Is Intimate Partner Violence More Common Among Immigrants in the United States? Yes and No
Despite the emerging body of evidence on the immigrant paradox for crime and violent victimization, less attention has focused specifically on intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration among immigrant populations. This is unfortunate given that it is well established that IPV occurs more frequently within cultural contexts comprised of social norms that legitimize physical aggression toward women by men. Thus, given that patriarchal cultural values can persist in many immigrant feeder nations, there are plausible reasons to believe that the general findings on immigrants and crime may be different with respect to the perpetration of IPV. Two research questions guide the present study: 1) Are immigrants more or less likely to perpetrate IPV compared to native-born Americans? 2) What is the prevalence of IPV perpetration across major regions of the world that are driving the results?
Method:
Study findings are based on data from Wave II of the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions (NESARC). The NESARC is a nationally representative sample of non-institutionalized U.S. residents aged 18 years and older. Psychiatric interviewers administered the Alcohol Use Disorder and Associated Disabilities Interview Schedule – DSM-IV version (AUDADIS-IV), which provides diagnoses for an array of clinical, behavioral, and personality disorders. IPV was assessed using six items from the Conflict Tactics Scale. Survey adjusted logistic regression analyses were conducted that compared non-immigrants (N = 15,733, 84.23%) with first-generation immigrants (N = 3338, 15.77%) with respect to IPV.
Results:
After controlling for an extensive array of sociodemographic, clinical, behavioral, and personality confounds, results indicate that in the aggregate immigrants are significantly more likely to perpetrate IPV. However, a closer inspection of IPV perpetration across major world regions indicates these results are driven by immigrants from the Caribbean, Mexico, and Central America. Immigrants from Asia, Africa, Europe, and South America reported a lower prevalence of IPV perpetration than native-born Americans. We also found that each additional year an immigrant lived in the United States is associated with a 26% increase in the likelihood of having carried out an act of IPV in the previous year.
Conclusions and Implications:
Interpersonal violence is increasingly being viewed and addressed as a public health concern rather than strictly a criminal justice issue. As such, it is becoming necessary to further examine the cultural contexts and individual-level correlates of IPV perpetration to improve social workers’ understanding and further inform policy and intervention in this area. Moreover, given the increase in the immigrant population across the US, it is important to examine the prevalence of IPV perpetration among immigrant populations. It is also important to examine whether rates differ from native-born Americans in order to inform social welfare driven policies and practices on immigration and provide a more nuanced understanding of IPV in the US. This study extends prior research on the immigrant paradox and suggests that future studies take into account regional heterogeneity when examining IPV and other forms of violence in immigrant populations.