This article suggests explanations for the misperception of the high rate of female partner violence (PV) by the public and service providers, and explanations for hiding and denying the evidence on gender symmetry by academics.
Treatment of existing clinical-level cases of PV requires continuing to include justice system interventions as an expression of social norms condemning PV, to protect victims, and to mandate treatment. As in the case of the primary prevention, research has shown that psychological problems such as antisocial and borderline personality are major risk factors for clinical-level PV. Consequently, treatment of existing cases needs to expand from efforts to end patriarchal dominance to include diagnosis for these psychological problems and treatment when identified. A tragic irony is that the denial that obstructs this needed fundamental change in prevention and treatment of PV is largely motivated by a concern with the safety of women. The tragedy associated with this irony is that, rather than enhancing the safety and well-being of women, these denials block key steps that could increase the effectiveness of the effort to reduce violence against women. Table, figure, and references
Downloads
Similar Publications
- Advancing Police-researcher Collaboration and Evidence-based Policing: an Evaluation of the Applied Criminology and Data Management Course
- Assessment of analytical workflows of gunshot residue evidence and strategies for implementation of advanced technology in crime laboratories
- Stabilizing Information Content in DNA Evidence to Improve Lab-to-Lab Inference