Partner Violence Against Women with Disabilities: Prevalence, Risk, and Explanations

• NCJ Number: 215520
• Journal: Violence Against Women: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal Volume: 12 Issue: 9 Dated: September 2006 Pages: 805-822
• Author(s): Douglas A. Brownridge
• Date Published: September 2006
• Length: 18 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study examined the prevalence and possible causes of partner violence against women with disabilities.

Abstract

Results indicated that when compared to their nondisabled counterparts, women with disabilities had a 40 percent greater chance of experiencing partner violence in the 5 years preceding the interview. Moreover, the findings suggest that these women are at greater risk of severe violence than women without disabilities. The analysis also focused on whether relationship characteristics, victim-related characteristics, or perpetrator-related characteristics could explain the greater risk of partner violence experienced by women with disabilities. The results suggested that perpetrator-related characteristics alone accounted for the elevated risk of violence for these women. Male partners of women with disabilities were about 2.5 times more likely to behave in a patriarchal dominating manner and about 1.5 times more likely to exhibit sexually proprietary behaviors, both of which were significantly linked to partner violence. Policymakers and practitioners should be aware that women with disabilities tend to have partners who are more susceptible to partner violence and that patriarchal dominance may be the root cause. Data were drawn from the 1999 Canadian General Social Survey (GSS), in which 1,092 disabled heterosexual women living with a male partner and 5,935 nondisabled women living with a male partner were interviewed via the telephone about their experiences of criminal victimization, including partner violence. Data were analyzed using multivariate statistical models and the weighting scheme suggested by Statistics Canada was employed. Limitations of the study are discussed and include the absence of behavioral characteristics in the analysis and the use of survey methods. Tables, notes, references