U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

Intimate Partner Homicide: Review and Implications of Research and Policy

NCJ Number
219163
Journal
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse Volume: 8 Issue: 3 Dated: July 2007 Pages: 246-269
Author(s)
Jacquelyn C. Campbell; Nancy Glass; Phyllis W. Sharps; Kathryn Laughon; Tina Bloom
Date Published
July 2007
Length
24 pages
Annotation
This literature review presents and critiques the research evidence pertinent to major risk factors for intimate-partner homicide (IPH) in general and for intimate-partner homicide of women (femicide) in particular.
Abstract
The number-one risk factor for IPH, whether the victim is a male or female, is at least one previous incident of domestic violence. Other major risk factors for IPH are access to a gun, estrangement of the partners, threats to kill and threats with a weapon, and nonfatal strangulation. Research shows that women are nine times more likely to be killed by an intimate partner (husband, boyfriend, same-sex partner, or ex-partner) than by a stranger. IPH has decreased significantly during the past 30 years for both male and female victims, with the decrease being greatest for male victims. The increase in domestic violence resources and policy changes regarding domestic violence and gun access are partly responsible for this decrease. Unemployment is the primary demographic risk factor for IP femicide, when compared to race, income, and education. Risk factors for IP homicide-suicide, which is almost always a female victim and male perpetrator, include prior mental health problems in the perpetrator and other risk factors for IPH without suicide. More research is needed on same-sex IPHs, attempted IPHs, and on policies and practices that prevent IPHs. The literature review presents research related to IPH during the past 10 years with implications for the health care, advocacy, and criminal justice systems. Critiques of individual studies are mentioned as reviewed, with an overall critique of the studies in the field, gaps in knowledge, and recommendations for policy and future research presented at the conclusion of the article. 1 table, 1 figure, and 104 references

Downloads

No download available

Availability