In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Women With Disabilities at Higher Risk for Intimate Parnter Violence

A new study (reiterating things that previous studies have already told us) shows that women with disabilities* are for more likely than women without disabilities to be the victims of intimate partner violence (h/t). The study looked at physical violence (hitting, kicking, etc.), threats of physical violence, and sexual violence. Across the board, women with disabilities were about twice as likely to have been subjected to these forms of violence by an intimate partner.

Intimate partner violence is “an understudied issue in much need of attention,” Dr. Brian Armor, who led the study, told Reuters Health. “We need to ensure that prevention initiatives designed to reduce intimate partner violence explicitly include the needs of adults with disabilities (e.g. ensuring shelters are accessible).

To estimate disability prevalence and differences in intimate partner abuse among women with and without a disability, Armor and his colleagues from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, analyzed data from the CDC’s 2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System — a large annual telephone survey of Americans designed to monitor the prevalence of key health behaviors.

They found that women with a disability were significantly more likely than women without a disability to report experiencing some from of intimate partner violence in their lifetime (37.3 percent versus 20.6 percent).

Women with a disability were more likely to report ever being threatened with violence (28.5 percent vs 15.4 percent) and hit, slapped, pushed, kicked or physically hurt (30.6 percent vs. 15.7 percent) by an intimate partner.

Women with a disability were also much more apt to report a history of unwanted sex by an intimate partner (19.7 percent vs 8.2 percent).

The study’s leader reflects on some of the likely reasons behind the disparities:

“Perhaps, women with disabilities are vulnerable to intimate partner violence because their disability might limit mobility and prevent escape; shelters might not be available or accessible to women with disabilities; the disability might adversely affect communication and thus the ability to alert others or the perpetrator might control or restrict the victim’s ability to alert others to the problem.”

Fear is another possibility, Armor said. “That is, a catch-22, stemming from reliance on the perpetrator for caregiving needs that might go unmet or lead to some form of undesirable placement if they tell authorities.”

He concluded, “Since intimate partner violence is a public help problem, we need to ensure that prevention strategies for people with disabilities are widely adopted.”

For more, see Women With Disabilities Australia (WWDA), which has a great long list of international resources on violence against women with disabilities.

* Though this study only looks at women, it’s important to emphasize that men with disabilities are also vulnerable to intimate partner violence.  I also don’t put it past the CDC to have defined “women” only as “cisgender women,” and so it bears noting that transgender PWDs are at risk just as much if not more than cisgender PWDs.


11 thoughts on Women With Disabilities at Higher Risk for Intimate Parnter Violence

  1. Among deaf people the abuse seems to take advantage of the lack of conventional communication ability. Women and children seem to get sexual abuse; men physical abuse. I’m hard put to think of any deaf people I know who haven’t encountered something like this in their lives.

    I know that disabled children are generally a favorite target as they are generally undersupervised and schools seem to be even worse about checking the backgrounds of special needs or itinerant tutors.

    And then of course abused children are particularly subsceptible to growing up and either being abusers themselves, or “accepting” further abuse through the rest of their lives (or both)…

  2. My own experience as an aspie woman has been that some partners justify violence by dehumanizing me. The things that are not neurotypical about me are “inhuman” and “frustrating” which eventually leads us into “bad situations” where “things happen” that they “don’t mean”. (Quote around things I’ve been told that are BS.)

  3. I’m guessing a telephone survey also missed an awful lot of women with communication issues or who were being deliberately isolated.

    I wrote a little about an Australian report on sexual abuse of women with disabilities, and the barriers to justice they experience all the way along the chain. Particularly worrying is the complete lack of systematic data collection – we really have no idea of the magnitude of the problem, let alone what needs to be done to tackle it.

  4. Neither the study nor the comments come as a surprise.

    I must disagree with the statement that tutors (or paraprofessionals) are not sufficiently scrutinized for their backgrounds, etc. I have worked in this field for years and am currently involved in hiring paras for severe disabilities and we do all we can via police background checks and use of local resources to check out those who work with our special needs students.

    Education is always the key.

  5. Though this study only looks at women, it’s important to emphasize that men with disabilities are also vulnerable to intimate partner violence.

    And children. Oh my god, children. As if it isn’t enough with what anon and EKS say, children are abused by caretakers who see their disability as a burden on their own mobility.

  6. So far, studies like this — which are important, so far as they go — fail to get at how everything about intimate or domestic violence can be amplified by disability and the social issues surrounding disability. Like a disabled woman being unable to move to a hotel or friend’s house for a night or two because of lack of access. Or poverty meaning they’re already spending every penny on prescription meds and can’t begin to pay rent elsewhere. Or the violence might be so subtle as “You do what I say or I won’t make you dinner.” (And if you can’t physically leave your own house without assistance, well, you need to do what is necessary to eat.) It might be the difference between a couple having a healthy fight where one walks off for awhile, but when you’re the disabled partner, the other walking off for an unspecified amount of time leaves you without assistance. So you cannot even have that argument.

  7. That’s right, no problem. Ignore all the kids, now adults, pointing out WHAT THE FUCK HAPPENED TO THEM.

    “Oh, no, we’re very careful, we hire only the best, nothing happens LALALALALA…”

    Same ol’ same ol’.

  8. Seconding Kay. Physical violence is a significant problem and I don’t want to downplay it, but partners of disabled people can sometimes achieve a level of domination and control that would be nearly impossible otherwise. All they have to do sometimes is not do stuff. Not cook dinner. Not put the food or groceries in accessible places. Aides can help with that sort of stuff, but aides can be remarkably easy to drive away, plus they’re expensive.

  9. The key to understanding why women with disabilities are abused more is understanding the people who abuse. In my experience (former victim advocate, former assistant state’s attorney, current attorney), people who want to control a partner are often attracted to a partner with disabilities because the person with disabilities is dependent and easy to control. She can’t just get in a car and leave. Sometimes she can’t even get to a phone easily. Some abusers seek out people with disabilities as partners because they value control of their partners that much.

  10. Dawn, I agree there are those people out there who look for partners to control and use disability as one determining factor, but I think it’s dangerous to not also talk about how abusers can be anyone, not just a personality type. I would argue that the key is not understanding the people who abuse, but in understanding the dynamics, the temptations, and the complexity of what access and freedom mean in a household and personal relationships.

  11. “One in 3 women may suffer from abuse and violence in her lifetime. This is an appalling human rights violation.

    We can put a stop to this.

    UNIFEM’s campaign Say NO to Violence against Women invites people to add their names to an ever-growing movement of people around the world who raise their voice and demand decisive action on ending violence against women. As UNIFEM’s Goodwill Ambassador, I was the first to sign on. The signatures will be handed over to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, as strong supporter of our cause, to strengthen the United Nations’ efforts to fulfil women’s right to a life free of violence.

    So please join me. ADD YOUR NAME TO THE CAMPAIGN.”
    UNIFEM Goodwill Ambassador Nicole Kidman

    http://www.saynotoviolence.org

Comments are currently closed.