ISSUES PAPER 25 MAY 2013 THE GENDER DEBATE IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: THE ROLE OF DATA DR ROCHELLE BRAAF Senior Researcher, Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse ISOBELLE BARRETT MEYERING Research Assistant, Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse Key points • The gender debate is one of the enduring controversies in domestic violence research. On the one hand, feminist researchers have long identified ‘gender asymmetry’ in domestic violence, arguing that women are the primary targets of abuse and that men comprise the large majority of perpetrators. On the other hand, family conflict researchers typically find‘gender symmetry’, arguing that women and men experience and perpetrate violence at similar rates. • Within the gender debate, two of the most contentious issues concern researchers’ definitions of domestic violence and their methods of data collection. • Feminist and family conflict researchers differ in how they conceptualise violence in relationships. Feminist researchers emphasise the wider dynamics of domestic violence: why it occurs, how it manifests and victim outcomes. Family conflict researchers define violence more narrowly, being primarily concerned with measuring incidents of violence between partners. • Feminist and family conflict researchers also differ in their data collection methods. Feminist researchers tend to favour qualitative approaches commonly used in clinical studies, as well as quantitative information collected via officially reported data and community sample surveys. Family conflict researchers tend to favour quantitative approaches, relying predominantly on acts-based surveys (such as the Conflict Tactics Scale). • These differences in turn influence feminist and family conflict researchers’findings about men’s and women’s experiences and perpetration of violence. In particular, their findings conflict in relation to perpetrator motivation for violence, forms and levels of abuse, severity of abuse, repetition of violence and impacts on victims. • Certainly, all violence in intimate relationships is unacceptable. However, an accurate analysis of the relationship between gender and domestic violence is essential to develop effective prevention and responses. • No single type of data collection method provides a complete picture of domestic violence. Furthermore, individual studies or data sets vary considerably in depth and quality of information. Researchers and practitioners, therefore, need to be mindful of the strengths and weaknesses of a chosen approach when drawing conclusions and making recommendations. • From the real life examples presented in this paper and in many other studies canvassed, practitioners and advocates should have confidence in claims of gender asymmetry in domestic violence.
23
Embed
THE GENDER DEBATE IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: THE ROLE OF … · THE GENDER DEBATE IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: THE ROLE OF DATA DR ROCHELLE BRAAF Senior Researcher, Australian Domestic and Family
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Issues PaPer 25 MAY 2013
THE GENDER DEBATE IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: THE ROLE OF DATA
DR ROCHELLE BRAAFSenior Researcher, Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse
ISOBELLE BARRETT MEYERINGResearch Assistant, Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse
Thescholarlydebatehascontributedtochangingpublicperceptionsaboutgenderanddomesticviolence.Australiansurveysshowthatcommunityattitudeshaveshiftedsincethemid-1990stowardsanincreasingviewofdomesticviolenceasgenderneutral(AustralianInstituteofCriminology,TheSocialResearchCentre&VicHealth2009,p.34).Movestoimplementgenderneutraldomesticviolencepolicy,legislationandprogramshavebecomethesubjectofconsiderablecontentioninAustraliaandoverseas(e.g.seeDeKeseredy&Dragiewicz2009;Hearn&McKie2008;Johnson&Dawson2011;Miller,Gregory&Iovanni2005;Vincent&Eveline2010).Goodqualitydataondomesticviolenceisclearlycriticaltothisdebate,asrecognisedinAustralianpolicydocumentsliketheNational plan to reduce violence against women and their children: including the first three-year action plan(CouncilofAustralianGovernments2011)andConceptual framework for family and domestic violence (AustralianBureauofStatistics2009).However,datacollectionitselfisacknowledgedaschallenging,intermsofensuringitisrepresentative,accurateandbroadenoughtocapturerelevantfactors,whilebeingfocusedenoughtobeuseful.
Forms of violence:Perpetratorsmayuseoneormultipleformsofviolencetohurt,intimidateandcontroltheirpartner.Feministresearchersmayconsidersomeorallofthefollowingintheirstudiesofdomesticviolence:physical,sexual,emotionalandfinancialabuse;propertydamage;threatstokillorabuse;andpostseparationviolence(suchasstalkingandhomicide).Familyconflictresearcherstendtoidentifyasmallerrangeofbehavioursasaggressiveorviolent.Thesearetypicallylimitedtoactsofphysicalassault(andsometimessexualviolence),psychologicalaggressionandcoercivenegotiation.Theyalsotypicallyfocusonviolencebetweencurrentpartners,therebyexcludingallpostseparationviolence.
Repetition of violence:Trackingrepetitionofviolenceinarelationshipinformsastowhetherincidentsformpartofapatternofbehaviour,whethertheviolenceisfrequentand/orescalating,andwhethertheabuserrepresentsanongoingthreat.Asfeministanalysisidentifiesdomesticviolenceasapatternofcontrollingbehaviour,repetitionisanimportantconsideration.Consequently,theywouldnotgenerallyconsideranisolatedabusiveepisodeasdomesticviolence,exceptwhereaperpetratorusedthateventtosubsequentlyintimidateorthreatenavictim.Familyconflictresearchers,incontrast,generallyfocusonviolentactstakingplacewithinatwelvemonthperiod.Thus,theyareunabletoconsiderlongerhistoriesandpatternsofviolence.Anyviolentepisodetakingplacewithinthattwelvemonthperiodwouldbeconsideredevidenceofaviolentrelationship.
InthisIssuesPaper,weexaminefindingsfromtwoCTSstudies:theInternational Dating Violence Study(Straus2004)andYoung People and Domestic Violence Survey (NationalCrimePrevention2001),amodifiedCTSstudy(seeTable1).
WepresentfindingsfromthreeAustraliancommunitysamplesurveysthatexaminedbothmaleandfemaleexperiencesofviolence:Crime Victimisation, Australia 2010-11(AustralianBureauofStatistics2012); Personal Safety Survey (PSS)(AustralianBureauofStatistics2006);andDalGrandeetal.(2003),‘DomesticviolenceinSouthAustralia:apopulationsurveyofmalesandfemales’(seeTable1).
Health data:TheAIHWNationalHospitalMorbidityDatabase(NHMD)collectsdatanationallyonpatientspresentingtopublicandprivatehospitalswithinjuriesandothermedicalproblems.Eachepisodeofcareforanadmittedpatientiscountedasa‘separation’whenthatcareisfinalised.Datacitedinthepaperisfortheperiod2009-10.Duringthistime,therewere421065injurycasesrequiringhospitalisation,nationally(Tovelletal.2012,p.v).Thisfigureincluded24550assaults,forwhichaperpetratorwasidentifiedin46%(n=10549)ofcases(p.106).Thedataindicatethegenderoftheperpetratorincasesofassaultbyaspouseordomesticpartner(amountingto27%ofassaultcaseswheretheperpetratorwasknown,n=2847)(p.106).AlsocitedinthepaperaredatacollectedinVictoriafrompatientspresentingtopublichospitalemergencydepartments(VEMD)(VictimsSupportAgency2012).Dataaregivenonthenumberofpatientswhoexperiencedinjuryrelatedtofamilyviolencebygender,fortheperiod2004-10.
Crime Victimisation, Australia 2010-11 (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2012):Thisisacomponentofthe Multipurpose Household Survey (MPHS),conductedannuallythroughoutAustralia.Forthecrimevictimisationcomponent,telephoneinterviewswereheldwith26405peopleagedfifteenyearsandolder,askingabouttheirexperienceofpersonalandhouseholdcrimes,withregardtophysicalassault,threatenedassaultandsexualassault.Thesurveyglossarydefinesphysicalassaultasphysicalforceorviolenceagainstaperson(includingbeingpushed,grabbed,shoved,slapped,hit,kickedorbitten,hitwithsomethingthatcouldhurt,beaten,choked/strangled,stabbed,shot,burnt,draggedorhitdeliberatelybyavehicle).Threatenedassaultincludesanyverbaland/orphysicalintentorthreattoinflictphysicalharm.Sexualassaultcomprisesasexualactcarriedoutagainstaperson’swill,throughtheuseorattemptofphysicalforce,intimidationorcoercion(askedofpeopleover18yearsofage).
Personal Safety Survey (PSS) (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006):Inthisnationalsurvey,face-to-faceinterviewswereconductedwith16300adultmenandwomen,askingabouttheirexperiencesofphysicalorsexualviolence,stalking,whethertheyhadtakenoutaprotectionorder,whetherviolencewasrepeatedandwhethertheyexperiencedfearfortheirsafety(p.43).Thesurveyglossarydefinesphysicalviolenceastheuseofforceintendedtoharmorfrightenaperson(p.59)andincludesthesameexamplesasgivenintheCrime Victimisation, Australia 2010-11surveycitedabove.ThedefinitiongivenforsexualviolencealsoreflectsthedefinitionusedintheCrime Victimisationsurvey(p.61).ThePSS definesstalkingasactivitiesintendedtoharmorfrightenaperson,includingloiteringoutsidepremisesthatapersonfrequents,followingorwatchingaperson,interferingwiththeirproperty,givingorleavingoffensivematerial,andmakingphoneorelectroniccontact(pp.61-62).
Dal Grande et al. (2003): Computer-aidedtelephoneinterviewswereconductedwitharandomsampleof6004SouthAustralianadults,agedeighteenyearsandoverinthisdomesticviolencestudy.Respondentswereaskedabouttheirexperiencesofawiderangeofformsofdomesticviolencebycurrentandex-partners.Theywereaskediftheyhadexperiencedphysicalabuse,suchasbeingkicked,choked,pushedorhitwithafistoranythingelsethatcouldhurtthem,werethreatenedwithorhadagunorknifeusedagainstthem,orwereforcedintoanysexualactivitywhentheydidnotwantto.Theywereaskedaboutarangeofemotionalabusessuchas:beingpreventedfrompractisingtheirreligion;havingtheirsocialfreedomrestrictedorbeingisolatedfromfriendsandfamily;beingrestrictedintheiraccesstohouseholdfunds;orexperiencingthreatsorintimidation,namecallingorhumiliation(p.545).
Offi
cial
ly R
epor
ted
Dat
a
Table 1 continued over page
Com
mun
ity
Sam
ple
Surv
eys
8
Issues PaPer 25
International Dating Violence Study (Straus 2004):Thismulti-siteinvestigationofmaleandfemalestudentsat31universitiesacross16countriesusedtheCTS2tomeasureratesofviolenceagainstdatingpartners.Respondentsnumberedbetween132and741casesateachsite,givingatotalof8666cases.TheCTS2definesminorphysicalassaultaspushorshove,grab,slap,throwsomethingatpartnerandtwistarmorhair(pp.795-6).Severephysicalassaultincludestopunchorhitapartner,kick,choke,slamagainstawall,beatup,burnorscald,anduseaknifeorgunonapartner (p.796).Minorinjuryincludedsprain,bruiseorsmallcut,orphysicalpainthatstillhurtthenextday(p.796).Severeinjuryincludedbrokenbone,passedoutfrombeinghitonthehead,wenttoorneededtoseeadoctorbecauseofafightwithone’spartner.Sexualcoercionwasnotincludedinthisstudy.
Young People and Domestic Violence survey (National Crime Prevention 2001):ThisAustraliannationalstudyof5000youngpeople,agedtwelvetotwenty,askedquantitativeandqualitativequestions(includingattitudescales,victimisationmeasuresandamodifiedversionoftheCTS)abouttheextentofviolenceinrelationshipsthatyoungpeoplehadexperiencedeitherasvictims,perpetratorsoraswitnessesofparentaldomesticviolence.Partnerviolenceinthesurveywasdefinedas:yellingloudlyatapartner;putdownsorhumiliation;notlettingapartnerseefamilyorfriends;notlettingapartnerhavemoneyfortheirownuse;throwsomethingatapartner;threatentohitthem;trytohitthem;actuallyhitthem;hitthembecausetheywerehittingyou(definedasself-defence);threatenwithaknifeorgun;anduseaknifeorfireagun(p.96).Respondentswerealsoaskedaboutsexualcoercion.
Dobash and Dobash (2004): ThiscomparativestudyfromtheUnitedKingdom(UK)appliedqualitativeandquantitativemethodsthroughin-depthinterviewswith95couples,inwhichmenandwomenreportedseparatelyontheirownviolenceandthatoftheirpartner(i.e.190interviews).Thesamplewasdrawnfromonlymenconvictedofviolenceagainsttheirpartner,giventoofewnumbersofwomenconvictedofviolenceagainsttheirpartnerforcomparison.Comparisonsweremadeofmen’sandwomen’sviolenceintermsoftheformsofviolence,frequency,severityandphysicalandemotionalconsequences,reasonsforviolenceandthecontextinwhichitoccurred.
Melton and Belknap (2003):ThisstudycomparedviolenceexperiencedandperpetratedbymenandwomenarrestedfordomesticviolenceoffencesinaMidwesterncityoftheUnitedStates(US).Thestudyauthorsanalysed2670misdemeanordomesticviolencepolicecasesduring1997,ofwhichwomencomprised14%.Theresearchersemployedqualitativeandquantitativemethodologies,collectingdatathroughpre-trialservices,police-completedformsandprosecutorinformation.Theyexaminedformsofviolence,repetitionandfrequency,severity,motivationsforviolenceandoutcomesforvictims,includingfear.
ratherthantryingtodiscernpatternsofcoercionandcontrol.Unsurprisingly,noneoftheofficiallyreporteddataorcommunitysamplesurveysconsideredforthispaperdiscussedmotivationissues.Indeed,theCTSisexplicitlynotdesignedtocapturemotivationsforviolenceoritscontextandhasbeencriticisedforfocusingonconflicttacticsratherthancoercionasamotivation(Dobash&Dobash2004;Flood2012;Kernsmith2005;Kimmel2002).However,Strausetal.(1996,p.285)havearguedthatthesurveycanbeusedinconjunctionwithmeasuresofthesevariablesrelevantfortheparticularstudyorclinicalsituationinquestion.Forexample,theYoung People and Domestic Violence Surveylookedatunprovokedhittingandretaliationorself-defence,findingwomenmorelikelytobevictimsofunprovokedhitting(seeTable2.2).IntheInternational Dating Violence Study,Strausidentifieddominanceinrelationshipsassignificantlyassociatedwithperpetrationofviolence,whichisnotnecessarilythesameascoercivecontrol.
Sexual violence:Thissurveydidnotreportonsexualviolence.
Sexual violence:Womenwerealsomorelikelytoreportexperiencingsexualviolence.Thesurveyestimatedthat 1293100womenhadexperiencedsexualassaultsincetheageoffifteen,ofwhom23.2%(n=299700)reportedbeingassaultedbyacurrentorex-partnerinthemostrecentincident(Table19, p.33).Bycomparison,362400menhadexperiencedsexualassault,ofwhomtoofewreportedbeingassaultedbyacurrentpartnertobeincludedinthesurveyresultsand5.7%(n=20700)reportedbeingassaultedbyapreviouspartnerinthemostrecentincident(Table19,p.33).
Sexual violence:Women(6.2%,n=179)weresixtimesmorelikelythanmen(1.0%,n=26%)tohavebeenforcedintoanysexualactivitywhentheydidnotwanttobyacurrentorex-partner(Table1,p.545).
Other forms of abuse: Thissurveydidnotreportonotherformsofabuse
Other forms of abuse:Morewomenthanmenhadbeenstalkedsincetheageoffifteen.Ofthe1472300womenwhohadbeenstalked,11.8%hadbeenstalkedbyaboyfriend/girlfriend/dateand20.1%byapreviouspartnerinthemostrecentincident(p.26).Ofmenwhohadbeenstalked(n=681700),12.4%hadbeenstalkedbyaboyfriend/girlfriend/dateand11.1%byapreviouspartnerinthemostrecentincident(Table12,p.26).
Other forms of abuse: Women(19.0%,n=548)wereovertwiceaslikelyasmen(8.7%,n=227)tohaveexperiencedsomeformofeconomic/emotional/spiritual/socialabuse(Table1,p.545).Thedisparitybetweenwomenandmen’sexperiencesofeconomicabusewasparticularlyhigh,reportedby8.8%ofwomencomparedto2.6%ofmen(Table1,p.545).
Officiallyrecordeddata,communitysamplesurveysandclinicalstudiesdatacitedindicatethatmaleperpetrationofdomesticviolenceoccursseveralordersofmagnitudemoreoftenthanfemaleperpetration.ThesefindingsarestronglycontrastedbytheselectedCTSstudieswhichfoundgreatergendersymmetryand,inthecaseofthe International Dating Violence Survey,moreviolencebyfemalepartners.
exclusionsofotherformsofabuselikeeconomicandsocialabuse(andformanystudies,sexualcoercion)affectsinformationgatheredaboutlevelsandformsofviolence.However,modifiedCTS-basedstudies,liketheYoung People and Domestic Violence Survey,mayincludethesevariablesintheirdesign.Table3.3presentsdataonthetwoselectedCTSstudiesregardinglevelsandformsofviolence.
Sexual violence:Thisstudydidnotreportonsexualformsofviolence.
Sexual violence:Ofrespondentswhohadbeenina‘dating’relationship,14%ofyoungwomenand7%ofyoungmensaidapartnerhadtriedtoforcethemtohavesex;6%ofyoungwomenand5%ofyoungmensaidthattheyhadbeenphysicallyforcedtohavesex(Tables4.34&4.35,pp.115-16).Ofparticipantswhohadbeeninadatingrelationship,1%ofyoungwomenand3%ofyoungmensaidtheyhadtriedtoforceapartnertohavesex;1%ofyoungwomenand2%ofyoungmensaidthattheyhadphysicallyforcedapartnertohavesex(Tables4.34&4.35, pp.115-16).
Other forms of violence:Thisstudydidnotreportonotherformsofviolence.
Other forms of abuse:Surveyrespondentsreportedhigherratesofotherformsofabuseagainstfemaleparentsthanagainstmaleparents.Ratesofviolenceagainstmothers/stepmotherswere:verbalabuse(58%),emotionalabuse(30%),socialisolation(11%)andeconomicabuse(11%)(pp.96-97).Ratesofviolenceagainstfathers/stepfatherswere:verbalabuse(55%),emotionalabuse(22%),socialisolation(6%)andeconomicabuse(4%)(pp.96-97).
13
Issues PaPer 25
www.adfvc.unsw
.edu.au
Table 3.4: Levels and forms in clinical studies
Dobash and Dobash (2004) Hester (2009) Melton and Belknap (2003) Wangmann (2010)
Sexual violence:Bothmenandwomenreportedawiderrangeofsexuallyabusiveactscommittedbymenthanwomen.Amongwomen,40%reportedtheirpartnerhaddemandedsexand20%reportedtheirpartnerhadforcedthemtohavesexonatleastoneoccasion(p.336).Coercedorforcedsexwasonlyperpetratedbymen.
Sexual violence:Thestudydidnotreportonsexualviolence.
Sexual violence:Thestudydidnotreportonsexualviolence.
Sexual violence:Sexualviolencewasrarelymentioned,withonlytwowomenandonemanmakingsuchallegations (p.958).
Other forms of violence:Thisstudydidnotreportonotherformsofviolence.
Other forms of violence:Menweresignificantlymorelikelythanwomentoengageinotherformsofviolence:29%ofmenand13%ofwomenusedthreats;29%ofmenand11%ofwomenharassedtheirpartner;and94%ofmenand83%ofwomenwereverballyabusive(Table2,p.8).Moremen(30%)thanwomen(16%)damagedapartner’sproperty(Table2,p.8).
Other forms of violence: Moremale(30.8%)thanfemaleoffenders(22.2%)madethreats(Table3,p.340).Men’sthreatswerealsomoredetailedandhostile;andmorelikelytorelatetothevictim’scooperationwithpoliceorcourts(p.341).Therewasonlyasmallnumberofoffenderswhostalkedtheirpartner,comprisingmoremale(2.5%)thanfemale(1.1%)stalkers(Table3,p.340).
Other forms of violence: Femalesecondapplicantsweresignificantlymorelikelythanmalesecondapplicantstoallegeotherformsofabuse(81.3%ofwomen,25%ofmen)(pp.958-59).
Itisclearfromtheseselecteddatasourcesthatthereisconsiderabledisparitybetweenfindingsofclinicalstudies,officiallyreporteddataandcommunitysamplesurveysandthoseofthestandardCTSstudy.Allthedatapresentedhere,exceptingthatfromtheInternational Dating Violence Study,indicatesagreaterseverityassociatedwithmen’sviolence.
LiketheCrime Victimisation Survey,theCTSisconstrainedinitsexaminationofrepetitionofviolentincidents.Itsfocusonthetwelvemonthspriortothesurveymeansthatitcanonlycanvassrecidivismwithinthattimeperiod.Again,theCTShasbeencriticisedfordeemingviolentanypersonwhocommitsatleastoneviolentactwithinthepastyear,withoutconsideringwhetherthisispartofapatternoriftherehasbeenalonghistoryofviolence,andwhetherthebehaviourhasescalated(Allen2011;Kimmel2002).Additionally,continuedviolencebyex-partnersisexcluded.However,modifiedCTS-basedstudiescanincludeadditionalquestionsaboutrepetition.TheYoung People and Domestic Violence Survey,forexample,askedrespondentsaboutwhethermeasuresofabuse
16
Issues PaPer 25
Table 5.1: Repetition in clinical studies
Dobash and Dobash (2004) Hester (2009) Melton and Belknap (2003) Wangmann (2010)
TheCTS2includesaseparatescaleforinjury,canvassing:cutsandbleeding;sprainsorbruising;pain;andneedingtoseeadoctor.Tellingly,CTS-basedstudiescollectinginformationoninjuriestendtoindicatethatwomenexperiencemoresevereinjuriesresultingfrommen’sviolencethanviceversa.Otheroutcomesforvictims,suchassocio-economicorpsychologicalconsequencesarenotconsideredbytheCTS.TheexclusionoffearfromtheCTS,inparticular,continuestobeenasalimitationbyfeministresearchers.TheInternational Dating Violence StudyandYoung People and Domestic Violence Survey
Wehavetriedtoexpressthroughrealexamplesthateachindividualstudyordatasetitselfvariesconsiderablyindepthandqualityofinformation.Forexample,datafromhospitalemergencydepartmentsthatactivelyscreenallpatientsfordomesticviolencearelikelytoproducemoreaccurateinformationaboutprevalenceanddetailaboutcasesthandepartmentsthatdonotscreen.Similarly,studiesemployingthesexualcoercionscaleoftheCTS2andincludingqualitativequestionswillprovidemoreinformationthanstudieswhichexcludethem.Researchersandpractitioners,therefore,needtobemindfulofthestrengthsandweaknessesofachosenapproachorindividualstudywhendrawingconclusionsandmakingrecommendations.Allquestionscannotbeansweredthroughasingledatapoint.Consequently,wewelcometheAustralianBureauofStatistics’(2013)recentreport,Defining the data challenge for family, domestic and sexual violence, Australia.Thisdocumentsetsoutthenationaldataagendaforunderstandingandrespondingtodomesticviolence,includingsourcinginformationaboutnotjustviolentincidentsbutalsoaboutthecontextforviolence,contributingriskfactors,impactsforvictimsandresponsesofservicesandagencies.
Table 6.4: Impacts in CTS studies
Straus (2004), International Dating Violence Study National Crime Prevention (2001), Young People and Domestic Violence Survey
AustralianBureauofStatistics2013,Defining the data challenge for family, domestic and sexual violence, Australia,cat.no.4529.0AustralianBureauofStatistics,Canberra
AustralianInstituteofCriminology,TheSocialResearchCentre&VicHealth2009,National survey on community attitudes to violence against women 2009: changing cultures, changing attitudes – preventing violence against women: a summary of findings,VictorianHealthPromotionFoundation,Melbourne
AustralianInstituteofHealthandWelfare2011,Government-funded specialist homelessness services: SAAP National Data Collection annual report 2009-10: Australia,cat.no.HOU246,AustralianInstituteofHealthandWelfare,Canberra
AustralianLawReformCommission&NSWLawReformCommission2010,Family violence - a national legal response, final report,AustralianLawReformCommission&NSWLawReformCommission,Sydney
Bair-MerrittM,SheaCrowneS,ThompsonD,SibingaE,TrentM&CampbellJ2010,‘Whydowomenuseintimatepartnerviolence?Asystematicreviewofwomen’smotivations’,Trauma, Violence and Abuse,vol.11,issue4,pp.178-189
CarneyM,ButtellF&DuttonD2007,‘Womenwhoperpetrateintimatepartnerviolence;areviewoftheliteraturewithrecommendationsfortreatment’,Aggression and Violent Behavior,vol.12,pp.108-115
ChanA&PayneJ2013,Homicide in Australia: 2008-09 to 2009-10 National Homicide Monitoring Program annual report,Monitoringreport,no.21,AustralianInstituteofCriminology,Canberra
CookPW2009,Abused men: the hidden side of domestic violence,Praeger,Westport
CouncilofAustralianGovernments2011,National plan to reduce violence against women and their children: including the first three-year action plan,DepartmentofFamilies,Housing,CommunityServicesandIndigenousAffairs,Canberra
21
Issues PaPer 25
www.adfvc.unsw
.edu.au
HesterM2009,Who does what to whom? Gender and domestic violence perpetrators,UniversityofBristolinassociationwiththeNorthernRockFoundation,Bristol
HolmesJ2010, Female offending: has there been an increase?,CrimeandJusticeStatisticsIssuePaperno.46,NSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearch,Sydney
JohnsonH&DawsonM2011, Violence against women in Canada: research and policy perspectives,OxfordUniversityPressCanada,DonMills,Ontario,NewYork
JohnsonMP2006,‘Conflictandcontrol:gendersymmetryandasymmetryindomesticviolence’,Violence Against Women,vol.12,issue11,pp.1003-1018
KernsmithP2005,‘Exertingpowerorstrikingback:agenderedcomparisonofmotivationsfordomesticviolenceperpetration’,Violence and Victims,vol.20,issue2, pp.173-185
KimmelMS2002,‘“Gendersymmetry”indomesticviolence:asubstantiveandmethodologicalresearchreview’,Violence Against Women,vol.8,issue11,pp.1332-1336
KincaidP1982,The omitted reality: husband-wife violence in Ontario and policy implications for education,LearnersPress,Ontario
LeisringP2009,‘WhatwillhappenifIpunchhim?Expectedconsequencesoffemaleviolenceagainstmaledatingpartners’,Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma,vol.18,issue7,pp.739-751
MeltonH&BelknapJ2003,‘Hehits,shehits:assessinggenderdifferencesandsimilaritiesinofficiallyreportedintimatepartnerviolence’,Criminal Justice and Behaviour,vol.30,issue3,pp.328-348
MouzosJ&MakkaiT2004,Women’s experiences of male violence: findings from the Australian component of the International Violence Against Women Survey (IVAWS),ResearchandPublicPolicySeries,no.56,AustralianInstituteofCriminology,Canberra
NationalCrimePrevention2001, Young people and domestic violence: national research on young people’s attitudes and experiences of domestic violence,CrimePreventionBranchoftheCommonwealthAttorney-General’sDepartment,Canberra
DalGrandeE,HicklingJ,TaylorA&WoollacottT2003,‘DomesticviolenceinSouthAustralia:apopulationsurveyofmalesandfemales’,Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health,vol.27,issue5,pp.543-550
DeKeseredyW&DragiewiczM2009,Shifting public policy direction: gender-focused versus bi-directional intimate partner violence,QueensPrinterforOntario-UniversityofOntarioInstituteofTechnology
DobashR&DobashR2004,‘Women’sviolencetomeninintimaterelationships:workingonapuzzle’,British Journal of Criminology,vol.44,issue3,pp.324-349
DouglasEM&HinesDA2011,‘Thehelpseekingexperiencesofmenwhosustainintimatepartnerviolence:anoverlookedpopulationandimplicationsforpractice’,Journal of Family Violence,vol.26,issue6,pp.473-485
DragiewiczM&DeKeseredyWS2012,‘Claimsaboutwomen’suseofnon-fatalforceinintimaterelationships:acontextualreviewofCanadianresearch’,Violence Against Women,vol.18,issue9,pp.1008-1026
DuttonDG2012,‘Thecaseagainsttheroleofgenderinintimatepartnerviolence’,Aggression and Violent Behavior,vol.17,pp.99-104
DuttonDG&NichollsTL2005,‘Thegenderparadigmindomesticviolenceresearchandtheory:part1-theconflictoftheoryanddata’,Aggression and Violent Behavior,vol.10,issue6,pp.680-714
FloodM2012,‘Hehits,shehits:assessingdebatesregardingmen’sandwomen’sexperiencesofdomesticviolence’,paperpresentedtoQueensland Centre for Domestic and Family Violence Research Seminar,CentralQueenslandUniversity(MackayCampus),22June
FriezeI2005,Hurting the one you love; violence in relationships,Wadsworth,Belmont,CA
GrechK&BurgessM(eds.)2011,Trends and patterns in domestic violence assaults: 2001 to 2010,IssuesPaper,no.61,NSWBureauofCrimeStatisticsandResearch,Sydney
GulliverP&FanslowJ2012,Measurement of family violence at a population level: what might be needed to develop reliable and valid family violence indicators?,IssuesPaper,no.2,NewZealandFamilyViolenceClearinghouse,Auckland
HambergerL2005,‘Men’sandwomen’suseofintimatepartnerviolenceinclinicalsamples:towardagender-sensitiveanalysis’,Violence and Victims,vol.20,issue2,pp.131-151
HearnJ&McKieL2008,‘Genderedpolicyandpolicyongender:thecaseof“domesticviolence”’,Policy and Politics,vol.36,issue1,pp.75-91
22
Issues PaPer 25
OsthoffS2002,‘But,Gertrude,Ibegtodiffere,ahitisnotahitisnotahit;whenbatteredwomenarearrestedforassaultingtheirpartners’,Violence Against Women,vol.8,issue12,pp.1512-1544
ReedE,RajA,MillerE&SilvermanJG2010,‘Losingthe“gender”ingender-basedviolence:themisstepsofresearchondatingandintimatepartnerviolence’,Violence Against Women,vol.16,issue3,pp.348-354
RobertsonK&MurachverT2007,‘Ittakestwototangle:gendersymmetryinintimatepartnerviolence’, Basic and Applied Social Psychology,vol.29,issue2,pp.109-118
SteinmetzS1977/78,‘Thebatteredhusbandsyndrome’,Victimology; An International Journal,vol.2,issue3-4, pp.499-509
StetsJ&StrausM1990,‘Genderdifferencesinreportingmaritalviolenceanditsmedicalandpsychologicalconsequences’,inStrausM&GellesR(eds.),Physical violence in American families: risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families,TransactionPublishers,NewBrunswick, pp.151-166
StrausM1979,‘Measuringintrafamilyconflictandviolence:theConflictTacticsScales’,Journal of Marriage and Family,vol.41,issue1,pp.75-88
StrausM1990,‘Injury,frequency,andtherepresentativesamplefallacyinmeasuringwifebeatingandchildabuse’,inStrausM&GellesR(eds.),Physical violence in American families: risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families,TransactionPublishers,London,pp.75-89
StrausM1995,Trendsinculturalnormsandratesofpartnerviolence:anupdateto1992,Understanding partner violence: prevalence, causes, consequences and solutions,FamilyinFocusSeries,no.2,NationalCouncilonFamilyRelations,Minneapolis
StrausM2011,‘Gendersymmetryandmutualityinperpetrationofclinical-levelpartnerviolence:empiricalevidenceandimplicationsforpreventionandtreatment’,Aggression and Violent Behavior,vol.16,issue4,pp.279-288
StrausM,HambyS,Boney-McCoyS&SugarmanD1996,‘TheRevisedConflictTacticsScales(CTS2):developmentandpreliminarypsychometricdata’,Journal of Family Issues, vol.17,issue3,pp.283-316
StrausMA2004,‘Prevalenceofviolenceagainstdatingpartnersbymaleandfemaleuniversitystudentsworldwide’,Violence Against Women,vol.10,issue7,pp.790-811
StrausMA2008,‘Dominanceandsymmetryinpartnerviolencebymaleandfemaleuniversitystudentsin32nations’,Children and Youth Services Review,vol.30,pp.252-275
StrausMA2009,‘Whytheoverwhelmingevidenceonpartnerphysicalviolencebywomenhasnotbeenperceivedandisoftendenied’,Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma,vol.18,issue6,pp.552-571
SwanSC,GamboneLJ,CaldwellJE,SullivanTP&SnowDL2008,‘Areviewofresearchonwomen’suseofviolencewithmaleintimatepartners’,Violence and Victims,vol.23,issue3pp.301-14
SwanSC&SnowDL2003,‘Behavioralandpsychologicaldifferencesamongabusedwomenwhouseviolenceinintimaterelationships’,Violence Against Women,vol.9, issue1,pp.75-109
TaftA,HegartyK&FloodM2001,‘Aremenandwomenequallyviolenttointimatepartners?’,Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health,vol.25,issue6,pp.498-500
TovellA,McKennaK,BradleyC&PointerS2012,Hospital separations due to injury and poisoning, Australia 2009-10,cat.no.INJCAT145,AustralianInstituteofHealthandWelfare,Canberra
VictimsSupportAgency2012,Measuring family violence in Victoria: Victorian family violence database Volume 5: eleven-year trend analysis: 1999-2010,DepartmentofJustice,Melbourne
VincentK&EvelineJ2010,‘Theinvisibilityofgenderedpowerrelationsindomesticviolencepolicy’,inBacchiC&EvelineJ(eds.),Mainstreaming politics: gendering practices and feminist theory,UniversityofAdelaidePress,Adelaide, pp.215-236
WangmannJ2010,‘Genderandintimatepartnerviolence:acasestudyfromNSW’,UNSW Law Journal – Forum,vol.33,issue3,pp.945-969