Dating violence articles

This course will help you:

> Understand teen dating violence and its consequences

> Identify factors that can place teens at risk for dating violence

> Communicate with teens about the importance of healthy relationships

> Learn about resources to prevent dating violence

By working with teens, families, organizations, and communities to implement effective teen dating violence prevention strategies, you can help make your school safer and healthier for all students.

What is teen dating violence?

Dating abuse

This article is about general article about dating violence. For the article specific to teens, see Teen dating violence .

Dating abuse or dating violence is defined as the perpetration or threat of an act of violence by at least one member of an unmarried couple on the other member within the context of dating or courtship. It is also when one partner tries to maintain power and control over the other through abuse/violence. This abuse/violence can take a number of forms: sexual assault. sexual harassment. threats, physical violence, verbal. mental, or emotional abuse. social sabotage, and stalking. It can include psychological abuse. emotional blackmail. sexual abuse. physical abuse and psychological manipulation. [ 1 ]

Dating violence crosses all racial, age, economic and social lines. The Center for Relationship Abuse Awareness describes dating abuse as a "pattern of abusive and coercive behaviors used to maintain power and control over a former or current intimate partner." [ 2 ] The Family & Community Development support group at eCitizen in Singapore has described what it calls tell-tale signs of an abusive relationship.

Contents

Profiles of abuser and victim [ edit ]

Individuals of all walks of life can find themselves in an abusive relationship. Abuse can occur regardless of the couple's age, race, income, or other demographic traits. There are, however, many traits that abusers and victims share in common.

The Centre for Promoting Alternatives to Violence describes abusers as being obsessively jealous and possessive, overly confident, having mood swings or a history of violence or temper, seeking to isolate their partner from family, friends and colleagues, and having a tendency to blame external stressors. [ 3 ]

Meanwhile, victims of relationship abuse share many traits as well, including: physical signs of injury, missing time at work or school, slipping performance at work or school, changes in mood or personality, increased use of drugs or alcohol, and increasing isolation from friends and family. [ 4 ] Victims may blame themselves for any abuse that occurs or may minimize the severity of the crime. This often leads to victims choosing to stay in abusive relationships.

Strauss (2005) [ 5 ] argues that while men inflict the greater share of injuries in domestic violence, researchers and society at large must not overlook the substantial minority of injuries inflicted by women. Additionally, Strauss notes that even relatively minor acts of physical aggression by women are a serious concern:

'Minor' assaults perpetrated by women are also a major problem, even when they do not result in injury, because they put women in danger of much more severe retaliation by men. [. ] It will be argued that in order to end 'wife beating,' it is essential for women also to end what many regard as a 'harmless' pattern of slapping, kicking, or throwing something at a male partner who persists in some outrageous behavior and 'won't listen to reason.'

Similarly, Deborah Capaldi [ 6 ] reports that a 13-year longitudinal study found that a woman's aggression towards a man was equally important as the man's tendency towards violence in predicting the likelihood of overall violence: "Since much IPV [Intimate Partner Violence] is mutual and women as well as men initiate IPV, prevention and treatment approaches should attempt to reduce women's violence as well as men's violence. Such an approach has a much higher chance of increasing women's safety." However, Capaldi's research only focused on at-risk youth, not women in general, and, therefore, may not apply to the entire population.

Characteristics [ edit ]

Emotional abuse [ edit ]

He/She is afraid of his/her date

He/She is afraid of making the date angry and are unable to even disagree with the date.

His/Her date has publicly embarrassed and humiliated him/her.

Psychological abuse [ edit ]

The date threatens to use violence against him/her or against himself/herself.(e. g. "If you leave me, I will kill myself".)

Physical Dating Violence Among High School Students --- United States, 2003

Dating violence is defined as physical, sexual, or psychological violence within a dating relationship. In a study of dating violence victimization among students in grades 7--12 during 1994--1995, the 18-month prevalence of victimization from physical and psychological dating violence was estimated at 12% and 20%, respectively ( 1 ). In addition to the risk for injury and death, victims of dating violence are more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior, unhealthy dieting behaviors, substance use, and suicidal ideation/attempts ( 2--4 ). Dating violence victimization can be a precursor for intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization in adulthood, most notably among women ( 5 ). Among adult women in the United States, an estimated 5.3 million IPV incidents occur each year, resulting in approximately 2 million injuries and 1,300 deaths ( 6 ). By using data from the 2003 Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS), CDC analyzed the prevalence of physical dating violence (PDV) victimization among high school students and its association with five risk behaviors. The results indicated that 8.9% of students (8.9% of males and 8.8% of females) reported PDV victimization during the 12 months preceding the survey and that students reporting PDV victimization were more likely to engage in four of the five risk behaviors (i. e. sexual intercourse, attempted suicide, episodic heavy drinking, and physical fighting). Primary prevention programs are needed to educate high school students about healthy dating relationship behaviors, and secondary prevention programs should address risk behaviors associated with dating violence victimization.

YRBS, a component of the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System, measures the prevalence of health risk behaviors among high school students through biennial national, state, and local surveys. The 2003 national survey obtained cross-sectional data representative of public - and private-school students in grades 9--12 in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The overall response rate was 67%. Data from 15,214 students in 158 schools were available for analysis; 14,956 (98.3%) students answered the dating violence question. Students completed an anonymous, self-administered questionnaire that included a question about dating violence victimization. A more detailed description of these methods appears elsewhere ( 7 ).

PDV victimization was defined as a response of "yes" to a single question: "During the past 12 months, did your boyfriend or girlfriend ever hit, slap, or physically hurt you on purpose?" Students were not asked whether they had had a boyfriend or girlfriend during the 12 months preceding the survey; therefore, a response of "no" might have included students who had not been dating. The following self-reported risk behaviors also were assessed: currently sexually active (had sexual intercourse with at least one person during the 3 months preceding the survey), attempted suicide (actually attempted suicide at least one time during the 12 months preceding the survey), current cigarette use (smoked cigarettes on > 1 of the 30 days preceding the survey), episodic heavy drinking (had five or more alcoholic drinks in a row on > 1 of the 30 days preceding the survey), and physical fighting (was in a physical fight at least one time during the 12 months preceding the survey). Specific risk behaviors were selected to represent risks that are of public health concern among high school students.

Data were weighted to produce national estimates. All calculations were performed using statistical software to account for the complex sampling design. Differences in prevalence among persons with certain characteristics were determined statistically significant if the 95% confidence intervals did not overlap. Adjusted odds ratios were calculated to examine the association between PDV victimization and the five risk behaviors using a multivariable logistic regression model that included, as predictors, the five risk behaviors and sex, grade level, race/ethnicity, and self-reported grades. In this report, data are presented for black, white, and Hispanic students*; the numbers of students from other racial/ethnic populations were too small for meaningful analysis.

Among all 14,956 students, 8.9% reported experiencing PDV victimization. The prevalence of PDV victimization was similar for males (8.9%) and females (8.8%) and similar by grade level (range: 8.1%--10.1%) (Table 1 ). Prevalence of reported PDV victimization was greater among blacks (13.9%) than whites (7.0%) and Hispanics (9.3%). In addition, prevalence of PDV victimization was greater among black males (13.7%) than white males (6.6%) and higher among black females (14.0%) than white females (7.5%) and Hispanic females (9.2%). PDV victimization prevalence did not vary significantly by geographic region. Lower self-reported grades in school were associated with higher levels of PDV victimization; 6.1% of students reporting mostly A's reported PDV victimization compared with 13.7% of students receiving mostly D's or F's.

Prevalences of the five risk behaviors among all participants were as follows: currently sexually active, 34.3%; attempted suicide, 8.5%; current cigarette use, 21.9%; episodic heavy drinking, 28.3%; and physical fighting, 33.0%. After controlling for sex, grade level, race/ethnicity, self-reported grades, and the five risk behaviors examined, four of the five risk behaviors were significantly associated with PDV victimization (Table 2 ). The only risk behavior not significantly associated with PDV victimization in the multivariable model was current cigarette use. When male and female students were analyzed separately, three of the five risk behaviors (currently sexually active, attempted suicide, and physical fighting) were significantly associated with PDV victimization in the multivariable model.

Reported by: MC Black, PhD, R Noonan, PhD, M Legg, MS, Div of Violence Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention; D Eaton, PhD, Div of Adolescent and School Health, National Center For Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion; MJ Breiding, PhD, EIS Officer, CDC.

Editorial Note:

The findings in this report suggest that PDV victimization affects a substantial number of high school students, with approximately one in 11 reporting PDV victimization during the 12 months preceding the survey, a ratio equating to nearly 1.5 million high school students nationwide. Prevalence of PDV victimization was similar and associated with risk behaviors for both male and female high school students, and no significant increases in PDV victimization were observed by grade level.

These results underscore the need for prevention programs directed at both PDV and associated risk behaviors. Choose Respect, a new CDC national initiative, is being launched this month in 10 U. S. cities. This initiative focuses on persons aged 11--14 years and encourages development of healthy relationship behaviors. Choose Respect uses traditional materials (e. g. posters or classroom videos) and nontraditional multimedia (e. g. podcasts or web-based games) to appeal to this age group.

The findings in this report are subject to at least five limitations. First, the extent of underreporting or overreporting of risk behaviors cannot be determined, although the survey questions demonstrate good test-retest reliability ( 8 ). Second, questions about sexual violence or psychological abuse by a dating partner were not included. Prevalence estimates of dating violence that include sexual and psychological violence likely would be substantially larger and indicate greater levels of sexual victimization among females ( 3 ). Third, these data apply only to high school students who were attending school during the survey and, therefore, are not representative of all persons in this age group. In 2001, approximately 5% of persons aged 16--17 years in the United States were not enrolled in a high school program and had not completed high school ( 9 ). Fourth, participants were not asked whether they had had a boyfriend or girlfriend during the preceding 12 months; therefore, those reporting no PDV victimization might have included students who had not been dating. Eliminating those who did not date would have increased the prevalence of PDV victimization among those who were dating. Finally, because the survey is cross-sectional in nature, whether the risk behaviors were precursors or consequences of PDV victimization could not be determined.

Medical and mental health-care providers and others consulted by teens (e. g. school counselors) should be aware of the prevalence of dating violence and the potential for associated risk behaviors among teens who report dating violence. Appropriate intervention (e. g. referral for counseling) to reduce the likelihood of further victimization is more likely if providers ask about dating violence when speaking with teens. The findings in this report and the resulting recommendations are consistent with recommendations by others that dating violence intervention and prevention can benefit from addressing dating violence in the context of other risk behaviors ( 4 ).

References

Halpern CT, Oslak SG, Young ML, Martin SL, Kupper LL. Partner violence among adolescents in opposite-sex romantic relationships: findings from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Am J Public Health 2001;91:1679--85.

Ackard DM, Neumark-Sztainer D. Date violence and date rape among adolescents: associations with disordered eating behaviors and psychological health. Child Abuse Negl 2002;26:455--73.

Coker AL, McKeown RE, Sanderson M, Davis KE, Valois RF, Huebner S. Severe dating violence and quality of life among South Carolina high school students. Am J Prev Med 2000;19:220--7.

Silverman JG, Raj A, Mucci LA, Hathaway JE. Dating violence against adolescent girls and associated substance use, unhealthy weight control, sexual risk behavior, pregnancy, and suicidality. JAMA 2001;286:572--9.

Smith PH, White JW, Holland LJ. A longitudinal perspective on dating violence among adolescent and college-age women. Am J Public Health 2003;93:1104--9.

CDC. Costs of intimate partner violence against women in the United States. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC; 2003. Available at http://www. cdc. gov/ncipc/pub-res/ipv_cost/IPVBook-Final-Feb18.pdf .

Grunbaum JA, Kann L, Kinchen S, et al. Youth risk behavior surveillance ---United States, 2003. In: Surveillance Summaries, May 21, 2004. MMWR 2004;53(No. SS-2).

Brener ND, Kann L, McManus T, Kinchen SA, Sundberg EC, Ross JG. Reliability of the 1999 Youth Risk Behavior Survey questionnaire. J Adolesc Health 2002;31:336--42.

Kaufman P, Alt MN, Chapman C. Dropout rates in the United States: 2001. Washington, DC: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics; 2004. Publication no. NCES 2005--046. Available at http://nces. ed. gov/pubs2005/2005046.pdf .

* In this report, students categorized as black or white were non-Hispanic. Students categorized as Hispanic might be of any race.

Use of trade names and commercial sources is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. References to non-CDC sites on the Internet are provided as a service to MMWR readers and do not constitute or imply endorsement of these organizations or their programs by CDC or the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. CDC is not responsible for the content of pages found at these sites. URL addresses listed in MMWR were current as of the date of publication.

What is Dating Violence?

Send to a Friend via Email

Recipient's Email

This field is required.

Separate multiple addresses with commas. Limited to 10 recipients. We will not share any of the email addresses on this form with third parties.

michealofiachra/Vetta/Getty Images

Question: What is Dating Violence?

Answer:

Dating violence is described by Health Canada (1995) as, ". any intentional sexual, physical or psychological attack on one partner by the other in a dating relationship".

Choking, slapping, hitting, kicking, biting, shoving, threatening with a weapon, confinement and hair pulling all constitute physical abuse, whereas sexual abuse takes place when one person has been forced to have sex or perform sexual acts or attempting to have sex or perform sexual acts with someone under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.

Emotional dating violence is somewhat more challenging to define as there are no physical manifestations (i. e. bruises) when emotional abuse occurs. Some types of emotional abuse include insulting, swearing, terrorizing, uttering threats, destroying property, forcing isolation, or being extremely jealous or possessive to the point of where it negatively affects the other person involved in the relationship.

Teenage Dating Violence: Signs, Examples of Dating Violence

Dating violence is violence that occurs within a dating relationship rather than, say, marriage; and dating violence is as much a problem for teenagers as it is for adults. In fact, statistics show that one-in-three teenagers have experienced teenage domestic violence in a dating relationship. In 1995, 7% of all murder victims were young women who were killed by their boyfriends. 1

In situations of dating violence, one partner tries to exert power and control over the other partner through physical abuse or sexual assault. Emotional abuse is commonly present alongside the physical abuse or sexual abuse that takes place.

Sexual violence in dating relationships is also a major concern. A survey of adolescent and college students revealed that date rape accounted for 67% of sexual assaults and 60% of rapes take place in the victim's home or in that of a friend or relative.

Why Teenage Dating Violence Occurs

Dating violence seems to decrease once young adults move beyond being a teenager. Part of this may be because of the way teenagers see themselves and because of their newness to dating. According to The Alabama Coalition Against Domestic Violence, young men and women may have certain beliefs that lead to higher incidence of dating violence.

For example, teenage men may believe:

They have the right to "control" their female partners in any way necessary

"Masculinity" is physical aggressiveness

They "possess" their partner

They should demand intimacy

They may lose respect if they are attentive and supportive toward their girlfriends

Teenage women may believe:

They are responsible for solving problems in their relationships

Their boyfriend's jealousy, possessiveness and even physical abuse, is "romantic"

Abuse is "normal" because their friends are also being abused

There is no one to ask for help

And while all of those beliefs can also be seen in adults, they are likely more prevalent in teens.

Warning Signs of Dating Abuse

There are many warning signs of dating abuse and they should always be taken seriously. A pattern does not have to occur for it to be considered dating violence – one incidence of violence is abuse and it is one too many.

Warning signs of dating violence are similar to those seen in adults. These signs of dating abuse can be seen outside the relationship and include:

Physical signs of injury

Truancy, dropping out of school

Failing grades

Indecision

Changes in mood or personality

Use of drugs/alcohol

Pregnancy

Emotional outburst

Isolation

Within the relationship itself there are also signs of dating abuse: 2

Checking your cell phone or email without permission

Constantly putting you down

Extreme jealousy or insecurity

Explosive temper

Isolating you from family or friends

Making false accusations

Mood swings

Physically hurting you in any way

Possessiveness

Telling you what to do

You are here

Healthy relationships consist of trust, honesty, respect, equality, and compromise. 1 Unfortunately, teen dating violence—the type of intimate partner violence that occurs between two young people who are, or who were once in, an intimate relationship—is a serious problem in the United States. A national survey found that ten percent of teens, female and male, had been the victims of physical dating violence within the past year 2 and approximately 29 percent of adolescents reported being verbally or psychologically abused within the previous year. 3

Teen dating violence can be any one, or a combination, of the following:

Physical. This includes pinching, hitting, shoving, or kicking.

Emotional. This involves threatening a partner or harming his or her sense of self-worth. Examples include name calling, controlling/jealous behaviors, consistent monitoring, shaming, bullying (online, texting, and in person), intentionally embarrassing him/her, keeping him/her away from friends and family.

Sexual. This is defined as forcing a partner to engage in a sex act when he or she does not or cannot consent.

It can negatively influence the development of healthy sexuality, intimacy, and identity as youth grow into adulthood 4 and can increase the risk of physical injury, poor academic performance, binge drinking, suicide attempts, unhealthy sexual behaviors, substance abuse, negative body image and self-esteem, and violence in future relationships. 5

Teen dating violence can be prevented, especially when there is a focus on reducing risk factors as well as fostering protective factors. and when teens are empowered through family, friends, and others (including role models such as teachers, coaches, mentors, and youth group leaders) to lead healthy lives and establish healthy relationships. It is important to create spaces, such as school communities, where the behavioral norms are not tolerant of abuse in dating relationships. The message must be clear that treating people in abusive ways will not be accepted, and policies must enforce this message to keep students safe.

1 U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011

2 CDC, 2010

3 Halpern, Oslak, Young, Waller, Markin, & Kupper, 2001

4 Foshee & Reyes, 2009