000			03529nab a2200337Ia 4500
001			113320
005			20250625151150.0
008			110331s2005 eng
022			_a0022-2445
040			_aWSS _dAFV
100			_aHoltzworth-Munroe, Amy _91374
245			_aMale versus female intimate partner violence : _bputting controversial findings in context _cHoltzworth-Munroe, Amy
260			_aMinneapolis, Minn. _bNational Council on Family Relations _c2005
365			_a00 _b0
520			_aThis article is in response to Fergusson, Horwood, and Ridder (2005), "Partner Violence and Mental Health Outcomes in a New Zealand Birth Cohort", which appears in the same issue of the Journal of Marriage and the Family (as does Johnson, 2005, "Domestic Violence: It's Not About Gender - Or Is It?". Fergusson et al. explore the relationship between domestic violence and mental health outcomes in a birth cohort of 1,003 participants involved in the longitudinal Christchurch Health and Development Study, assessed at age 25. The authors sought to dispel the belief that domestic violence is gendered, typically involving a male offender and a female victim. Their findings indicate that men and women had similar rates of victimisation and perpetration of partner abuse; exposure to domestic violence had a positive relationship with mental disorders, and mental health outcomes were similar for men and women. This article provides context for these controversial research findings and summarises the situation by stating that we currently lack the "data to fully understand the differing ratio of male to female violence across differing samples and at differing levels of violence severity." While commending Fergusson et al. for their attempts to examine this issue in several ways, the author points out their inadequate consideration of the significant gender differences in experiences of fear of partners and its impact on women. She suggests that the study of posttraumatic stress disorder might address this short-coming. The author also points out that, not being originally designed to specifically study partner violence, the Christchurch Health and Development Study lacks measures of factors such as jealously and borderline personality disorders as predictors of violence. She also points out that it is important "to understand whether similar theories adequately explain both male and female intimate partner violence or whether they are different phenomena, requiring differing models", as these questions have important implications for prevention and intervention initiatives. Lastly the author reiterates the ethical need for such controversial research to be placed in context, when currently there is an imbalance in our scientific understanding of male and female intimate partner violence. To not do so risks simply fuelling political agendas.
522			_axxu
650	2	7	_aABUSIVE MEN _926
650	2	7	_aABUSIVE WOMEN _927
650	2	7	_aChristchurch Health and Development Study _94067
650	2	7	_2FVC _aDOMESTIC VIOLENCE _9203
650	2	7	_2FVC _aEMOTIONAL ABUSE _9222
650	2	7	_2FVC _aGENDER _9269
650	2	7	_2FVC _aMENTAL HEALTH _9377
650	2	7	_2FVC _aPHYSICAL ABUSE _9439
650	2	7	_2FVC _aWOMEN _9645
650	2	7	_9431 _aINTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE _2FVC
651		4	_aNEW ZEALAND _92588
500			_aJournal of Marriage and Family 67(5) December 2005 : 1120-1125
773	0		_tJournal of Marriage and Family 67(5) December 2005 : 1120-1125
942			_2ddc _cARTICLE
999			_c2044 _d2044