Economic abuse is a poorly understood form of intimate partner violence but may have far-reaching implications for the financial health of the survivor. Additionally, very little is known about whether depressive symptoms, education, employment, or attitudes about relations between men and women mediate or moderate the relationship between economic abuse and their financial circumstances. The purpose of this study was to answer these two research questions: (a) Is there a relationship between the experience of economic abuse and food insecurity (as a measure of poverty)? (b) Is the relationship between economic abuse and food insecurity impacted by women’s education, women’s and men’s employment, women’s attitudes towards gender relations, or women’s depressive symptoms? We used quantitative data from the “UN Multi-Country Study on Men and Violence,” analyzing data on 3,105 women aged 18–49 years who were interviewed. Initial logistic regressions were conducted followed by introducing moderators and mediators to the model using path analyses to test the relationship between economic abuse and food insecurity in the household. Significant predictors of food insecurity included several types of abuse and partners’ employment, women’s own employment, and education. The only type of IPV not associated with food insecurity was physical abuse. Experiences of economic abuse were associated with a 1.69 times greater likelihood of reporting food insecurity which was higher than experiences of psychological or sexual abuse. Additionally, women’s experiences of economic abuse over their lifetime were significantly associated with an increase in depressive symptoms which in turn was associated with greater likelihood of experiencing food insecurity. Such relationships warrant attention to economic abuse and depressive symptoms as part of the interventions used when working with survivors. Additional research could also help further our understanding of how these variables interact together and how best to address its impact on survivors.
The Family Violence Option (FVO), a provision of the 1996 welfare legislation, allows states to waive certain program requirements for domestic violence (DV) survivors in order to protect them from danger or penalties. The absence of a standardized method for assessing risk and impact has been an impediment to states’ use of the FVO, particularly in the granting of waivers. The purpose of this study was to address this limitation by developing and testing a risk and impact assessment tool for DV survivors applying for waivers under the FVO. Therefore, a collaborative effort between state administrators and researchers was formed which included input from welfare staff and DV advocates. Background research included reviews of validated risk assessments and FVO policies, as well as primary data from focus groups and surveys with staff from the state human services organization, county welfare agencies, and DV organizations. A tool was then created with 131 questions covering demographics, abuse experiences, partner access and risk, perceptions of safety, and emotional health, and piloted in four counties. Two hundred and thirty-seven completed assessments were analyzed using descriptive statistics, principal component analysis, and feedback from assessors. The final tool (n= 95 items) was informed by validated evidence and frontline practice wisdom, recommended to improve FVO utilization and survivor outcomes. From this study, the authors recommend that other states seeking changes to their FVO risk assessment policy and practice explore collaborative partnerships between practitioners and researchers in order to make decisions informed by best practices and systematic research. They should also pursue cross departmental training of risk assessment tools to prevent a siloed approach to FVO implementation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.