Intimate Partner Violence

Introduction

It is a natural human desire to seek the acceptance and love of other individuals. At the early stages of life it is the relationship with our parents or caregivers that matters the most, whereas as we step into adolescence, we begin to seek for intimate relationships with the opposite sex. According to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, love and belonging come right after the basic physiological and safety needs are fulfilled (Maslow, 1943). Love and being loved is an essential part of life for every individual. Therefore, in order to be happy, it is important to be able to form a successful and close relationship with
an intimate partner.
Although, it is natural that problems and conflicts may sometimes arise in such relationships, it seems that a large number of people choose aggression and violence as the way to deal with it. Data from a survey carried out in the US shows that nearly 3 out of 10 women and 1 out of 10 men have reported having experienced some sort of abuse or violence in their relationships (Black et al., 2011). This type of aggression, which occurs between two people in a close relationship, is defined by the term of intimate partner violence (IPV). IPV can involve both current and former dating partners and spouses. Usually this type of violence can occur as psychological, physical or sexual. Psychological aggression is probably the most common type of inter-partner violence. It can take the form of threatening a partner or his or her possessions or
loved ones, harming a partner’s sense of self-worth. Examples are swearing, calling names, intimidation, not letting a partner see friends and family, and even stalking. In most cases IPV starts with psychological abuse and the can progress further to physical or sexual assault. Physical violence involves attempting to physically hurt one’s partner by pushing, slapping, hitting, kicking, choking or threatening with some sort of weapon. Sexual aggression is considered to be the type of behaviour that enforces any kind of sexual activity on the partner when he or she does not consent. It can involve acts such as kissing, petting or intercourse. According to another national survey in the US, as many as 9.5% of students have been physically hurt on purpose by their partner (Jouriles et al., 2006).
Even though the numbers of partner violence seem rather high, they still underestimate the scale of the problem. Unfortunately, many victims do not report having been abused by their partners to the police or even friends and family. They often think that others will not believe them or that the police cannot help in cases like that. Moreover, the media usually tends to portrait a rather unambiguous picture of IPV. It is a common belief that females are significantly more victimized by domestic violence and males are more likely to be the main initiators of aggression against their intimate partners. Such stereotyping causes most males that have ever experienced aggression from their female partners not to report it or tell anyone about it. Hence the figures of dating violence in the media become quite distorted. However, if we take a look at the research that has examined partner violence by males and females, it seems that females are just as (or even more) likely to initiate aggression in close relationships. Different reasons and consequences of such aggression are
discussed.

Prevalence of Aggression

One of the studies that clearly demonstrates males and females being as similarly aggressive in relationships was carried out by White and Koss in 1991. They investigated the rates of victimization and perpetration by physical and psychological abuse in adolescent dating relationships. A national survey was carried out in the US with data collected from 6159 college students. The findings showed that at least 87-88% of the females and 81% of the males had inflicted or suffered from psychological partner violence at least once. Meanwhile, the number of individuals having suffered from physical abuse was significantly smaller with 37% of the males and 35% of the females having initiated some sort of physical aggression. Whereas about 39% of the males and 32% of the females reported having suffered from physical aggression. A more recent study examined the prevalence and extent of domestic violence between males and females and came up with consistent results (Fergusson et al., 2005). The researchers interviewed a total of 828 young adults in New Zealand, aged 25, and found that at least 70% of them reported having experienced or initiated domestic conflict in their relationships. According to results from the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) that was used, the distribution of scores for males and females was very similar. For instance, both men and women reported similar rates of minor injuries caused by domestic violence: 3.9% for women and 3.3% for men. However, there were more women (58%) than men (32%) who reported having initiated physical abuse in perpetration reports. Consistently more women (2.5%) than men (0.3%) also seemed to fear their partner as a result of experiencing violence. The above are just a couple of examples from a large number of studies revealing consistent results (e.x., Bookwala et al., 1992; Burke et al., 1988). It seems that the percentage of males and females who experience violence in their relationships is very similar. Surprisingly, results from various studies consistently show females as reporting higher rates of perpetration of partner abuse. This could be due to the fact that male violence is viewed as less acceptable in the society and the consequences and punishments for it are more severe. Therefore, the number of men who perpetrate aggression may actually be larger, as some of them tend to underreport initiating and causing physical harm to their partners (Archer, 2002).

Types of Aggression and Consequences

Even though both sexes seem to have similar rates in the occurrence of violence, there is a clear gender difference when it comes to the acts of violence that result in injuries of the partner. For instance, a study by Makepeace (1986) investigated how male and female college students differed in the types of acts of violence that they inflicted upon their significant others. Once again it was found that the rates of initiating aggressive acts in general were similar for both genders. However, there was a noticeable difference in the level of damage done. Females reported having suffered from a higher level of violence with more severe injuries and emotional harm. The numbers were twice as large than those reported by men. The consequences of physical abuse can vary from minor cuts and bruises to a black eye or even broken bones. In a later study, the same author found that women experienced three times more minor injuries, two times more moderate injuries and all of the severe injuries, where medical care and hospitalization was needed (Makepeace, 1988). Such findings are not surprising as males are usually physically stronger and hence can cause more severe physical damage to their partners. It is suggested that this fact alone can do plenty of psychological damage to women, as they might feel threatened and fear what their partner may be able to do to them. Having to live in constant fear and anxiety is considered to be as psychological harm caused by partner violence (Follingstad et al., 1991). Meanwhile, there has been evidence that men do not consider women as able to cause much harm in terms of acts of violence and hence do not suffer from as much emotional trauma (Miller and Simpson, 1991). Moreover, there appear to be significant gender differences in the types of sexual aggression committed as well. Sexual abuse is often reported as a consequence of playful behaviour or simply teasing each other. Females have been found to be more likely to engage in enforcement of minor acts such as kissing or petting. Meanwhile, the sexual acts inflicted by males are usually much more severe and can even result in forced intercourse (Poitras and Lavoie, 1995). This in turn also leads to females suffering more from emotional damage than males. Evidently, females who have suffered from physical and sexual abuse are more likely to develop eating disorders, such as anorexia or bulimia (Schwartz and Cohn, 1996). Many studies have examined the number of eating disorder patients who have also suffered from sexual trauma and the figures of prevalence were highly alarming. For example, Hall et al. (1989) investigated a group of 158 women with disordered eating patterns and found that 40% of them had previously experienced sexual abuse. Furthermore, a different study has demonstrated that physical and sexual abuse in women is positively associated with gastrointestinal disorders and the risk of lifetime surgery (Drossman et al., 1990). Even though, it seems that women overall suffer from more severe physical and psychological consequences in violent intimate relationships, it does not mean that they are less aggressive. Males tend to perpetrate more acts of severe physical and sexual violence, whereas females may be more abusive in terms of psychological and minimal (or moderate) physical aggression. However, it is not yet clear as to what psychological extent men are harmed by aggression from their partners, due to the lack of research on this particular topic.

Reasons for Violence

Both genders report rather similar reasons for perpetrating acts of violence in their relationships. The most common one being in response to aggressive acts that had already been received from their partner. Females have been found to be more emotional in their initiation of aggression. In a recent study, it has been demonstrated to mostly occur in situations of anger caused by previous emotional hurt received or romantic jealousy of their partner: 22.4% for females and 13.9% for males (Munoz et al., 2007). A large number of women also report using physical violence as a method of self-defense. Women who suffer from chronic abuse from their partners, have been found to use more severe or even lethal acts of aggression in order to escape such relationships (Bograd, 1990). On the other hand, men report that their violence is more often triggered by the aggression received from their partners rather than emotional situations (13.0% of men; 6.6% of women) (Munoz et al., 2007). Moreover, men tend to be aggressive in more cases than women due to their wish to show dominance and power over their partners (Follingstad et al., 1991). There has also been some evidence that the inflicting and sustaining of aggression in females can be associated with levels of low self-esteem. However, so far it has only been found to have a direct effect on sexual but not physical violence (Jackson, 1999). Another important factor for suffering or perpetrating violence in later relationships may come from traumatic childhood experiences. In a recent study by Miller et al. (2011) violence in American adolescent relationships was examined. The authors found that approximately half of the teenagers who had experienced violence in their relationships, had also been subject to childhood adversity. The adversities included such as parental death, divorce, substance abuse, criminality, neglect, poor economical situation, etc. However, there were three main factors that seemed to correlate with partner violence the most. Individuals with the highest risk rates were those that had previously suffered from sexual abuse in childhood (13.8%), inter-parental violence (11.6%) and parental mental illness (10.7%). Such findings support the idea that a dysfunctional family environment in childhood can also be an important predictor of aggressive and violent relationships in later life. The correlation between witnessing inter-parental violence as a child and later on initiating it in adult relationships has been found to be especially strong for men. The more severe were the witnessed acts of violence in childhood, the more severe were the ones inflicted upon their intimate partners as an adult. It is important to mention that inter-parental violence may also have more subtle effects for women. For instance, witnessing their mother be chronically abused, may cause females to stay in violent relationships and put up with abuse later on in life (Jackson, 1999).

Conclusion

As mentioned before, the views that people have concerning violence in relationships are rather controversial. It is commonly believed that women are more likely to be the victims of domestic violence, whereas men are the constant aggressors. Contrary to popular belief, it has been scientifically demonstrated that females are just as likely to be aggressive towards their partners as males. However, it is important to note that men and women do differ in the types of aggression that they are more likely to initiate. Women tend to be more verbal and perpetrate physical violence more in response to emotional situations or as self-defense. Meanwhile, men are more often initiators of severe physical acts or sexual abuse in response to the aggression they receive. In general, acts of physical violence by men are regarded in a significantly more negative manner than by women. This is due to the fact that men can easily cause more severe physical damage to women and intimidate them because of their physical strength. In consequence, many more females tend to report injuries or psychological problems, such as eating disorders, as a result of domestic violence. The reasons for aggression between intimate partners can vary from jealousy or anger to violence being triggered as a response to received aggression. Essential predicting factors for inter-partner violence can also be found in individuals who have suffered from traumatic childhood experiences, especially if they have witnessed abuse between their parents. All in all, violence between intimate partners is a relevant and tender issue. Even though, men and women may differ in the way they express violence or the level of harm they cause to their partners, they still both demonstrate similar levels of victimization and perpetration when it comes to aggression. It is important to raise awareness of these facts so that respective measures can be taken to prevent or at least reduce violence between couples.

References

Archer, J. (2002). Sex differences in physically aggressive acts between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 7, 313 – 351.
Black, M. C., Basile, K. C., Breiding, M. J., Smith, S. G., Walters, M. L., Merrick, M. T., Chen, J., & Stevens, M. R. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 Summary Report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Bograd, M. (1990). Why we need gender to understand human violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 5, 132 – 135.
Bookwala, J., Frieze, I., Smith, J., & Ryan, K. (1992). Predictors of dating violence: A multivariate analysis. Violence and Victims, 7, 297 – 311.
Burke, P., Stets, J., & Pirog-Good, M. (1988). Gender identity, self-esteem and physical and sexual abuse in dating relationships. Social Psychology Quarterly, 51, 272 – 285.
Drossman, D. A., Leserman, J., Nachman, G., Li, Z., Gluck, H., Toomey, T. C. & Mitchell, M. C. (1990). Sexual and Physical Abuse in Women with Functional or Organic Gastrointestinal Disorders. Annals of Internal Medicine, 113, 828 – 833.
Fergusson, D., Horwood, L., & Ridder, E. (2005). Partner violence and mental health outcomes in a New Zealand birth cohort. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67(5), 1103 - 1119.
Follingstad, D., Wright, S., Lloyd, S., & Sebstian, J. (1991). Sex differences in motivations and effects in dating violence. Family Relations, 40, 51 – 57.
Hall, R. C. W., Tice, L., Beresford, T. P., Wooley, B., & Hall, A. K. (1989). Sexual abuse in patients with anorexia nervosa and bulimia. Psychosomatics, 30, 79 – 88.
Jackson, S. M. (1999). Issues in the dating violence research: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 4, 233 - 247.
Jouriles et al. (2006). Relationship Violence. In D. A. Wolfe and E. J. Mash (Eds.), Behavioural and Emotional Disorders in Adolescents: Nature, Assessment, and Treatment. (Chapter 19 pp. 621-641). New York: The Guilford Press.
Makepeace, J. (1986). Gender differences in courtship violence victimization. Family Relations, 35, 383 – 388.

Makepeace, J. (1988). The severity of courtship violence and the effectiveness of individual precautions. Family Abuse and Its Consequences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370 – 96.
Miller, S. & Simpson, S. (1991). Courtship violence and social control: Does gender matter? Law and Society Review, 25, 335 – 365.
Miller, E., Breslau, J., Chung, W.-J. J., Green, J. G., McLaughlin, K. A., & Kessler, R. C. (2011). Adverse childhood experiences and risk of physical violence in adolescent dating relationships. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 65, 1006 - 1013.
Munoz-Rivas, M. J., Grana, J. L., O 'Leary, K. D., & Gonzalez, M. P. (2007). Aggression in adolescent dating relationships: Prevalence, justification, and health consequences. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, 298 - 304.
Poitras, M., & Lavoie, F. (1995). A study of the prevalence of sexual coercion in adolescent heterosexual dating relationships in a Quebec sample. Violence and Victims, 10, 299 – 313.
Schwartz, F., & Cohn, L. (1996). Sexual Abuse and Eating Disorders. Psychology Press.
White, J. M., & Koss, M. P. (1991). Courtship violence: Incidence in a national sample of higher education students. Violence and Victims, 6, 247 – 256.