Center for Disease Prevention and Control terms violence as a serious public health issue that affects people in all life stages for example the elderly, children, teens and adults ( CDPC, 2017) . The World Health Organization defines violence as the premeditated application of power or force towards a group, community or another person whose results include maldevelopment, deprivation, injury, death or psychological harm (WHO, 2002). Various forms of violence result to emotional, physical and mental health problems which impair a person’s normal functioning throughout their lives. In the modern day world, violence pervades the lives of many populations globally thereby compromising people’s health seriously.
Violence is a universal scourge that permeates various aspects of life including schools, institutions, workplaces and homes. Past empirical research by Black, Basile, Breiding, Smith, Walters, Merrick & Stevens (2011) posits that globally, 1.6 million people succumb to violence. Violence ranks among the leading causes of fatalities for people between the ages of 15 to 44 years which accounts to 14% and 7% deaths among males and females consecutively ( Black et al., 2011) . Examples of forms of violence are; aggression towards youths, elder assaults, intimate partner violence, sexual violence and abuse that targets children. The study explores intimate partner violence and pays a special focus on types of intervention strategies that can be adopted to curb IPV.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Background of Intimate Partner Violence
IPV is a type of aggression occurring between spouses in an intimate relationship either at home or outside the family precincts. The belligerence behaviour may transpire between same sex partners or heterosexual spouses and does not necessarily involve sexual intimacy. Intimate partner violence varies in respect to severity and frequency and entails episodes of aggression that could either be chronic or severe over multiple years. As Kelly and Johnson (2008) explain, IPV hostility may take forms such as stalking, psychological harm, sexual abuse or physical violence orchestrated by former or current partner.
Physical violence between partners in a relationship involves hurting through kicking, hitting or any other type of physical force. Sexual violence between partners entails forcing a partner to have sex, sexting or sexual touching without consent. Stalking is a form of intimate partner aggression characterized by contact or unwanted attention to one’s partner which imposes fear or jeopardizes one’s safety ( Kelly & Johnson, 2008) . Psychological aggression in an intimate relationship is the intent to harm through nonverbal or verbal communication which may result to emotional or mental discomfort. The Center for Disease Control and Prevention believes that IPV is linked to other forms of aggression and that it causes dire economic consequences coupled with serious health issues to the victim.
Prevalence
Millions of American citizens are affected by various forms of intimate aggression each year. The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) indicate that approximately 1 in every 10 men and about 1 in 4 females have fallen victims to various forms of IPV such as physical violence, stalking or sexual abuse instigated by an intimate partner ( Black et al., 2011) . An estimated 38 million men and 43 million women have encountered psychological violence initiated by their partner. Intimate Partner Violence can either start early when dating or can manifest later one after marriage. IPV experienced during adolescence is termed as teen dating violence which is encountered by millions if teen in the United States every year. Approximately 5 million males and 11 million females reported experiencing physical violence, stalking or sexual violence orchestrated by a spouse before attaining 18 years ( Peterson, Liu, Kresnow, Florence, Merrick, DeGue & Lokey, 2018) . A global survey reported that 10-69% of females encountered physical abuse orchestrated by a male spouse. A study of 613 assaulted females in Japan indicated that of all women who had reportedly been abused, less than 0.1% were victims of physical aggression while 57% of the cases revolved on sexual, physical and psychological abuse.
Consequences
Perpetration of intimate partner violence results to serious societal and individual costs. IPV against a partner leads to physical injury and in extreme cases may amount to death. The United States crime data suggest that 1 in every 6 homicide victims lose their lives as a result of IPV. Approximately half of the female homicide cases in the United States are perpetrated by a former or current male intimate spouse. According to Black et al., (2011), additional adverse outcomes linked to intimate partner violence include a range of conditions that impair the digestive tract, heart, muscle and bone, reproductive and nervous malfunctioning, all which are chronic in nature. Survivors of IPV can also experience posttraumatic stress disorder and depression cases which have enduring impacts in a victims’ life. Partners who have reported the forms of intimate aggressions are highly likely to indulge in binge drinking, smoking and sexual risk behaviours which may endanger their livelihoods ( Kelly & Johnson, 2008) . Devastating societal and medical costs emanating from intimate partner violence include lost productivity from paid employment, hospital costs to treat injuries and litigation costs all totaling to approximately $3.6 trillion. IPV costs spread over a survivor’s lifetime were found by a CDC survey to be $103,767 and $23,414 respectively (CDPC, 2017).
Risk Factors
Individuals who are pre-disposed to risk factors eventually become either victims or perpetrators of intimate aggression. IPV risk factors contribute directly and indirectly to victimization and perpetration of aggression. Sexual victimization or childhood abuse predisposes an individual to intimate partner violence at later stages of a person’s life. The risk factors can either be relational, societal, individual or may emanate from the community eventually contributing to the likelihood of becoming a victim or perpetrator ( Black et al., 2011) . Individual IPV risk factors are for example poor income streams, youthful age, binge alcohol and drug indulgence, abusive prior encounters, antisocial personal traits, and isolation from other people. Relationship factors that contribute to IPV are economic stress, lack of social support, marital instability, unhealthy family relationships, association with antisocial peers, dominance of a relationship by one partner and jealously or negative emotion in a relationship. Community risk causative factors are outlined by CDC as high alcohol density, weak community sanctions, low social relationships and poverty associated causes such as acute unemployment and overcrowding (CDPC, 2017 ) . The World Health Organization enumerates examples of societal risk factors as societal income inequality, cultural norms that are inclined towards aggression, weak education and economic policies as well as gender inequality.
CDC also outlines protective relationship and community factors that are necessary to protect populations from the harmful predisposition to IPV risk factors (CDPC, 2017 ) . Examples of relationship factors are high friendship quality and cordial social support such as assistance from neighbors and tangible help from the community. Some of the community factors that safeguard people from partner violence perpetration include neighbourhood collective efficacy and efficient resource coordination among community agencies ( Okasako-Schmucker, Cole, Finnie, Basile, DeGue, Niolon and Community Preventive Services Task Force, 2019) . Mutual trust, community cohesiveness, support, willingness to intervene and connectedness are central in cushioning global populations from intimate partner violence.
Intervention Strategies
Prevention endeavors are key in mitigating occurrence of violence perpetrated by partners which negatively affect communities, individuals and families worldwide. Intervention strategies are meant to promote nonviolent, respectful and healthy relationships.
Teaching the importance of embracing healthy and safe relationships is instrumental in averting Intimate Partner Violence. Building abilities such as communications skills, emotional regulation and conflict management would be an effective approach in creating nonviolent relationships ( Nilon, Kearns, Dills, Rambo, Irving, Armstead & Gilbert, 2017) . Strengthening relationship skills can reduce negative behaviours such as delinquency, peer violence, sexual risk behaviours and substance abuse, all which contribute to intimate partner violence. Social emotional learning initiatives targeting the youth help promote healthy relationships by laying emphasis on need for mutually respectful relationships among adolescents. The learning programs impart social and emotional dexterities such as conflict resolution, respect, empathy and healthy communication ( Nilon et al., 2017) . Couple healthy relationship are important in improving relationship dynamics and increasing relationship quality eventually reducing likelihood of IPV occurrences.
Second, engaging influential peers and adults play a key role in averting IPV cases. Trusted peers and adults can be used to exert positive influence on young adults and adolescents in the way they act and behave in relationships. Adults and peers promote healthy relationship behaviors by teaching social norms that change social contexts and beliefs on the adverse effects of IPV. Engaging adults would positively impact relationships by discouraging potential perpetrators and increasing awareness that IPV carries substantial risks and social consequences ( Black et al., 2011) . Approaches that can be employed by influential peers and adults include family based programs, bystander education and empowerment in teaching family values, changing parental attitudes, improving monitoring and rule setting skills, eventually leading to significant reduction of intimate perpetrated violence.
Third, disrupting developmental pathways linked to partner aggression would be an effective intervention strategy in prevention on IPV. Meta-analysis and longitudinal studies indicate that factors such as poor behavioral control and deficit in problem solving manifest before adolescents. Negative parenting, exposure to chronic stress, neglect and child abuse are developmental risks and pathways that can be disrupted to reduce likelihood of IPV. Examples of disruptive approaches are early childhood home visits, family engagement, pre-school enrichment, family relationship programs and parental skill coaching. At risk and pre-disposed families, children and youth can be treated through therapeutic interventions to mitigate likely consequences that can arise from the exposures.
Fourth, creating protective environments is an intervention strategy that targets neighbourhood, schools and workplaces with an intent of positively improving awareness on IPV, boosting safety and strengthening social connections. The prevention strategy encourages tendency to disclose IPV matters and promote social norms that discourage IPV within the community ( Okasako-Schmucker et al., 2019) . Examples of approaches that can be employed include reforming organization and workplace policies, improving school safety, modifying physical and social neighbourhood that act as IPV risk factors. The intervention strategy prevents IPV through reducing violent crime, increasing awareness of IPV, improving workplace climate and averting community violence. Creating protective environments also reduces rates of IPV victimization and increases social support that targets victim of intimate aggression.
Strengthening family support economically has a great potential for preventing aggression perpetrated by partners in relationships. Low income, poverty and financial stress are ingredients and triggers of IPV. Economic support to ensure financial stability and autonomy reduces risk for IPV. Efficacious approaches that can be adopted include strengthening work and family support and boosting household financial security ( Peterson et al., 2018) . Training families and communities on income generating opportunities, providing income supplements and narrowing gender pay gap improves the societal wellbeing eventually lessening IPV cases.
Supporting IPV victims’ increases safety and lessens potential detriments from intimate aggressions. Survivors of IPV suffer from chronic pain, eating and sleeping disorders, depression and substance abuse. Support channeled inform of psychological and emotional assistance, housing and addressing other needs would be effective in averting potential future IPV cases. Approaches that ought to be employed include legal assistance, hosing programs, victim centered support, patient services and survivor treatment. The intervention reduces subsequent IPV experiences, improves pregnancy outcomes and decreases imposition of corporal punishment consequently preventing IPV.
Conclusion
Violence pervades various life dimensions worldwide and touches individuals, families and communities in various ways. Perpetration of violence inflicts emotional, physical and mental injuries in a victim’s life. Aggression can manifest inform of youth violence, elder assault, IPV and child neglect. Intimate violence can take forms such as stalking, psychological harm, and physical assault by a current or former spouse. Examples of intervention strategies to curb IPV include engaging influential adults, instilling relationship skills, creating protective environments, disrupting pathways that trigger violence and supporting IPV victims to lessen harm and improve safety.
References
Black, M., Basile, K., Breiding, M., Smith, S., Walters, M., Merrick, M.,& Stevens, M. (2011). National intimate partner and sexual violence survey: 2010 summary report.
Kelly, J. B., & Johnson, M. P. (2008). Differentiation among types of intimate partner violence: Research update and implications for interventions. Family court review , 46 (3), 476-499.
Nilon, P. H., Kearns, M., Dills, J., Rambo, K., Irving, S., Armstead, T., & Gilbert, L. (2017). Preventing Intimate Partner Violence across the Lifespan: A Technical Package of Programs, Policies, and Practices.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). Preventing Intimate Partner Violence across the Lifespan: A Technical Package of Programs. Policies, and Practices .
Okasako-Schmucker, D. L., Cole, K. H., Finnie, R. K., Basile, K. C., DeGue, S., Niolon, P. H., ... & Community Preventive Services Task Force*. (2019). Using a Community Preventive Services Task Force recommendation to prevent and reduce intimate partner violence and sexual violence. Journal of Women's Health , 28 (10), 1335-1337.
Peterson, C., Liu, Y., Kresnow, M. J., Florence, C., Merrick, M. T., DeGue, S., & Lokey, C. N. (2018). Short-term lost productivity per victim: intimate partner violence, sexual violence, or stalking. American journal of preventive medicine , 55 (1), 106-110.
Peterson, C., Kearns, M. C., McIntosh, W. L., Estefan, L. F., Nicolaidis, C., McCollister, K. E., ... & Florence, C. (2018). Lifetime economic burden of intimate partner violence among US adults. American journal of preventive medicine , 55 (4), 433-444.
World Health Organization (2002). The world report on violence and health. The lancet , 360 (9339), 1083-1088, https://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/en/summary_en.pdf
