Female victims of intimate partner physical domestic violence (IPP-DV), California 1998

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-3797(01)00363-4Get rights and content

Abstract

Background: This study was conducted to identify factors associated with adult female victims of intimate partner physical domestic violence (IPP-DV) in California and to estimate statewide IPP-DV prevalence.

Methods: We analyzed data from the 1998 California Women’s Health Survey, a random, computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI) survey of 4006 California women aged ≥18, conducted by the California Department of Health Services.

Results: Data from the survey indicated that 6% of the women reported that in the previous 12 months, their intimate partners threw objects at them, or hit them with an object, or kicked, pushed, slapped, choked, beat up, or threatened them with a gun or a knife. Odds ratio (OR) analyses controlling for age and race/ethnicity suggest that a large number of factors are associated statistically with IPP-DV victims. These factors include feelings of ill physical and mental health; pregnancies at early age; smoking status; nutritional needs; low income; participation in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program; having children aged <18 in the household; and limited access to health care. Among the non-U.S.-born respondents, IPP-DV victims were significantly younger when they entered the United States than their nonvictim counterparts. A multiple logistic regression model identified the following factors as main correlates with IPP-DV: feelings of being overwhelmed in the past 30 days (OR=3.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]=2.5–4.6); aged 18 to 44 (OR=2.8, 95% CI=1.9–4.1); current smoking status (OR=2.1, 95% CI=1.5–2.9); participation in WIC in the previous 2 years (OR=1.8, 95% CI=1.2–2.6); and being out of work (OR=1.4, 95% CI=1.1–1.9).

Conclusions: The above findings suggest that a variety of venues (e.g., schools, mental and physical health care providers, WIC, immigration programs, and social services) will be needed in order to identify/gain access to IPP-DV victims, provide referral resources, and implement any future prevention efforts.

Section snippets

Background

Domestic violence (DV) can be defined broadly as economic control and physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, and psychological abuse used by adults or adolescents against their current or former intimate partners.1 In the United States, it is estimated that 2 million to 3 million women (or 1.9% to 2.8% of all women) are assaulted by male partners each year, and between 21% to 34% of all women will be physically assaulted by an intimate partner at some time during their adulthood.2 DV leads to

The California women’s health survey, 1998

The California Women’s Health Survey (CWHS) is a survey of randomly selected adult (aged ≥18) women in California, administered by the Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview (CATI) unit of the Cancer Surveillance Section of the California Department of Health Services (CDHS).16 The CWHS is led by a CDHS coordinating committee with participation of other state agencies and other public and private institutions. Approximately 4000 surveys are administered annually in English or Spanish. For

IPP-DV prevalence

Ethnic and age group breakdowns are summarized in Table 1. The data indicate that the white group statistically had a lower prevalence data point than the African-American and Hispanic/Latina groups. A significant trend was observed for decreasing IPP-DV prevalence with increasing age (p<0.001, Cochran-Armitage trend test); that is, the older the victims are, the less IPP-DV they reported in the past 12 months.

Demographics and health issues

Results of the variable OR analyses (reduced model), adjusted for age and

Conclusions

Our data indicate that in 1998, 6.0% of California women were victims of IPP-DV. The California IPP-DV statewide estimate is in agreement with results of the 1995 National Alcohol Survey of married or cohabiting couples (5.2% to 13.6%),20 with the 1994 New York study (5.6%),14 and with a 1995 Georgia study (6.0%).15 However, the California IPP-DV rate is higher than recent comparable national data, and it is also higher than that of the 1988 National Survey of Families and Households (2.9%).21

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the excellent survey work of Bonnie Davis, PhD, Marta Induni, and the interviewers of the CATI Unit of the Cancer Surveillance Section, California Department of Health Services. We also thank Nikki Baumrind, PhD, for her dedication to the California Women’s Health Survey.

References (43)

  • A Browne

    Violence against women by male partners. Prevalence, outcomes, and policy implications

    Am Psychol

    (1993)
  • S.A Eisenstat et al.

    Domestic violence

    N Engl J Med

    (1999)
  • R Acierno et al.

    Health impact of interpersonal violence 1prevalence rates, case identification, and risk factors for sexual assault, physical assault, and domestic violence in men and women

    Behav Med

    (1997)
  • Saltzman LE, ed. Building data systems for monitoring and responding to violence against women, parts I & II. Violence...
  • Commonwealth Fund. Fact sheet #3: violence and abuse, May 1999. Available at:...
  • Tjaden P, Thoennes N. Incidence and consequences of violence against women: findings from the National Violence Against...
  • Physical violence and injuries in intimate relationships—New York, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 1994

    MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep

    (1996)
  • Lifetime and annual incidence of intimate partner violence and resulting injuries—Georgia, 1995

    MMWR Morb Mort Wkly Rep

    (1998)
  • Cancer Surveillance Section, California Department of Health Services. California Women’s Health Survey: SAS dataset...
  • M.A Strauss et al.

    The revised conflict tactics scales (CTS2)development and preliminary psychometric data

    J Fam Issues

    (1996)
  • M.A Straus et al.

    Physical violence in American familiesrisk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families

    (1990)
  • Cited by (84)

    • Health problems of partner violence victims: Comparing help-seeking men to a population-based sample

      2015, American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      Community studies of female victims show that they have poorer mental health than non-victims6–9 and are at increased risk for depression,10–12 anxiety,10 sleep problems,10 and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).12 They are more likely to engage in risky health behaviors: smoking,8,9 alcohol abuse,12,13 and drug abuse.12,14 Studies show a range of physical health problems for female victims in comparison to non-victims: poor overall health,6,9,14–17 functional disability,6,7,10,16 cardiovascular problems,13,15 respiratory infections,11,15 asthma,13 and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs).6,9,13,18

    • A predictive model to help identify intimate partner violence based on diagnoses and phone calls

      2011, American Journal of Preventive Medicine
      Citation Excerpt :

      Table 5 shows how the summed score predictive model, based on the sum of the scores assigned to predictors in the reduced model, would perform at different levels of estimated IPV prevalence in women aged 18–44 years under the assumption that the clinical profile of women with undiagnosed IPV is similar to that of women with clinically documented IPV. The assumed 12-month prevalence levels are based on general population surveys and clinical studies for partner physical and sexual violence.23–28 The bottom three rows of Table 5 display the performance characteristics for the summed-score model at this estimated 7% prevalence level.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text