This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
Gun use in IPV has hidden mental health consequences
Recent findings indicated that individuals who experienced intimate partner violence involving a gun were less likely to be physically harmed but more likely to feel frightened, suggesting that this type of violence and trauma could go unnoticed by clinicians.
“A lot of the policies that are laid out about guns and domestic violence focus on preventing homicides, which is really important,” Susan B. Sorenson, PhD, of University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, said in a press release. “But there has been less attention on what it means for the women who are alive and not just as a risk factor for their death.”
To compare outcomes of intimate partner violence (IPV) between different weapons, researchers analyzed data from police forms completed at the scene of IPV in a large U.S. city in 2013. There were 35,413 incidents.
Overall, 6,573 incidents involved hands, fists or feet and 1,866 involved external weapons, of which 576 were guns.
Most incidents were male-on-female. Of these, 63.4% involving no weapon, 77.4% involving a bodily weapon, 50.2% involving a non-gun external weapon and 79.5% involving a gun were male-on-female.
Guns were used to threaten the partner in 69.1% of incidents.
When a gun was used, individuals who experienced IPV were less likely to have visible injuries (adjusted OR = 0.64) and more likely to feel frightened (aOR = 3.13), while offenders were less likely to have pushed or shoved, grabbed, punched or kicked victims, compared with when a bodily or non-gun external weapon was used.
“Victims of IPV against whom a gun was used were less likely to have visible injuries, were far more likely to have been threatened, and were substantially more likely to be frightened,” Sorenson wrote. “Medicine and public health focus primarily on physical injuries (both fatal and nonfatal) to document the nature and scope of gun violence. Such a focus may need to be reconsidered if gun use in IPV is primarily a means to an end. In this situation, guns would heighten fear and compliance and likely would reduce willingness to leave or otherwise end the relationship, thus promoting chronic abuse.” – by Amanda Oldt
Disclosure: Sorenson reports no relevant financial disclosures.
Editor's Note: This story was updated on Jan. 7, 2020 to more accurately reflect the percentages of male-on-female incidents.