Read other letters about this article

• Friday, October 26, 2007 09:15 AM

  It is important to read the method section

  Interesting study, but lets look at the data. I copied sections (yes, I left a bunch of stuff out in the interest of parsimony) from the study. There are some pretty important pieces of information that are not emphasized in the salon article. #1 The definition of violence includes both low-severity aggression ("How often in the past year have you threatened your partner with violence,

  pushed or shoved him/her, or thrown something at him/her that could hurt," and fairly severe violence ("How

  often in the past year have you slapped, hit, or kicked your partner").

  This study does NOT differentiate by severity. In other words, if you answered "yes" to any of these questions you were considered to have either perpetrated or been on the receiving end of Intimate Partner Violece (IPV). It is important to know that in previous studies that used this assessment technique- namely the one that shows that 1 in 3 women are victimized by men, the VAST majority of those violent acts are at the low end of the severity scale. So, let me be clear-when violence is assessed, most reported incidents of violence reported by both men and women are usually at the low end of the scale. I am not excusing even low levels of violence (no matter who does it), but pushing someone is NOT in the same category as punching someone in the face or hitting with a baseball bat. So, lets save the hysterics on both sides of the gender spectrum.

  Consistent with past research, when there is violence (reciprocal or not), it is women that are likely to get hurt. “Two parallel questions assessed the partner's

  perpetration of violence toward the respondent. Injuries from partner violence were assessed with a single question for the perpetration of injuries upon the partner ("How often has partner had an injury, such as a sprain, bruise, or cut because of a fight with you"), and a parallel question assessed the partner's perpetration of injuries to the respondent.”

  Results “For injury occurrence, both perpetrator gender and reciprocity were significant predictors, but the interaction was not significant injury was more likely when violence was perpetrated by men than by women (men=28.8% vs women= 18.8%; AOR= 1.30), and in relationships for which IPV was reciprocal versus nonreciprocal (redprocal=28.4% vs nonreciprocal =11.6 %; AOR=4.41).”

  It is clear that this study does show that women act aggressively and sometimes violently. This is not funny, nor should it be excused. In my experience in the mental health field, some of the most violent relationships were characterized by reciprical violence. But, in most cases it was the women who went to the hospital (will never forget the woman with the scar because her husband had tried to slit her throat, or the schizophrenic woman with the dent in her head because her husband hit her) because men are on average bigger and have greater upper body strength.

  Here is a link to the full text article-I don't know if it will work, since I downladed via a university sponsored website. If it does not work, google American Journal of Public Health + Whitaker + Intimate Partner Violence.

  http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdf?vid=2&hid=113&sid=91db5685-27d9-4482-a214-d1176c9c8a9d%40sessionmgr107

  —nancyh Read nancyh's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel