Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence Among Intimate Partners During the Perinatal Period: A Narrative Literature Review

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects individuals and families from all backgrounds, regardless of their ethnicity, socio-economic status, sexual orientation, or religion. Pregnancy and childbirth could be a time of vulnerability to violence because of changes in physical, emotional, social, and economic demands and needs. Prevalence of IPV against women during the perinatal period is increasingly researched and documented. However, evidence on IPV prevalence among intimate partners as well as on the course of IPV over the perinatal period is scarce. The purpose of this review was to provide a narrative synthesis of the existing literature regarding the prevalence estimates of IPV among intimate partners over the perinatal period. Through this review, we also gained better insight into associated factors, as well as the various forms of IPV. Of the 766 studies assessing prevalence estimates identified, 86 were included, where 80 studies focused on unidirectional IPV (i.e., perpetrated by men against women) and six studies investigated bidirectional IPV (i.e., IPV perpetrated by both partners). Most of the included studies reported lower overall prevalence rates for unidirectional IPV postpartum (range: 2–58%) compared to pregnancy (range: 1.5–66.9%). Psychological violence was found to be the most prevalent form of violence during the entire perinatal period. Studies on bidirectional IPV mostly reported women's perpetration to be almost as high as that of their partner or even higher, yet their findings need to be interpreted with caution. In addition, our results also highlighted the associated factors of IPV among partners, in which they were assimilated into a multi-level ecological model and were analyzed through an intersectional framework. Based on our findings, IPV is found to be highly prevalent during the entire perinatal period and in populations suffering from social inequalities. Further research exploring not only the occurrence, but also the motivations and the context of the bidirectionality of IPV during the perinatal period may facilitate better understanding of the detrimental consequences on partners and their families, as well as the development of effective intervention strategies. Public health prevention approaches intervening at optimal times during the perinatal period are also needed.

The impact of a maternal mental health intervention on intimate partner violence in Northern Ghana and the mediating roles of social support and couple communication: secondary analysis of a cluster randomized controlled trial

“…The results should be interpreted in light of IPV trajectories during stressful periods of pregnancy and postpartum. The trajectories of IPV during these periods remain unclear despite emerging evidence indicating a drop in IPV during the postpartum period [ 47 ]. However, it is well established that women experiencing IPV prior to or during pregnancy are more likely to continue experiencing IPV postpartum compared to those who do not [ 47 , 55 ].…”

“…Covariates were chosen a priori based on previous evidence on risk factors for IPV not only globally [ 47 ] but specific to African countries [ 48 ] and Ghana [ 17 , 49 ]: age, education, number of pregnancies, relationship status, whether receiving sufficient support from husband, depression and IPV status at baseline. Variables including age, education, number of pregnancies, relationship status, and whether receiving sufficient support from husband were self-reported by women using a single-item question for each.…”

Rapid Review on the Associations of Social and Geographical Isolation and Intimate Partner Violence: Implications for the Ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic

“…Types of behavior could include: (A) acts of physical violence, such as slapping, hitting, kicking, and beating; (B) sexual violence, including forced sexual intercourse and other forms of sexual coercion; (C) emotional (psychological) abuse, such as insults, belittling, constant humiliation, intimidation (e.g., destroying things), threats of harm, threats to take away children; (D) controlling behavior, including isolating a person from family and friends, monitoring their movements, and restricting access to financial resources, employment, education, or medical care (12). IPV can happen to anyone, regardless of any gender specifications, and in any form of intimate relations (13). However, it is the most common form of violence against women, and approximately one in three women worldwide has experienced violence by an intimate partner during her lifetime (14).…”

“…In addition, social isolation plays a major role in creating the structural dislocation of minorities and marginalized populations and the differential distribution of resources (i.e., social capital), which in turn could directly increase the risk for IPV victimization for individuals who face overlapping social discriminations due to their race, gender, class, etc. (13,24,25). Furthermore, geographical isolation can be defined by distance to resources like neighbors, friends, police stations, hospitals, or the nearest village or town (26).…”

Human–Animal Interaction and Perinatal Mental Health: A Narrative Review of Selected Literature and Call for Research

“…Although the literature is conflicting, research seems to suggest that pets are likely to disturb sleep, but may provide a sense of safety and security, which, in turn, may improve sleep [ 222 ]. Furthermore, the transition to parenting may increase stressors that result in conflict between caregivers and exacerbate the risk of intimate partner violence (IPV; [ 223 ]). It is well documented that IPV and animal cruelty commonly co-occur [ 224 , 225 , 226 , 227 ].…”