocal partner violence]]
   
  +
== External Links ==
−
* http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020
  
   
  +
*[https://www.psychreg.org/women-perpetrate-domestic-violence-in-self-defence/ Discussion of women's violence by Dr Liz Bates]
  +
*[https://glennsacks.com/column.php?id=227 Article from 2009]
  +
*[https://www.restorativechange.org.uk/ Restorative Change]
   
  +
== References ==
−
* https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26062874
  
   
  +
[[Category:Intimate Partner Violence]]
−  
  +
[[Category:Featured Articles]]
−
* http://sti.bmj.com/content/early/2017/01/04/sextrans-2016-052873
  
−  
−  
−
* journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1477370812453403
  
−  
−  
−
* www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/170018.pdf
  

Latest revision as of 12:18, 1 December 2023

Reciprocal partner violence, also known as bi-directional partner violence, involves intimate partner violence (IPV) in which each person in the relationship is both a perpetrator and victim of IPV. Research shows a high proportion of IPV is reciprocal.

One of the key indicators of whether a woman will be a victim of IPV is whether she is a perpetrator of DV/IPV. "Reciprocity was associated with more frequent violence among women"[1]. Women are more likely to be injured as a result of IPV so it follows one key way that women could avoid being a victim of IPV is to not be a perpetrator. This is not about provocation in the moment. Rather this a long term trend in which a man and a woman initiate IPV against each other.

PASK

By Classification

The table below lists classifiations used in PASK as well as male-perpetrated and female-perpetrated IPV. These are listed as MFPV & FMPV respectively in the PASK Domestic Violence Facts and Statistics at a Glance.[2][3]

PASK Classification Partner violence (percentage)
Reciprocal Male Perpetrated Female Perpetrated
Among large population samples 57.9 13.8 28.3
Among school and college samples 51.9 16.2 31.9
Among respondents reporting IPV in legal or female-oriented clinical/treatment seeking samples not associated with the military 72.3 13.3 14.4
Within military and male treatment samples 39 43.4 17.3

Of particular note is that 57.9% of all IPV is reciprocal in large population samples.[4][5]

By Race

PASK Classification Total Partner Violence (percentage)
Reciprocal Partner Violence Non-Reciprocal Partner Violence
White 50.9 49.1
Latino 49 51
African-American 61.8 38.2

Dunedin Study

The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study, commonly called the Dunedin Study is a longitudinal study being undertaken in Dunedin, New Zealand.

The Dunedin Study found high rates of reciprocal IPV among study participants. The document “Findings About Partner Violence From the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study” released by the US National Institute of Justice found:

When the data were analyzed, victimized women were 10 times more likely to be perpetrators than other women and male perpetrators also were 19 times more likely to be victims than other men."[6]

The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health also found that about half of all IPV is reciprocal IPV. The study examined differences in injury rates between reciprocal and non-reciprocal IPV and found that injury rates are higher in reciprocal IPV than non-reciprocal IPV.[7]

In 2017, 12 of 27 women who were killed by their intimate partner had previously been identified by police as perpetrators of IPV.[8][9]

One of the key indicators of whether a woman will be a victim of IPV is whether she is a perpetrator of IPV.[10] It follows then that one important way that a woman can avoid being a victim of IPV is to not be a perpetrator of IPV. Research by Capaldi has found that this holds true.[11]

Models that ignore reciprocal IPV can inhibit violent women from receiving the support they need to stop their violence.[12][13]

Governments, domestic violence organisations and the wider community completely ignore reciprocal IPV. By ignoring the prevalence of reciprocal IPV these groups are preventing effective interventions as they discount the need to intervene with violent women. This will contribute to the continuation of reciprocal IPV and actually make it more likely that the women involved will be injured. Ignoring women's violence contributes to violence against women.

Response from Feminists

Until recently feminists rejected RPV outright. With the wider community now recognising RPV feminists have shifted to attempting to excuse women's violence in relationships but their own research shows that women initiate partner violence. The Australian study Women who use force lists self-defence, retaliation, anger and stress as common reasons that women are violent in relationships.[14][15] [16][17] The last three are not justifiable reasons to use violence in a relationship. Notably the study uses the word force rather than violence' when describing women's actions.

See Also

External Links

References

  1. ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
  2. ↑ https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/domestic-violence-facts-and-statistics-at-a-glance/
  3. ↑ https://archive.is/jDfT1
  4. ↑ https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/domestic-violence-facts-and-statistics-at-a-glance/
  5. ↑ https://archive.is/jDfT1
  6. ↑ http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/170018.pdf
  7. ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
  8. ↑ https://theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/may/03/women-murdered-by-husbands-labelled-perpetrators-of-domestic-violence-by-queensland-police
  9. ↑ https://theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/may/03/women-murdered-by-husbands-labelled-perpetrators-of-domestic-violence-by-queensland-police
  10. ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/
  11. ↑ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glenn-sacks/researcher-says-womens-in_b_222746.html
  12. ↑ http://pb.rcpsych.org/content/35/1/33.1
  13. ↑ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233119538_Intimate_Partner_Violence_in_Couples_Seeking_Relationship_Education_for_the_Transition_to_Parenthood
  14. ↑ https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/women-who-use-force
  15. ↑ https://archive.is/Kmrps
  16. ↑ https://pursuit.unimelb.edu.au/articles/the-online-hate-for-amber-heard
  17. ↑ https://archive.is/4dzfm
Retrieved from "https://wiki4men.com/w/index.php?title=Reciprocal_partner_violence&oldid=73878"