Does domestic violence legislation reduce permissive attitudes about intimate partner violence? Longitudinal evidence from men and women from 61 countries.
Robin A Richardson, Nuria Rodriguez-Planas, Alexandria Ree Hadd, Katjana Wiederkehr, Farheen Jamshed, Cari Jo Clark, Tarik Benmarhnia
{"title":"Does domestic violence legislation reduce permissive attitudes about intimate partner violence? Longitudinal evidence from men and women from 61 countries.","authors":"Robin A Richardson, Nuria Rodriguez-Planas, Alexandria Ree Hadd, Katjana Wiederkehr, Farheen Jamshed, Cari Jo Clark, Tarik Benmarhnia","doi":"10.1136/bmjph-2024-001837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong></p><p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Intimate partner violence (IPV) is highly prevalent and has substantial implication for women's health. Changing IPV attitudes is one pathway to reduce IPV. While evidence suggests that interventions targeting individuals may change IPV attitudes, the effect of wider-scale interventions, such as legislation, remains unknown.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used individual-level IPV attitudes information collected between 1997 and 2020 by the Demographic and Health Surveys and the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys, which we linked with national-level domestic violence (DV) legislation information. We evaluated the effect of adoption of DV legislation on changes in IPV attitudes using a difference-in-differences study design that controlled for time-varying country-level confounding and accounted for staggered timing of legislation adoption.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our sample included harmonised information across 61 countries, composed of 2 184 047 women from 60 countries and 390 877 men from 40 countries. After controlling for country-level time-varying confounders, adoption of DV legislation reduced IPV acceptability among women (average treatment effect among treated=-0.07, 95% CI: -0.16, 0.06) and men (average treatment effect among treated=-0.11, 95% CI: -0.22, 0.03) although estimates were imprecise and included the null.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>DV legislation may reduce permissive IPV attitudes, especially among men, although conclusions should be interpreted cautiously due to imprecise estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":101362,"journal":{"name":"BMJ public health","volume":"3 1","pages":"e001837"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11891541/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjph-2024-001837","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract:
Introduction: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is highly prevalent and has substantial implication for women's health. Changing IPV attitudes is one pathway to reduce IPV. While evidence suggests that interventions targeting individuals may change IPV attitudes, the effect of wider-scale interventions, such as legislation, remains unknown.
Methods: We used individual-level IPV attitudes information collected between 1997 and 2020 by the Demographic and Health Surveys and the Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys, which we linked with national-level domestic violence (DV) legislation information. We evaluated the effect of adoption of DV legislation on changes in IPV attitudes using a difference-in-differences study design that controlled for time-varying country-level confounding and accounted for staggered timing of legislation adoption.
Results: Our sample included harmonised information across 61 countries, composed of 2 184 047 women from 60 countries and 390 877 men from 40 countries. After controlling for country-level time-varying confounders, adoption of DV legislation reduced IPV acceptability among women (average treatment effect among treated=-0.07, 95% CI: -0.16, 0.06) and men (average treatment effect among treated=-0.11, 95% CI: -0.22, 0.03) although estimates were imprecise and included the null.
Conclusions: DV legislation may reduce permissive IPV attitudes, especially among men, although conclusions should be interpreted cautiously due to imprecise estimates.