Primary Prevention of Intimate Partner Violence for Women's Health: A Response to Plichta
The aim of this work is to make the case that prevention is essential and that concrete strategies for prevention exist and need to be prioritized. The women’s movement of the late 1960s advocated for a more comprehensive tertiary prevention for intimate partner violence (IPV) (Schechter, 1982) to include law enforcement and legal responses to IPV. The women’s movement also inspired creation of battered women’s shelters and community-based support services for women seeking assistance in coping with IPV or safely leaving a violent relationship. These essential and life-saving services are tertiary prevention because violence has already occurred, and, for many women, the violence has become chronic and health consequences have already occurred. The focus of these tertiary prevention interventions is preventing death or disability not in preventing the violence. More effective and cost-efficient primary and secondary prevention strategies are needed, in addition to adequately funding the necessary tertiary prevention approaches to address the epidemic of IPV. The remainder of this article will be a presentation of the range of primary and secondary prevention strategies that can and, in some cases, are being implemented in the United States and elsewhere. The lists provided are not meant to be exhaustive, but illustrative.
Response or Comment
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Coker, Ann L., "Primary Prevention of Intimate Partner Violence for Women's Health: A Response to Plichta" (2004). CRVAW Faculty Journal Articles. 129.