Domestic violence is known to be one of the most prevalent forms of gender-based violence in emergency contexts and anecdotal data during the COVID-19 pandemic suggest that related restrictions on movement may exacerbate such violence. As such, the purpose of this study was to measure differences in domestic violence incident reports from police data in Atlanta, Georgia, before and during COVID-19. Thirty weeks of crime data were collected from the Atlanta Police Department (APD) in an effort to compare Part I offense trends 2018-2020. Compared with weeks 1-31 of 2018 and 2019, there was a growth in Part I domestic crimes during 2020 as reported to the APD. In addition, trendlines show that 2020 domestic crimes were occurring at a relatively similar pace as the counts observed in previous years leading up to the pandemic. A spike in domestic crimes was recorded after city and statewide shelter-in-place orders. The rise of cumulative counts of domestic crimes during the COVID-19 period of 2020 compared with the previous 2 years suggests increased occurrence of domestic violence. The co-occurring pandemics of COVID-19 and domestic violence come amidst a period of racial justice reckoning in the United States; both have a disproportionate impact on Black, Indigenous, and People of Color. As the country grapples with how to deal with health and safety concerns related to the pandemic, and the unacceptable harms being perpetrated by police, a public health approach is strongly warranted to address both universal health care and violence prevention.

Because little is known about the mental health status of Syrian refugees in the United States, we conducted a survey among a convenience sample of those resettled in Atlanta between March 2011 and 2017. Though home visits, we delivered a questionnaire including standardized instruments (HSCL25 and PTSD-8) to assess symptoms of anxiety, depression and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. We found high rates of anxiety (60%), depression (44%) and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (84%) symptoms; however, only 20% of participants had seen a mental health professional. Reported reasons for not seeking professional help were lack of transportation and access to information. Findings of this survey indicate the high burden of mental health symptoms and the need for services to the study population. A longitudinal study with a larger sample size would improve the understanding of mental health needs and resilience factors of Syrian refugees resettled in the US.

Since the 1990s, the Inter-agency field manual on reproductive health in humanitarian settings (IAFM) has provided authoritative guidance on reproductive health service provision during different phases of complex humanitarian emergencies. In 2018, the Inter-Agency Working Group on Reproductive Health in Crises will release a new edition of this global resource. In this article, we describe the collaborative and inter-sectoral revision process and highlight major changes in the 2018 IAFM. Key revisions to the manual include repositioning unintended pregnancy prevention within and explicitly incorporating safe abortion care into the Minimum Initial Service Package (MISP) chapter, which outlines a set of priority activities to be implemented at the outset of a humanitarian crisis; stronger guidance on the transition from the MISP to comprehensive sexual and reproductive health services; and the addition of a logistics chapter. In addition, the IAFM now places greater and more consistent emphasis on human rights principles and obligations, gender-based violence, and the linkages between maternal and newborn health, and incorporates a diverse range of field examples. We conclude this article with an outline of plans for releasing the 2018 IAFM and facilitating uptake by those working in refugee, crisis, conflict, and emergency settings.

Fetal "heartbeat" bills have become the anti-abortion legislative measure of choice in the US war on sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). In 2019, Georgia House Bill 481 (HB 481) passed by a narrow margin banning abortions upon detection of embryonic cardiac activity, as early as six weeks gestation. The purpose of this study was to distinguish and characterise the arguments and tactics used by legislators and community members in support of Georgia's early abortion ban. Our data included testimony and debate from House Health and Human Services and the Senate Science and Technology Committees; data were transcribed verbatim and coded in MAXQDA 18 using a constant comparison method. Major themes included: the use of the "heartbeat" as an indicator of life and therefore personhood; an attempt to create a new class of personsfetuses in uteroentitled to legal protection; and arguments to expand state protections for fetuses as a matter of state sovereignty and rights. Arguments were furthered through appropriation by misrepresenting medical science and co-opting the legal successes of progressive movements. Our analysis provides an initial understanding of evolving early abortion ban strategy and its tactics for challenging established legal standards and precedent. As the battle over SRHR wages on, opponents of abortion bans should attempt to understand, deconstruct, and analyse anti-abortion messaging to effectively combat it. These data may inform their tactical strategies to advance sexual and reproductive health, rights, and justice both in the US context and beyond.

COVID-19 related guidelines and movement restrictions are designed to protect the public’s health and reduce disease transmission; yet, COVID-19 related restrictions on movement including social distancing, isolation, quarantine, and shelter-in-place orders have an unknown effect on violence and abuse within relationships. As the pandemic has progressed, many have justifiably speculated that such restrictions may pose a danger to the safety and well-being of people experiencing such violence. Early in the pandemic, countries hard hit by COVID-19 began raising the alarm bell about the impacts of the disease on IPV occurrence. Police in China report that 90% of the causes of recent IPV cases could be attributed to the COVID-19 epidemic. Rising fears and anxiety about prolonged movement restrictions, increased economic strain and diminished health care capacity to support survivors are among the potential reasons for such dramatic effects. Under normal circumstances: low income, unemployment, economic stress, depression, emotional insecurity and social isolation are all risk factors for using violence against partners. Many of these factors may worsen in the context of COVID-19. Despite the urgency in addressing COVID-19, existing health concerns like Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) persist—and may well be worsened by the virus. We simply do not yet know the effects of COVID-19 on violence, nor do we know which interventions work best to prevent and respond to it within the context of the pandemic. The vast majority of information available about IPV and violence during the pandemic has been based on anecdotal reports. The call to action for the research community is clear. We must systematically measure the effects of COVID-19 and movement related restrictions on violence. As always when researching violence, serious consideration must be given to ethics and safety. Violence researchers must mobilize to investigate the impacts of COVID-19 on violence and human health.