In the United States, the judicial system response to violence between intimate partners, or intimate partner violence (IPV), typically mandates that adjudicated perpetrators complete a batterer intervention program (BIP). The social science data has found that these programs, on the whole, are only minimally effective in reducing rates of IPV. The authors examined the social science literature on the characteristics and efficacy of BIPs. More than 400 studies were considered, including a sweeping, recently conducted survey of BIP directors across the United States and Canada. Results of this review indicate that the limitations of BIPs are due, in large part, to the limitations of current state standards regulating these programs and, furthermore, that these standards are not grounded in the body of empirical research evidence or best practices. The authors, all of whom have considerable expertise in the area of domestic violence perpetrator treatment, conducted an exhaustive investigation of the following key intervention areas: overall effectiveness of BIPs; length of treatment/length of group sessions; number of group participants and number of facilitators; group format and curriculum; assessment protocol and instruments; victim contact; modality of treatment; differential treatment; working with female perpetrators; working with perpetrators in racial and ethnic minority groups; working with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) perpetrators; perpetrator treatment and practitioner–client relationships; and required practitioner education and training. Recommendations for evidence-based national BIP standards were made based on findings from this review.

In this article, we apply three theoretical frameworks, poststructural feminism, queer, and sociology of gender to the issue of intimate partner violence (IPV) in order to better account for heterosexual female perpetration and same-sex IPV. Although the traditional feminist paradigm—that assumes men use violence as an extension of patriarchy against their female victims—has been useful in explaining some instances of IPV, it does not adequately frame instances of heterosexual female perpetration and IPV in same-sex relationships. Therefore, in this article we seek to add to existing literature by re-theorizing IPV using poststructural feminism, queer, and sociology of gender perspectives, and their attendant understanding of power as dynamic, fluid, and relational and gender as both interactional and structural, in order to open up new ways of framing IPV and encourage new lines of empirical research resulting in better policy proscriptions and treatment interventions.

COVID-19 is a pandemic event not seen in a century. This research aims to determine important predictors of resilience towards the COVID 19/Coronavirus Pandemic. This study uses a cross-sectional design, with purposive snowball sampling, for primary survey data collected over 10 weeks starting the first week in April 2020. Participants completed a self-administered questionnaire on demographics and behavioral factors. Resilience was assessed using the 10-item Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale and perceived stress was assessed using the 10-item Perceived Stress Scale. 374 adults participated in the survey. OLS regression was performed to determine key associations among demographic variables, resilience measures, and perceived stress brought on by COVID-19. Age and education were statistically significantly positively associated with resilience, while English as a second language was significantly negatively associated. Participants who reported needing help from family and neighbors, total number of days in lockdown, and higher perceived stress were all significantly negatively associated with resilience. This study adds to immediate predictors of individual resilience to the ongoing infectious disease catastrophe created by the COVID-19 pandemic.

‘‘It will always continue unless we can change something’’: consequences of intimate partner violence for indigenous women, children, and families

The purpose of this research is to identify important predictors, related to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, of intimate partner violence (IPV) and to provide insight into communication ecologies that can address IPV in disaster contexts. This study uses a cross-sectional design, with purposive snowball sampling, for primary survey data collected over 10 weeks starting the first week in April 2020. A total of 374 adults participated in the study. Logistic binary regression was used to identify key predictors among sociodemographic characteristics, stress related to COVID-19, and perceived stress of group membership for those who reported IPV experiences. A t test was used to statistically differentiate between IPV-reporters and non-IPV reporters based on perceived stress measured by the Perceived Stress Scale. Results indicated that respondents who reported renting, lost income due to COVID-19, and increased nutritional stress were all more likely to belong to the IPV-reporters group. These findings provide insight into additional stressors related to the ongoing pandemic, such as stress due to income loss, nutritional stress, and renting, and their likelihood of increasing IPV victimization. Taken together, these results indicate that additional communication resources are needed for those affected by IPV. Additional findings and implications are further discussed.