Reaction Paper: 2
In their article titled, Differentiation Among Types of Intimate Partner Violence: Research Update and Implications for Interventions, Kelly and Johnson (2008) explore how empirical research has sought to discredit the understanding of intimate partner violence (IPV) as a unitary phenomenon. That is, types of partner violence can be differentiated with respect to partner dynamics, context, and consequences (Kelly & Johnson, 2008). Expanding from this, four patterns of violence are described in depth: Coercive Controlling Violence, Violent Resistance, Situational Couple Violence, and Separation-Instigated Violence. In using these patterns of violence, Kelly and Johnson (2008) go on to deconstruct the notion of gender symmetry
…show more content…
and asymmetry in relation to the sampling differences and methodological limitations of the perpetration of violence. Additionally, the four patterns of violence, and the discussion of gender symmetry and asymmetry, are used to examine the implications for interventions and family court. Coercive Controlling Violence is used to differentiate partner violence that is characterized by a pattern of emotionally abusive intimidation, coercion, and control coupled with physical violence against partners (Kelly & Johnson, 2008).
Pattern in this sense, is the operative word. The article discusses that many women’s advocates use the term domestic violence for this type of patterned violence, and that wife beating, battering, and spousal abuse would construct a similar understanding. However, as the article maintains, I would suggest that IPV is a more inclusive term that captures the reality of violence in multiple contexts. Domestic violence broadly encompasses people who share familial relationships: parents, children, and/or siblings (Johnson & Dawson, 2011). I would contest that domestic violence elicits an understanding that is narrowly conceptualized by the listener. However, IPV encompasses violence that is perpetrated between current or former spouses, dating partners and sexual partners. Additionally, IPV is a favourable term for me because it can be used to explore violence in non-heterosexual relationships, and is inclusive of folks that are gender non-conforming as well as a variety of gender …show more content…
identities. Violent Resistance posits, “that both women and men may, in attempts to get the violence to stop or to stand up for themselves, react violently to their partners who have a pattern of Coercive Controlling Violence” (Kelly & Johnson, 2008, p. 479). Violent Resistance is a type of violence that is co-opted and manipulated by Fathers’ Rights groups. That is, these groups claim that women are just as violent as men (Dragiewicz, 2008). It appears that FR groups are removing the context from which violent resistance occurs. Drawing from Kelly and Johnson (2008), Johnson and Dawson (2011) explain that in the violent resistance context it “most often involves women who react to male-perpetrated coercive controlling violence with violent acts of their own” (p. 71). FR groups claim that violence is a gender symmetric act, and do so to remove male accountability (Dragiewicz, 2008). Situational Couple violence is different from Coercive Controlling violence in that is does not occur in a relationship wide pattern of coercion, power and control (Kelly & Johnson, 2008).
As the name suggest, this type of violence is context specific, and is also the most common type of violence (Kelly & Johnson, 2008). Situational couple violence is reactionary and is an inappropriate response to an argument or situation (Kelly & Johnson, 2008). Separation Instigated Violence occurs in the context of a separation or divorce and is triggered by the realization of separation or traumatic news, which causes the partner being left to react uncharacteristically violent (Kelly & Johnson,
2008). A few interesting points arose from the questions offered by the presenters and the ensuing class discussion. In what is to follow, I will explore the following highlights that I noted in relation to: if parents who do not intend to separate underreport abuse, and if the media has an impact on IPV. The first question the presenters asked was if we thought that there was a larger population of parents that do not report abuse because they are not planning to separate. My initial thought was that if the relationship was constituted as a coercive controlling relationship, that the ability to leave, and or report, would be limited. Drawing from what we have learned in class, women in the most coercive and violent relationships have less of an opportunity to report abuse (to police or for data collection) for fear of further violence. Moreover, the question appears to be operating on the assumption that reporting abuse is mostly done in the context of a separation. Operating on this assumption fails to include those who report abuse in the hopes that it will end the abuse, or hold the offender accountable for their act. This may be a safe assumption in the context of a coercive controlling relationship. For safety purposes, if one reports the abuse in this coercive context they may do so with the understanding that they have to leave their partner to remain unharmed. However, this may not be the case for a partnership that experiences situational couple violence. That is, this type of violence is typically less physically harmful, and can encompass one isolated act or several sporadic outbursts of violence (Kelly & Johnson, 2008). In a fifteen month follow up of two hundred men that were court mandated to a violence intervention program, “twenty one percent of men involved in Situational Couple Violence were reported by their partners to have committed further abuse” (Kelly & Johnson, 2008). Put another way, if the rest of the couples involved stayed together that would mean seventy nine percent of men did not reoffend. In both cases a report had been made and the couples remained together, regardless of on going violence. Showing that violence is reported in pairings that are not planning to separate. The second question from the presentation was do you believe the media has an impact on intimate partner violence? Are we becoming normalized to violence because we see so much of it, even at an early age? The media sensationalizes cases of IPV and violence in general. However, it is also important to consider that the media reflects and reaffirms social dynamics. A very interesting point was made when a parallel was drawn between the film Fifty Shades of Grey and the case of Pamela George, in relation to contracts. Admittedly, I have not read the book or seen the film mentioned. However, a colleague explained that in the movie a very wealthy and attractive man has a female employee sign a contract that would involve her submission and involvement in sexual acts, in exchange for financial gain. We discussed how the context of an agreement with a rich and attractive man is quite important. That is, it plays off the notion that women are obligated to accept sexual advances from these types of men. In the case of Pamela George, we see a similar contract in the way her sex work is conceptualized in relation to the two men who murdered her. Razack (2000) explains that prostitution is treated as a contract under the law, which sustains colonial social order. The contract in this sense cancels the violence (Razack, 2000). Paradoxically, violence in other service and financial transactions is recognized. The discussion surrounding sex work and violence reminded me of a class I took with Christine Bruckert. In that, she outlined for us the discursive context and competing frames of reference on sex work. Bruckert (2013) outlined four discursive contexts used to frame sex work: sex work as violence, sex work as immoral, sex work as nuisance, and sex work as work. Additionally, underlying these contexts is the question of choice (Bruckert, 2013). Choice, I think, is essential to understanding Razack’s article. That is, to understand Pamela George’s case, as well as other marginalized women like her, one must consider an individual’s ability to choose within conditions of possibility and under particular constraints. For the woman in the film Fifty Shades of Grey, considering the power imbalance of a boss and employee relationship is important to understanding her choice (or lack thereof). For Pamela George, her prostitution and eventual murder has to be understood in relation to the colonized and colonizer dynamic between her and her killers. A section of Kelly and Johnson’s article I found most interesting was the piece on page 482 about the few qualitative studies that have covered Coercive Controlling Violence in same-sex relationships. I think it would be useful and helpful to conduct more research on the topic of queer intimate partner violence. Kelly and Johnson (2008) state that control tactics for lesbian relationships are similar, with the addition of some being unique to same-sex relationships such as outing. I believe that research on the similarities and differences between heterosexual and non-heterosexual experiences of IPV is important. Furthermore, this analysis can be extended to include the social and criminal justice responses involved. As mentioned by Kelly and Johnson, there are some experiences of violence that are unique to queer relationships. I think that by understanding these experiences better we can begin to look at prevention and access to resources in a way that can be beneficial to those survivors of violence in queer relationships.
Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) reviewed 15 batterer types previously established in the literature to develop three descriptive dimensions used to differentiate among batterer subtypes. These dimensions measure the severity of the marital violence, the generality of the violence, and any psychopathology or personality disorders the batterer may have (Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart, 1994). Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994) used these three dimensions to theorize three batterer subtypes: family only, dysphoric/borderline, and generally violence/antisocial.
“Domestic violence, or intimate partner violence, is defined as a pattern of assaultive and coercive behaviors, including physical, sexual, and psychological attacks as well as economic coercion that adults or adolescents use against their intimate partners” (Peeks-Asa). When it comes to domestic violence, many people don’t want to get involved, but if just one person took a stand, maybe others would follow and potentially save a life, like the neighbors did in The Day It Happened by Rosario Morales. Domestic violence can happen to anyone at any time, there is no typical victim or perpetrator. The fact that there is no one specific group that domestic violence occurs in more than one, only makes it more difficult to get an accurate representation of just who is being affected by this crime. “Domestic violence and abuse does not discriminate” (Smith and Segal).
...nd incidence of such violence, there still seems to be gaps amongst the research that creates links to other aspects of IPV. By providing a further analysis of how women go from being the victim to the offender, it may create a more realistic understanding of why the recent intimate partner homicide/violence rates for women offenders has increased. Perhaps society needs to not see females as become more serious 'aggressors' and 'bad girls' but rather as women who are finally fighting back. By relating the social learning theory, the self defense theory as well as the male proprietariness theory to intimate partner violence it creates a more thorough understanding of the causes and affects of this form of violence. Conceivably, future directions of research on intimate partner violence should investigate the reasoning behind this new 'husband abuse' phenomenon.
Intimate partner violence is still a common issue that affects women from all walks of life. It is an issue that is too often ignored until the violence has become deadly. In the book “Women: Images and Realities a Multicultural Anthology,” chapter seven entitled “Violence Against Women” includes pieces that cover the issue of intimate partner violence. In Michele McKeon’s piece “Understanding Intimate Partner Violence” she states that “In 1994 the Violence Against Women Act was passed, revolutionizing programs, services, and funding for individuals affected by intimate partner violence and their families” (McKeon 497). Yet the revolutionized programs, which McKeon speaks of, haven’t changed the fact that the violence continues and in my opinion, it is not enough to just deal with the aftermath of the violence, the prevention of intimate partner violence is something that society needs to address. In addition, McKeon also states “The Center for Disease Control and Prevention found that 1,181 women were murdered by their intimate partners in 2005; two million women experience injurie...
Stark (2006) would suggest that thirty years of research has failed to produce a consensus as to what constitutes a case of domestic violence considering that 90% of women who report the abuse have no physical injuries. Methods of coercive control do not meet the criminological viewpoint rather, control extends to financial, emotional, and psychological aspects of subjugating the partner thus no physical violence occurs. If only violent means are reported, then the reported number of victims would perhaps change thus creating a more gender symmetrical pattern. Until operational definitions are defined throughout the disciplines with consistency then there will continue to be discrepancies and opposing views. However, integrative theories of feminist views are being explored which investigate the intersection of not only male dominance as a form of oppression but the use of race, class, national origin, age, sexual orientation, and disability and their impact on intimate partner violence as stated by McPhail and colleagues
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a type of abuse that occurs between people who are involved in a close relationship. “Intimate partner” is a term that is used to include both current and former spouses as well as dating partners. IPV exists along a continuum that ranges from a single episode of violence through ongoing battering.
Patriarchal Terrorism is general need to control a relationship. It is violence exclusively initiated by men as a way of gaining and maintaining absolute control over their female partner. (Shehan, 2003) The second form of couple violence, is common couple violence, is less a product of patriarchy. (Johnson, 1995) Patriarchal terrorism does exist today. Differences do not exist in intimate violence based on social class, education level, race / ethnicity or sexual orientation. Intimate violence is violence that occurs between two people in a relationship. It includes four types of behaviors: physical abuse, sexual abuse, threats, and emotional abuse. The longer the abuse goes on the longer it will affect the victim. (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2006) Partner violence occurs in all countries, social, economic, religious and cultural boundaries. (Shehan, 2003) I have observed couples with good communication and poor communication and intimacy. Dr. Gottman and his colleagues created recommendations, tactics, and strategies for couples with poor communication, intimacy and conflict problems.
Chapter 8 entitled, Intimate Partner Abuse, outlines and dwells on the victims in abusive relationships. Intimate partner abuse is when an individual in a relationship purposely hurts another person physically and or as well as emotionally. IPA and domestic violence correlates because the abuse usually comes from a current or past lover. The factors that can contribute to intimate partner abuse is the individual, relationship, community and societal. There are two forms of violence throughout IPA which is yelling and throwing objects and the more intense form would be striking and hitting.
Domestic abuse, also known as domestic violence, can occur between two people in an intimate relationship. The abuser is not always the man; it can also be the woman. Domestic abuse can happen between a woman and a man, a man and a man, or a woman and a woman. Domestic abuse shows no preference. If one partner feels abusive, it does not matter their sexual orientation, eventually the actions they are feeling will come out towards their partner.
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) is historically referred to as domestic violence. It describes a pattern of coercive and assaultive behavior that may include psychological abuse, progressive isolation, sexual assault, physical injury, stalking, intimidation, deprivation, and reproductive coercion among partners (The Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF), 1999). IPV leads to lifelong consequences such as lasting physical impairment, emotional trauma, chronic health problems, and even death. It is an issue affecting individuals in every community, regardless of age, economic status, race, religion, nationality or educational background. Eighty-five percent of domestic violence victims are women (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2003).
McHugh, M. C., & Frieze, I. H. (2006). Intimate partner violence. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1087, 121–141. doi: 10.1196/annals.1385.011
Interpersonal violence refers to violence that occurs between two people who know each other, usually within a family setting. The World Health Organisation defines Interpersonal violence as any behaviour within an intimate relationship that causes physical, psychological and/or physical harm. It can be perpetrated by a partner, ex-partner or an acquaintance.
Thesis: In my paper, I will be examining the different types, possible causes, and effects of Intimate Partner Violence, and what treatments or programs are available to combat this growing problem in America. Regardless of differing approaches to fight it, statistics show that women all across the world suffer from the effects of domestic violence at a similar rate independent of class, race, or religion.
The term "intimate partner violence" describes physical violence, sexual violence, stalking and psychological aggression (including coercive acts) by a current or former intimate partner. Examples of intimate partners include current or former spouses, boyfriends or girlfriends, dating partners, or sexual partners. IPV can occur between heterosexual or same-sex couples and does not require sexual intimacy.
Kennedy, Bernice R. Domestic Violence: A.k.a. Intimate Partner Violence (ipv). New York: iUniverse, 2013. Print.