Intimate partner violence and the childbearing year - Maternal and infant health consequences
ABSTRACT Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a significant public health problem with negative physical and mental health consequences. Pregnant women are not immune to IPV, and as many as 4% to 8% of all pregnant women are victims of partner violence. Among pregnant women, IPV has been associated with poor physical health outcomes such as increased sexually transmitted diseases, preterm labor, and low-birth-weight infants. This article focuses on the physical health consequences of IPV for mothers and their infants. The purpose of this review is therefore to examine timely research ranging from 2001 to 2006 on IPV during pregnancy, the morbidity and mortality risks for mothers and their infants, and the association between IPV and perinatal health disparities. It will also identify gaps in the published empirical literature and make recommendations for practice, policy, and research.
- SourceAvailable from: Jo Spangaro
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Tension between health care workers' desire to promote trust on the one hand, and limited confidentiality on the other, is a problem that is not readily solved, given that statutory reports will, at times, be required (Fantuzzo & Fusco, 2007; Sharps et al., 2007). As identified by health workers in this study, however, the risk of lost engagement with a health service is a heavy price to pay for making child protection reports, particularly where no follow-up by the child protection agency occurs. "
ABSTRACT: Routine screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) has been widely introduced in health settings, yet screening rates are often low. A screening policy was introduced statewide in Australia in antenatal, mental health, and substance abuse services. Annual snapshot indicates a sustained screening rate of 62%-75% since 2003. Focus group research with health care workers from 10 services found that initial introduction of screening was facilitated by brief, scripted questions embedded into assessment schedules, training, and access to referral services. Over time, familiarity and women's favorable reactions reinforced practice. Barriers remain, including lack of privacy, tensions about limited confidentiality, and frustration when women remain unsafe. Screening added to the complexity of work, but was well accepted by workers, and increased awareness of and responsiveness to IPV.Violence and Victims 02/2011; 26(1):130-44. DOI:10.1891/0886-6708.26.1.130 · 1.28 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "health care provider about abuse (whether or not this occurred following screening or through spontaneous disclosures) were included in the scope of the study. The central question of what impact screening alone has on women, therefore, remains unanswered, and studies continue to conclude with calls for more research (Coker, 2006; Phelan, 2007; Plichta, 2007; Sharps et al., 2007; Trabold, 2007). It is argued here that in the reviews as well as much of the other literature, three assumptions appear to have been made in the thinking about the evidence for screening. "
ABSTRACT: Routine screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) has been introduced in many health settings to improve identification and responsiveness to IPV. The debate about the level of evidence required to warrant routine screening continues. Three assumptions have impeded progress in measuring the impact of screening. The first is that routine screening is a test only which does not of itself have an impact on patients. The second is that it can be assessed by evaluating interventions provided to women after abuse is identified through screening. The third is that there can be an agreed appropriate intervention for IPV. Each of these assumptions is problematic. In addition, there are significant impediments to evaluating screening as an intervention through a randomized control trial. These include identification of the study group, isolating the control group from the intervention, ethics, lack of baseline data, and recall bias. A range of study designs is required and a rethink of assumptions is needed in researching this area.Trauma Violence & Abuse 02/2009; 10(1):55-68. DOI:10.1177/1524838008327261 · 3.27 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Violence directed by an intimate partner toward the pregnant woman and her fetus, or during the first year after delivery, is often either not recognized by professionals or suspected but not addressed. There is no typical abused woman; in fact, intimate partner violence occurs across all social, economic, educational, and professional settings. Physical or sexual abuse may be readily observed in some instances or well hidden at other times; the emotional components of verbal, economic, and isolation abuse are often difficult to assess. All types of intimate partner violence require sensitive assessment and intervention by healthcare professionals, as numerous undesirable outcomes for both the mother and her fetus/baby have been identified. Suggestions for assessment and intervention (primary, secondary, and tertiary) are offered.The Journal of perinatal & neonatal nursing 01/2008; 22(1):39-48. DOI:10.1097/01.JPN.0000311874.30828.4e · 1.01 Impact Factor