Author: admin

In approximately 500 words, present the paradigms and methodologies used in the
TWO
articles
In formulating your Key Concept Exercise, consider the following questions:
What are the advantages and disadvantages of the methodologies implemented in these studies?
Which of these could (or could not) be used for your research and why?
What could be your feasibility concerns in any case?

Intimate Partner Violence
Intimate Partner Violence
University Class name
Student Name
Intimate Partner Violence Introduction
In 1979, the U.S. Surgeon General identified violent behavior as a key public health priority (CDC, 2018). Violence has played a significant role as a key public health behavior. Violence can happen to anyone from infants to the elderlies. In 2016, more than 19,000 people were victims of homicide and nearly 45,000 people took their own life (CDC, 2018).
Intimate Partner Violence
According to CDC (2018), “Intimate partner violence (IPV) is violence or aggression that occurs in a close relationship.” Intimate partner includes any of the current and/or former spouses and any dating partners. Intimate partner violence varies based on the frequency and severity of violence in which that can lead to years of violence. IPV occurs to more than millions of people in the US each year. Intimate partner violence has four types of behavior. These four types of behavior are the following:
Physical violence
Sexual violence
Stalking
Psychological aggression
Physical violence is when a person hurts or tries to hurt a partner by hitting, kicking, or using another type of physical force (CDC, 2018). According to CDC (2018), “Nearly 1 in 4 adult women and approximately 1 in 7 adult men report having experienced severe physical violence from an intimate partner in their lifetime.” Sexual violence is forcing or attempting to force a partner to take part in a sex act, sexual touching, or a non-physical sexual event (e.g., sexting) when the partner does not or cannot consent (CDC, 2018). About 16% of women and 7% of men have experienced contact sexual violence from an intimate partner (this includes rape, being made to penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, and/or unwanted sexual contact) (CDC, 2018). Stalking is a pattern of repeated, unwanted attention and contact by a partner that causes fear or concern for one’s own safety or the safety of someone close to the victim (CDC, 2018). About 10% of women and 2% of men report having been stalked by an intimate partner (CDC, 2018). Psychological aggression is the use of verbal and non-verbal communication with the intent to harm another person mentally or emotionally and/or exert control over another person (CDC, 2018). In addition to these four types of violence behaviors, these behaviors can occur simultaneously and can cause serious health and economic consequences.
Risk factors
Intimate partner violence falls into four levels of risk factors. The four levels of risk factors are the following:
Individual
Relationship
Community
Societal
With individual factors, “some of the most consistent factors associated with a man’s increased likelihood of committing violence against his partner(s) are the following: Young age, low level of education, witnessing or experiencing violence as a child, harmful use of alcohol and drugs, personality disorders, acceptance of violence (e.g. feeling it is acceptable for a man to beat his partner) and past history of abusing partners” (WHO, 2012). Factors consistently associated with a woman’s increased likelihood of experiencing violence by her partner(s) across different settings include the following: low level of education, exposure to violence between parents, sexual abuse during childhood, acceptance of violence, and exposure to other forms of prior abuse (WHO, 2012). Relationship factors are associated with the risk of both victimization of women and perpetration by men. These factors include the following: Conflict or dissatisfaction in the relationship, male dominance in the family, economic stress, man having multiple partners, and disparity in educational attainment (WHO, 2012). Community and societal factors include the following: Gender-inequitable social norms, poverty, low social and economic status of women, weak legal sanctions against IPV within marriage, lack of women’s civil rights, including restrictive or inequitable divorce and marriage laws, weak community sanctions against IPV, broad social acceptance of violence as a way to resolve conflict and armed conflict and high levels of general violence in society (WHO, 2012).
Consequences
With intimate partner violence, there are also consequences that occur after the violence that has been done. According to CDC (2018), “Approximately 41% of female IPV survivors and 14% of male IPV survivors experience some form of physical injury related to their experience of relationship violence.” Women are more prone to injury than men after an intimate partner violence. Physical infliction can include the following:
Bruises and welts
Lacerations and abrasions
Abdominal or thoracic injuries
Fractures and broken bones or teeth
Sight and hearing damage
Head injury
Attempted strangulation
Back and neck injury
Depending on the severity of the violence, death can also occur too. Data from U.S. crime reports suggest that 16% (about 1 in 6) of murder victims are killed by an intimate partner, and that over 40% of female homicide victims in the U.S. are killed by an intimate partner (CDC, 2018). IPV does not only have physical harm but also internally and mentally, too. IPV also causes environmental consequences such as medical services, mental health services, losing a job, and child welfare costs.
Interventions
In the first intervention, Dating Matters, it is an evidence-based teen dating violence prevention model that includes prevention strategies for individuals, peers, families, schools, and neighborhoods (CDC, 2018). This intervention focuses on teaching young teens about healthy relationships and to develop skills before they start dating. In addition, this intervention is to help young teens reduce behaviors that will most likely increase the risk of violence. Dating Matters includes seven primary components that work together to reinforce protective factors and reduce risk factors for teen dating violence across the social ecology— at the individual, relationship, and community levels (CDC, 2018). Another intervention would be for the perpetrators. According to Eckhardt et al., (2014), “Brief motivational interviewing—a supportive and highly empathic counseling style designed to resolve ambivalence about change—has been shown to enhance positive treatment engagement and compliance with behavior change recommendations.” Brief interview or counseling will hopefully help the perpetrators change their violent behaviors. Group discussions will also help the perpetrators move step by step to change their behaviors. Group approaches designed to help clients move through the stages of intentional behavior change have increased treatment adherence for highly resistant IPV offenders in one study and produced lower posttreatment violence relative to standard BIP services in another (Eckhardt et al., 2014). Life-skills and school-based intervention should be considered because early prevention will most likely decrease violent behaviors later on when dating. WHO (2012) stated, “Many initiatives have aimed to influence knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of young people through life-skills programs in low-income countries or classroom-based dating violence prevention programs in the USA, such as Safe Dates, which demonstrated effectiveness in reducing perpetration.” Among students who reported dating, 12% of girls and 7% of boys had experienced physical dating violence and 16% of girls and 5% of boys had experienced sexual dating violence in the past 12 months (CDC, 2012). Building the knowledge base and raising awareness about IPV will help get a basic knowledge and awareness about IPV. Expanding the knowledge base and disseminating existing and new information will lead to better programs and strategies (WHO, 2012). Early intervention services for at-risk families would also help with dealing violence. There is growing evidence that programs aimed at parents, including home visits and education, can reduce or prevent child abuse and maltreatment and thus help reduce child conduct problems and later violent behavior, which has been associated with IPV perpetrated by men (CDC, 2012). Another intervention that should be mentioned is to increase access to comprehensive service response to survivors and their children. As described by Heise and colleagues (1999), women who experience IPV have complex needs and may need services from many different sectors, including health care, social services, legal entities and law enforcement, and therefore, multi-sectoral collaboration is essential for ensuring survivors’ access to comprehensive services (WHO, 2012). Having more access to comprehensive services will help the survivors cope better with their experiences. Using community mobilization and behavior change communication can be another intervention to help with IPV. Mass media ‘edutainment’ strategies (e.g. programs that use multimedia such as television, radio and print) to change social norms and mobilize communitywide changes have been shown to influence gender norms, community responses and individual attitudes to IPV (WHO, 2012). There are also promising initiatives to engage men and boys in violence prevention, as well as other community-based programs that aim to reduce IPV along with HIV transmission, such as Stepping Stones, a program that has been replicated in settings all over the world. Interventions and programs like the Stepping Stones will help reduce IPV because men are more likely to be the perpetrators. Reforming legal frameworks may include strengthening women’s civil rights (WHO, 2012). Improving existing laws and implementing new laws can help reduce violence. Also, reforming legal frameworks may help the victims get support by the bystanders. Some steps in this direction include the following:
Strengthening and expanding laws defining rape and sexual assault within marriage
Sensitizing and training police and judges about partner violence
Improving the application of existing laws
Lastly, Hamberger et al. believes that a System Levels intervention will help reduce intimate partner violence. Hamberger et al., (2015) stated, “Ambuel et al. have provided a six-point model for creating sustainable system change to improve IPV screening and intervention in the clinic or ED setting.” The six-point model are the following:
Development of internal, on-site IPV expertise
Saturation training
Development of unit-based policies and procedures
Collaboration with local advocacy agencies
Incorporating continuous quality improvement strategies
Primary prevention
Conclusion
Violence has various forms and can develop negative health impacts and various. Violence has affected many people’s life and health. In order to reduce violence, especially intimate partner violence, it would take a system level intervention to help because each risk factor plays and supports a factor in each level. Overall, one cannot stop violence but can only reduce it.
References
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). Preventing Intimate Partner Violence.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/ipv-factsheet.pdf
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018). Violence Prevention.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/datingmatters/science.html
Hamberger, L. K., Rhodes, K., & Brown, J. (2015).
Attachments:
3156352_1_Assignment-Sample1.pdf