Part 2: Screening for Intimate Partner Violence: Secondary Prevention Strategies
Start Date
15-5-2014 9:00 AM
End Date
15-5-2014 10:00 AM
Description
Overview
Within the last 20 years, gender-based violence (GBV) has gained increased attention globally. GBV is defined as types of violence that primarily women/girls experience, including physical violence (e.g., hitting, punching, kicked, slapped, choked, hurt with a weapon, or otherwise physically hurt), sexual violence (e.g. unprotected forced sex, coercive behaviors, including sexual slavery and coerced abortion), and psychological harm (e.g. controlling behaviors, stalking, threats of violence). These acts of violence are perpetrated by members of women/girl’s family, acquaintances, and/or strangers in the home, community and/or during armed conflict. Globally, an estimated 35% of women experience physical and/or sexual violence in their lifetime, including partner and non-partner violence.(Bott, Guedes, Goodwin, & Mendoza, 2012; WHO, 2013) Refugees fleeing conflicts and natural disasters are vulnerable to sexual violence; a recent systematic review and meta-analysis generated a pooled estimate of 21.4% (95%CI: 14.9 – 29.7%) sexual violence prevalence based on 19 studies meeting eligibility criteria and totaling 8,398 participants.(Vu et al., 2013) Global efforts often focus on GBV in recognition of the range of likely perpetrators; within the US, intimate partners are the dominant perpetrators of GBV,(Black, 2011) hence the domestic focus on IPV. Nationally an estimated one in three women experience IPV, i.e., physical or sexual violence by a current or former spouse or boyfriend, with youth and young adult women at highest risk. (Black, 2011) Gender differences persist in the nature and impact of IPV. Nationally, physical IPV prevalence is comparable for women (33%) and men (28%);(Black, 2011) however, women experience significantly more sexual IPV (9% vs. too small to report among men),(Black, 2011) more IPV with resulting fear, injury, or other health or social issues (29% vs. 10%),(Black, 2011) and IPV homicide.(Cooper & Smith, 2011; Stockl et al., 2013) There is substantial evidence indicating under-reporting of GBV both globally(Tia Palermo, Bleck, & Peterman, 2013) as well as in diverse humanitarian settings where women and girls can be particularly vulnerable.(T. Palermo & Peterman, 2011; Wirtz et al., 2013) To date, prevention and response efforts continue to be insufficient to make a significant difference in the lives of survivors and their families.
Screening for IPV in Formal and Informal Settings
Overview
Within the last 20 years, gender-based violence (GBV) has gained increased attention globally. GBV is defined as types of violence that primarily women/girls experience, including physical violence (e.g., hitting, punching, kicked, slapped, choked, hurt with a weapon, or otherwise physically hurt), sexual violence (e.g. unprotected forced sex, coercive behaviors, including sexual slavery and coerced abortion), and psychological harm (e.g. controlling behaviors, stalking, threats of violence). These acts of violence are perpetrated by members of women/girl’s family, acquaintances, and/or strangers in the home, community and/or during armed conflict. Globally, an estimated 35% of women experience physical and/or sexual violence in their lifetime, including partner and non-partner violence.(Bott, Guedes, Goodwin, & Mendoza, 2012; WHO, 2013) Refugees fleeing conflicts and natural disasters are vulnerable to sexual violence; a recent systematic review and meta-analysis generated a pooled estimate of 21.4% (95%CI: 14.9 – 29.7%) sexual violence prevalence based on 19 studies meeting eligibility criteria and totaling 8,398 participants.(Vu et al., 2013) Global efforts often focus on GBV in recognition of the range of likely perpetrators; within the US, intimate partners are the dominant perpetrators of GBV,(Black, 2011) hence the domestic focus on IPV. Nationally an estimated one in three women experience IPV, i.e., physical or sexual violence by a current or former spouse or boyfriend, with youth and young adult women at highest risk. (Black, 2011) Gender differences persist in the nature and impact of IPV. Nationally, physical IPV prevalence is comparable for women (33%) and men (28%);(Black, 2011) however, women experience significantly more sexual IPV (9% vs. too small to report among men),(Black, 2011) more IPV with resulting fear, injury, or other health or social issues (29% vs. 10%),(Black, 2011) and IPV homicide.(Cooper & Smith, 2011; Stockl et al., 2013) There is substantial evidence indicating under-reporting of GBV both globally(Tia Palermo, Bleck, & Peterman, 2013) as well as in diverse humanitarian settings where women and girls can be particularly vulnerable.(T. Palermo & Peterman, 2011; Wirtz et al., 2013) To date, prevention and response efforts continue to be insufficient to make a significant difference in the lives of survivors and their families.
