Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2024

Open Access 01-12-2024 | COVID-19 | Research

Collateral effects of COVID-19 stay-at-home orders on violence against women in the United States, January 2019 to December 2020

Authors: Patricia C. Lewis, Yuk Fai Cheong, Nadine J. Kaslow, Kathryn M. Yount

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2024

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The necessary execution of non-pharmaceutical risk-mitigation (NPRM) strategies to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 has created an unprecedented natural experiment to ascertain whether pandemic-induced social-policy interventions may elevate collateral health risks. Here, we assess the effects on violence against women (VAW) of the duration of NPRM measures that were executed through jurisdictional-level orders in the United States. We expect that stay-at-home orders, by reducing mobility and disrupting non-coresident social ties, are associated with higher incident reporting of VAW.

Methods

We used aggregate data from the Murder Accountability Project from January 2019 through December 2020, to estimate count models examining the effects of the duration of jurisdictional-level (N = 51) stay-at-home orders on femicide. Additionally, we used data from the National Incident-Based Reporting System to estimate a series of count models that examined the effects of the duration of jurisdictional-level (N = 26) stay-at-home orders on non-lethal violence against women, including five separate measures of intimate partner violence (IPV) and a measure of non-partner sexual violence.

Results

Results from the count models indicated that femicide was not associated with COVID-19 mitigation strategies when adjusted for seasonal effects. However, we found certain measures of non-lethal VAW to be significantly associated in adjusted models. Specifically, reported physical and economic IPV were positively associated with stay-at-home orders while psychological IPV and non-partner sexual violence were negatively associated with stay-at-home orders. The combination measure of all forms of IPV was positively associated with the duration of stay-at-home orders, indicating a net increase in risk of IPV during lockdowns.

Conclusions

The benefits of risk-mitigation strategies to reduce the health impacts directly associated with a pandemic should be weighed against their costs with respect to women’s heightened exposure to certain forms of violence and the potentially cascading impacts of such exposure on health. The effects of COVID-19 NPRM strategies on IPV risk nationally and its immediate and long-term health sequelae should be studied, with stressors like ongoing pandemic-related economic hardship and substance misuse still unfolding. Findings should inform the development of social policies to mitigate the collateral impacts of crisis-response efforts on the risk of VAW and its cascading sequelae.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
Hotline calls are a complex way to understand the problem, because women experiencing lockdown with a perpetrator of violence may not feel safe to call and may have been cut off for some period from protective services.
 
2
Yearly jurisdictional-level female population estimates were based on projections from the 2010 census population for each jurisdiction. The median jurisdictional population was applied to each quarter of the year so there was a stable population size equivalent to the median for the year.
 
Literature
1.
Breiding MJ, Smith SG, Basile KC, Walters ML, Chen J, Merrick MT. Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization–national intimate partner and sexual violence survey, United States, 2011. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014;63(8):1–18.PubMed
2.
Violence Policy Center. When men murder women: an analysis of 2019 homicide data. Washington D.C.: Violence Policy Center; 2021.
3.
4.
5.
Women UN. Prevention: Violence against women and girls & COVID-19. New York: UNWomen; 2020.
6.
Godin M. As Cities around the world go on lockdown, victims of domestic violence look for a way out. Time. 2020.
7.
Passmore H. Impact of COVID-19 risk-mitigation strategies on family violence in the United States: A systematic review of grey literature [Master’s Thesis]. Atlanta, GA: Emory University; 2021.
8.
9.
10.
McLay MM. When “Shelter-in-Place” Isn’t Shelter That’s Safe: a rapid analysis of domestic violence case differences during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Stay-at-Home Orders. J Fam Violence. 2022;37(6):861–70.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Piquero AR, Jennings WG, Jemison E, Kaukinen C, Knaul FM. Domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic - Evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Crim Just. 2021;74:101806.CrossRef
12.
United Nations. Policy brief: the impact of covid-19 on women. 2020.
13.
Heise LL. Violence against women: an integrated Ecological Framework. Violence Against Women. 1998;4(3):262–90.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Copp JE, Kuhl DC, Giordano PC, Longmore MA, Manning WD. Intimate partner violence in neighborhood context: the roles of structural disadvantage, subjective disorder, and emotional distress. Soc Sci Res. 2015;53:59–72.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
15.
Vanderende KE, Yount KM, Dynes MM, Sibley LM. Community-level correlates of intimate partner violence against women globally: a systematic review. Soc Sci Med (1982). 2012;75(7):1143–55.CrossRef
16.
Cunradi CB, Caetano R, Clark C, Schafer J. Neighborhood poverty as a predictor of intimate partner violence among white, black, and hispanic couples in the United States: a multilevel analysis. Ann Epidemiol. 2000;10(5):297–308.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Lewis P. Locked out: Women’s Housing Insecurity in a Hostile Social Environment [Dissertation]. Atlanta, GA: Emory University; 2022.
18.
Stark L, Ager A. A systematic review of prevalence studies of gender-based violence in complex emergencies. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2011;12(3):127–34.PubMedCrossRef
19.
United Nations Development Programme. Recovering from the Ebola Crisis; 2015.
20.
21.
Capaldi DM, Knoble NB, Shortt JW, Kim HK. A systematic review of risk factors for intimate partner violence. Partn Abus. 2012;2:231–80.CrossRef
22.
23.
Eckhardt CI, Oesterle DW, Maloney MA. The instigating effects of isolation on substance-related intimate partner violence: a review. Curr Opin Psychol. 2022;44:18–23.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Brabete AC, Wolfson L, Stinson J, Poole N, Allen S, Greaves L. Exploring the Linkages between Substance Use, Natural Disasters, Pandemics, and Intimate Partner Violence against Women: A Rapid Review in the Context of COVID-19. Sexes. 2021;2(4):509–22.CrossRef
25.
26.
Stark E. Coercive control: how men entrap women in personal life. Renzetti C, Edleson J, editors. Oxford University Press: Oxfor; 2007.CrossRef
27.
Van Gelder N, Peterman A, Potts A, O’Donnell M, Thompson K, Shah N, et al. COVID-19: Reducing the risk of infection might increase the risk of intimate partner violence. EClinicalMedicine. 2020;21:100348.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
28.
Falb KL, McCormick MC, Hemenway D, Anfinson K, Silverman JG. Violence against refugee women along the Thai-Burma border. Int J Gynecol Obstet. 2013;120(3):279–83.CrossRef
29.
Horn R. Exploring the impact of displacement and encampment on domestic violence in Kakuma refugee camp. J Refug Stud. 2010;23(3):356–76.CrossRef
30.
Wako E, Elliott L, De Jesus S, Zotti ME, Swahn MH, Beltrami J. Conflict, displacement, and IPV: findings from two Congolese refugee camps in Rwanda. Violence against women. 2015;21(9):1087–101.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Violence Policy Center. When Men Murder Women: An Analysis of 2020 Homicide Data. Washington, D.C.: Violence Policy Center; 2022.
32.
33.
Campedelli GM, Aziani A, Favarin S. Exploring the immediate effects of COVID-19 containment policies on crime: an empirical analysis of the short-term aftermath in Los Angeles. Am J Crim Justice. 2021;46(5):704–27.PubMedCrossRef
34.
Bullinger LR, Carr JB, Packham A. COVID-19 and crime: effects of stay-at-home orders on domestic violence. Am J Health Econ. 2021;7(3):249–80.CrossRef
35.
36.
Piquero AR, Riddell JR, Bishopp SA, Narvey C, Reid JA, Piquero NL. Staying home, staying safe? A short-term analysis of COVID-19 on Dallas domestic violence. Am J Crim Justice. 2020;45(4):601–35.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
37.
Yount KM, Bergenfeld I, Mhamud N, Clark CJ, Kaslow NJ, Cheong YF. Monitoring sustainable development goal 5.2: cross-country cross-time invariance of measures for intimate partner violence. PLoS One. 2022;17(6):1–19.CrossRef
38.
Stokes J, Turner AJ, Anselmi L, Morciano M, Hone T. The relative effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on wave one Covid-19 mortality: natural experiment in 130 countries. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):1113.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Yount K, Kaslow N. Impact of COVID-19 state-level executive orders on incident partner violence and suicide: Assessing collateral health effects of non-pharmaceutical risk mitigation during pandemics Synergy Award from Emory University’s Woodruff Health Sciences Center. 2020.
40.
Moreland A, Herlihy C, Tynan MA, Sunshine G, McCord RF, Hilton C, et al. Timing of State and Territorial COVID-19 Stay-at-Home Orders and Changes in Population Movement — United States, March 1–May 31, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69(35):1198–203.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
41.
Bourassa KJ. State-level stay-at-home orders and objectively measured movement in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychosom Med. 2021;83(4):358–62.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
42.
Fowler JH, Hill SJ, Levin R, Obradovich N. Stay-at-home orders associate with subsequent decreases in COVID-19 cases and fatalities in the United States. PLoS One. 2021;16(6):e0248849.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
43.
Ollove M. Too Many Bodies, Too Few Forensic Pathologists. Stateline. 2020.
44.
Gill JR, DeJoseph ME. The importance of proper death certification during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA. 2020;324(1):27–8.PubMedCrossRef
45.
Hargrove T. Murder Accountability Project. 2022.
46.
Kaplan J. Jacob Kaplan’s Concatenated Files: Uniform Crime Reporting Program Data: Offenses Known and Clearances by Arrest (Return A), 1960–2020. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research; 2021.
47.
Clark CJ, Bergenfeld I, Cheong YF, Kaslow NJ, Yount KM. Impact of measurement variability on study inference in partner violence prevention trials in low- and middle-income Countries. Assessment. 2023;30(5):1339–53.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Yount KM, Krause KH, VanderEnde KE. Economic coercion and partner violence against Wives in Vietnam: a unified framework? J Interpers Violence. 2016;31(20):3307–31.PubMedCrossRef
49.
50.
Flor LS, Friedman J, Spencer CN, Cagney J, Arrieta A, Herbert ME, et al. Quantifying the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on gender equality on health, social, and economic indicators: a comprehensive review of data from March, 2020, to September, 2021. Lancet. 2022;399(10344):2381–97.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Keilholtz B, Spencer C, Vail S, Palmer M. COVID-19-related stress and its association with intimate partner violence perpetration and victimization. Behav Sci (Basel). 2023;13(7):593.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
52.
Kaukinen C. When stay-at-home orders leave victims unsafe at home: exploring the risk and consequences of intimate partner violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. Am J Crim Justice. 2020;45(4):668–79.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
53.
Graham LM, Ranapurwala SI, Zimmer C, Macy RJ, Rizo CF, Lanier P, et al. Disparities in potential years of life lost due to intimate partner violence: data from 16 states for 2006–2015. PLoS One. 2021;16(2):e0246477.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
54.
Stubbs A, Szoeke C. The effect of intimate partner violence on the physical health and health-related behaviors of women: a systematic review of the literature. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2022;23(4):1157–72.PubMedCrossRef
55.
Johnson L, Chen Y, Stylianou A, Arnold A. Examining the impact of economic abuse on survivors of intimate partner violence: a scoping review. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):1014.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
56.
Goldberg X, Espelt C, Porta-Casteràs D, Palao D, Nadal R, Armario A. Non-communicable diseases among women survivors of intimate partner violence: Critical review from a chronic stress framework. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2021;128:720–34.PubMedCrossRef
57.
58.
Morgan RE, Truman JL. Criminal Victimization, 2019. Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2020. Contract No.: 255113.
59.
Kaplan J, Goh LS. Physical harm reduction in domestic violence: does marijuana make assaults safer? J Interpers Violence. 2022;37(7–8):Np5269-np93.PubMedCrossRef
60.
Langton L, Planty M, Lynch JP. Second Major Redesign of the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). Criminol Public Policy. 2017;16(4):1049–74.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Collateral effects of COVID-19 stay-at-home orders on violence against women in the United States, January 2019 to December 2020
Authors
Patricia C. Lewis
Yuk Fai Cheong
Nadine J. Kaslow
Kathryn M. Yount
Publication date
01-12-2024
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
COVID-19
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-17546-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

BMC Public Health 1/2024 Go to the issue

Research

Recalibration of Framingham risk for a local population of Sri Lanka

Research

Hepatitis C screening in Lithuania: first-year results and scenarios for achieving WHO elimination targets

Research

Potential factors affecting the impact of community reinforcement and family training. Secondary analysis of an RCT

Research

The varied restorative values of campus landscapes to students’ well-being: evidence from a Chinese University

Research

A collaboration team to build social service partnerships within a safety-net health system

Research

Associations between child marriage and food insecurity in Zimbabwe: a participatory mixed methods study