Intimate Partner Homicide Research Paper

Intimate Partner Homicide

Abstract Intimate partner homicide is a major, however avoidable public health setback that affects millions of women in spite of age, economic status, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or educational background. Individuals who are subjected to intimate partner homicide may have lifelong penalty, including emotional trauma, lasting physical impairment, chronic health problems, and even death. Even though women of all ages may experience intimate partner homicide, it is most widespread among women of reproductive age and contributes to gynecologic disorders, pregnancy complications, unintended pregnancy, and sexually transmitted infections, including
human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Intimate partner homicide is a pattern of assaultive behavior and coercive behavior that may include physical or mental injury, sexual assault, progressive isolation, stalking, deprivation, intimidation, and reproductive coercion. These types of behavior are perpetrated by someone who is, was or desires to be occupied in an intimate or dating relationship with an adult or juvenile, and is intended at establishing having power over of one partner over the other despite of age, economic status, race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or educational background.

Definition Intimate partner homicide also known as intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious, preventable public health issue that affects millions of Americans.
IPV can be described by physical, sexual, or psychological harm by a current or former partner or spouse (www.cdc.gov). This is a cycle of behavior which involves the abuse by one partner in opposition to another in an intimate relationship such as marriage, dating or even within the family. Intimate partner homicide can take on many different forms, including physical aggression or assault which results in hitting, kicking, biting, shoving, restraining, slapping, throwing objects, or threats thereof sexual abuse, emotional abuse, controlling, intimidation, stalking, and economic deprivation. Alcohol consumption and mental illness can coincide with intimate partner homicide while presenting added challenges in taking away domestic violence. Awareness, perception, definition and documentation of intimate partner homicide differ widely from country to country. Domestic intimate partner homicide is likewise an endangerment, criminal coercion, kidnapping, unlawful imprisonment, trespassing, harassment, and
stalking.

Types There are different types of intimate partner violence (IPV). Three of the most common types are physical violence, sexual violence and threats of physical or sexual violence. Physical violence is when force is actually used that can cause physical harm, injury, disability, or even death. The physical harm used consist of kicking, shaking, hitting, slapping, choking, cutting, burning, restraints, weapons, and etc.. Sexual violence has three categories with number one being the use of physical force to compel a person to engage in sexual act unwillingly, whether or not the act is completed. Second would be an attempted or completed sexual act involving a person who, because of illness, disability, or the influence of alcohol or other drugs, or because of intimidation or pressure, is unable to understand the nature or condition of the act, decline participation, or communicate unwillingness to engage in the act and the last category would consist of abusive sexual contact. Threats of physical or sexual violence would be more on the level of stalking. Stalking normally refers to harassing or threatening behavior that an individual engages in repetitively activity such as distributing the victim unwanted presents, following or lying in wait for the victim, damaging or threatening to damage the victim 's property, appearing at a victim 's home or place of business, defaming the victim 's character or spreading rumors, or harassing the victim via the Internet by posting personal information
Causes and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence Intimate partner homicide has severe physical, psychological, economic, and social consequences.
The consequences of IPV involve intimate partners injuring their partner with violence being against them. For example, one in five women killed or severely injured by an intimate partner had no warning: the fatal or life-threatening incident was the first physical violence they had experienced from their partner. A woman 's attempt to leave an abuser was the precipitating factor in 45 percent of the murders of women by their intimate partners (Wallace & Roberson, 2009). Another example would be alcohol abuse. Even though alcohol is not the origin of violence alongside women, an important relationship exists between a male performer problem drinking and violence against intimate female partners. Brutal drinking problems increase the risk for lethal and aggressive discrimination of women in intimate partner relationships. Studies show that more than two-thirds of the offenders who commit or challenge homicide used alcohol, drugs, or both during the incident. Women who have experienced serious abuse face overwhelming mental and emotional
distress. Measuring Intimate Homicide How researchers define terms and create survey questions matters are due to measuring intimate partner violence/homicide often called "domestic violence" can produce different results depending on the instruments used, the focus of the survey (crime, safety, health) and the severity of injuries.
Global Prevalence An increasing amount of research is starting to present a global overview of the extent of violence against women. Some of the most common and most severe forms of violence against women are intimate partner violence; sexual abuse by non-intimate partners; trafficking, forced prostitution, exploitation of labor, and debt bondage of women and girls; physical and sexual violence against prostitutes; sex selective abortion, female infanticide, and the deliberate neglect of girls; and rape in war ("Committee opinion," 2012). There are many potential perpetrators, including spouses and partners, parents, other family members, neighbors, and men in positions of power or pressure. The bulk forms of violence are not only one of its kind incidents, but are continuing and can even continue for decades. Because of the sensitivity of the subject matter, violence is almost collectively under-reported. However, the prevalence of such violence suggests that globally, millions of women are experiencing violence or living with its consequences.
Some cases related to or well known Self-defense is the act of a person to use reasonable force to defend herself from physical violence (Wallace & Roberson, 2009). Courts realize self-defense in home invasion because of the owner being in immediate danger vs. a women becoming tired of past encounters that she just can’t shake. In the case “State vs. Gallegos”, Anita Gallegos charged with murdering her ex-husband George Gallegos by shooting him at close range while lying in bed, then stabbing him numerous times in the neck. After all the bad things that Mr. Gallegos did to his wife before the shooting, Mrs. Gallegos, was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, which was later reversed by the New Mexico’s court of appeals. Most notable cases involve a battered woman and self-defense. In the case “People vs. Aris”, Mrs. Brenda Aris was threatened and had been beaten numerous of times over their ten years of marriage. After murdering him, she received fifteen years to life. In 1993, Governor Pete Wilson of California reduced her sentence to twelve years to life. This allowed her to be eligible for parole in July of 1994.
Data and Statistics Intimate partner violence rates vary greatly depending on the age of the victim. While the overall rate of intimate partner violence against women was 5.8 victimizations per 1,000 in 1999, among females age 16-24, it was 15.6 per 1,000. Between 1993 and 1999 the overall rate of intimate partner violence against all females decreased 41% from 10 to 6 victimizations per 1,000 females age 12 or older. Rates of intimate partner violence fell for females age 20-24, 25-34, and 35-49. Black and white females experienced IPV at similar rates for every age group examined except age 20-24. For this age, there were 29 intimate partner victimizations per 1,000 black women and 20 per 1,000 white women. Women alienated from their husbands were victimized by an intimate at rates higher than married, divorced, widowed, or never married women. Intimate partners murdered 1,218 women during 1999. From 1993 to 1999 intimates killed 32% of all female murder victims age 20-24. Women age 35-49 were the most vulnerable to intimate murder.
Famous People Involved There have been several famous people involved in IPV. In a case that has transfixed, many in the sporting world and beyond, Oscar Pistorius, the double amputee who became an international track star, was indicted in a South African court on a charge of premeditated murder in the shooting death of his girlfriend (NYTimes.com). Another case would be the O.J. Simpson case. O.J. Simpson was divorced from his wife; Nicole Brown and her friend Ron Goldman were found stabbed to death, much evidence pointed towards Simpson. Anyone can be involved in IPV whether famous of not. As stated earlier on, IPV does not discriminate.
Conclusion
In conclusion, partner substance abuse and intimate partner violence in the woman 's family of origin are strong risk factors for experiencing violence. Unlike many health problems, there are few social and demographic characteristics that define risk groups for intimate partner violence. Poverty is the exception and increases risk through effects on conflict, women 's power, and male identity. Violence is used as a strategy in conflict. Relationships full of conflict and especially those in which conflicts occur about finances, jealousy, and women 's gender role transgressions are more violent than peaceful relationships. Heavy alcohol consumption also increases risk of violence. Women who are more empowered educationally, economically, and socially are most protected, but below this high level the relation between empowerment and risk of violence is nonlinear.

References
Retrieved from www.NYTimes.com
Retrieved from www.cdc.gov
Wallace, H., & Roberson, C. (2009). Family violence legal, medical, and social perspectives. (7th Ed.).
(2012). Committee opinion. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists.