Odds Of Physical Intimate Partner Violence Research Articles

Physical intimate partner violence among women reporting prior fertility treatment: a survey of U.S. postpartum women

To determine the prevalence of physical intimate partner violence (IPV) among postpartum women reporting preconception fertility treatment compared to those who conceived without the use of assisted reproduction. Cross-sectional population-based study. Twelve U.S. states with at least a 50% PRAMS survey response rate. Postpartum respondents of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) survey. Preconception fertility treatment utilization. Physical Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). Of the 43,999 respondents included in this analytic sample, roughly 2% reported physical IPV. Respondents reporting preconception fertility treatment (12.6%) were less likely to endorse physical IPV than those who conceived without fertility treatment exposure (OR 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.7). In the multivariate regression model, the odds of physical IPV were similar among postpartum women regardless of fertility treatment exposure (aOR 1.2, 95% CI 0.8-2.0). Residing in a household with an income under the federal poverty level and increased preconception stressors were predictive of reported physical IPV. There was no difference in type of fertility treatment and report of physical IPV. Among women exposed to fertility treatment, predictors of physical IPV included self-identification of Black (p<0.0001) or Hispanic (p=0.0352) race/ethnicity as well as report of 4 or more stressors in the 12 months prior to the most recent delivery (p<0.0001). The use of fertility treatment did not confer greater risk of physical IPV within this postpartum population. However, there are many individuals with infertility who never present for an assessment, proceed with treatment, or are unsuccessful, thus the extent to which infertility and fertility treatment exposure is associated with physical IPV remains to be elucidated. Women reporting a greater number of stressors may be uniquely at risk despite access and exposure to fertility treatment. The preconception period, inclusive of encounters with infertility specialists, represents a unique opportunity to screen and counsel all women for IPV.

A Longitudinal Study of IPV Victimization Among Sexual Minority Youth.

Although intimate partner violence (IPV) is highly prevalent among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) youth, little is known regarding its developmental patterns, risk factors, or health-related consequences. We examined IPV victimization in an ethnically diverse community-based convenience sample of 248 LGBT youth (aged 16-20 at study outset) who provided six waves of data across a 5-year period. Results from multilevel models indicated high, stable rates of IPV victimization across this developmental period (ages 16-25 years) that differed between demographic groups. Overall, 45.2% of LGBT youth were physically abused and 16.9% were sexually victimized by a dating partner during the study. Odds of physical victimization were 76% higher for female than for male LGBT youth, 2.46 times higher for transgender than for cisgender youth, and 2 to 4 times higher for racial-ethnic minorities than for White youth. The prevalence of physical IPV declined with age for White youth but remained stable for racial-ethnic minorities. Odds of sexual victimization were 3.42 times higher for transgender than for cisgender youth, 75% higher for bisexual or questioning than for gay or lesbian youth, and increased more with age for male than female participants. Within-person analyses indicated that odds of physical IPV were higher at times when youth reported more sexual partners, more marijuana use, and lower social support; odds of sexual IPV were higher at times when youth reported more sexual partners and more LGBT-related victimization. In prospective analyses, sexual IPV predicted increased psychological distress; both IPV types marginally predicted increased marijuana use.