Autor(es): Costa, D ; Hatzidimitriadou, E ; Ioannidi-Kapolou, E ; Lindert, J ; Soares, JJF ; Sundin, O ; Toth, O ; Barros, H
Data: 2016
Identificador Persistente: http://hdl.handle.net/10216/114801
Origem: Repositório Aberto da Universidade do Porto
Assunto(s): Intimate partner violence; Socioeconomic position
OBJECTIVES:This work explores the association between socio-economic position (SEP) and intimate partner violence (IPV) considering the perspectives of men and women as victims, perpetrators and as both (bidirectional). STUDY DESIGN:Cross-sectional international multicentre study. METHODS:A sample of 3496 men and women, (aged 18-64 years), randomly selected from the general population of residents from six European cities was assessed: Athens; Budapest; London; Östersund; Porto; and Stuttgart. Their education (primary, secondary and university), occupation (upper white collar, lower white collar and blue collar) and unemployment duration (never, ≤12 months and >12 months) were considered as SEP indicators and physical IPV was measured with the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales. RESULTS:Past year physical IPV was declared by 17.7% of women (3.5% victims, 4.2% perpetrators and 10.0% bidirectional) and 19.8% of men (4.1% victims, 3.8% perpetrators and 11.9% bidirectional). Low educational level (primary vs university) was associated with female victimisation (adjusted odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 3.2; 1.3-8.0) and with female bidirectional IPV (4.1, 2.4-7.1). Blue collar occupation (vs upper white) was associated with female victimisation (2.1, 1.1-4.0), female perpetration (3.0, 1.3-6.8) and female bidirectional IPV (4.0, 2.3-7.0). Unemployment duration was associated with male perpetration (>12 months of unemployment vs never unemployed: 3.8; 1.7-8.7) and with bidirectional IPV in both sex (women: 1.8, 1.2-2.7; men: 1.7, 1.0-2.8). CONCLUSIONS:In these European centres, physical IPV was associated with a disadvantaged SEP. A consistent socio-economic gradient was observed in female bidirectional involvement, but victims or perpetrators-only presented gender specificities according to levels of education, occupation differentiation and unemployment duration potentially useful for designing interventions.
