Abstract: Intimate Partner Violence, Gun Carriage, and Gun Violence (Society for Prevention Research 27th Annual Meeting)

202 Intimate Partner Violence, Gun Carriage, and Gun Violence

Schedule:
Wednesday, May 29, 2019
Pacific A (Hyatt Regency San Francisco)
* noted as presenting author
Jeffrey Temple, PhD, Professor, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX
Yu Lu, PhD, Postdoctoral Fellow, University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX
Leila Wood, PhD, Research Assistant Professor, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX
Introduction: The use of firearms in intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant public health problem. Data shows a substantial number of women have been threatened or shot with a gun by their intimate partner, resulting in injuries and femicide. To date, the majority of research on this topic has focused on whether a firearm was present during an IPV incident and the severity of consequences when a firearm was present. Less is known, however, about the general association between firearm ownership and use, and the likelihood of perpetrating and being victimized by IPV. To address this gap, we examine the link between IPV (i.e., physical, threatening, and psychological) victimization and perpetration and firearm violence (i.e., carriage, threatened someone with a gun, and been threatened with a gun).

Methods: We used data from Wave 8 (spring, 2017, n= 686) of an ongoing longitudinal study about risk behaviors. Participants were 56.0% female, 31.4% Hispanics, 29.4% White, 27.9% Black, and 11.3% other (e.g., Asian American, Native Americans) with a mean age of 22 years (SD = .79). Controlling for age, gender, and race, we ran three multivariate logistic regression analyses in Mplus 8 to examine if physical IPV, threatening IPV, and psychological IPV perpetration and victimization predicted gun carriage, threatened someone with a gun, and having been threatened with a gun.

Results: Analyses indicated that physical IPV perpetration was associated with having threatened someone with a gun (Adjusted OR = 2.47, 95% CI: 1.22, 5.03). Conversely, physical IPV victimization was associated with having been threatened with a gun (Adjusted OR = 1.50, 95% CI: 1.01, 2.25). Experienced threats of IPV or psychological IPV was not significantly linked to gun violence. No significant associations were found between gun carriage and IPV.

Conclusions and Implications: While our data did not permit us to determine whether firearm threats were directly related to IPV incidents, findings suggest that a history of threatening someone with a gun was linked to physical IPV perpetration and having been threatened with a gun was linked to physical IPV victimization. Longitudinal research is needed to determine the temporal relationship between these variables. Regardless, the co-occurrence identified in this study suggests that IPV prevention programs should address firearm safety and that firearm trainings should include a healthy relationship component.