Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence and Beliefs About Partner Violence Screening Among Young Men

Tova B Walsh; Rita C Seabrook; Richard M Tolman; Shawna J Lee; Vijay Singh

doi:10.1370/afm.2536

Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence and Beliefs About Partner Violence Screening Among Young Men

Ann Fam Med. 2020 Jul;18(4):303-308. doi: 10.1370/afm.2536.

Authors

Tova B Walsh¹, Rita C Seabrook², Richard M Tolman³, Shawna J Lee³, Vijay Singh⁴

Affiliations

¹ School of Social Work, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin tbwalsh@wisc.edu.
² Institutional Analysis, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
³ School of Social Work, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
⁴ Departments of Emergency, Family, and Internal Medicine, Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

Abstract

Purpose: Few clinical guidelines focus on how physicians can identify intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration or victimization among male patients, and little is known of men's experiences and beliefs regarding screening in health care settings. Our objective was to determine prevalence of men's experiences with IPV screening in health care settings and associations with men's beliefs regarding health care clinician identification of IPV.

Methods: Using a cross-sectional online survey of a nationally representative sample of 916 men aged 18-35 years, we conducted survey-weighted descriptive analyses to determine IPV prevalence, screening experiences and beliefs, and multivariate logistic regression to examine associations of demographics, IPV perpetration, and IPV victimization with men's screening experiences and beliefs.

Results: Of 916 men surveyed, 19% reported perpetration and 27% reported victimization in relationship with current or previous spouse/partner, 90% believed health care clinicians should ask about perpetration, 92% believed health care clinicians should ask about victimization, but only 11% had been asked about perpetration and 13% about victimization. Beliefs regarding IPV were associated with African American non-Hispanic race, IPV perpetration, and IPV victimization. Experiences being asked about IPV were associated with educational attainment and IPV perpetration.

Conclusions: Among young US men, 9 in 10 support IPV identification by health care clinicians, nearly 1 in 5 report using IPV, but only about 1 in 10 report health care clinicians asking about IPV. These represent missed opportunities for health care IPV identification. Beliefs and experiences regarding health care IPV identification vary by race, education, and men's IPV perpetration and victimization. These disparities can inform tailored health care identification approaches.

Keywords: intimate partner violence; men; primary health care.

Publication types

Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

MeSH terms

Adolescent
Adult
Adult Survivors of Child Abuse / statistics & numerical data*
Black or African American / statistics & numerical data*
Cross-Sectional Studies
Educational Status
Humans
Income / statistics & numerical data*
Intimate Partner Violence / statistics & numerical data*
Logistic Models
Male
Multivariate Analysis
Prevalence
Risk Factors
Surveys and Questionnaires
United States / epidemiology
Young Adult