Qualitative Differences Among Rural and Urban Intimate Violence Victimization Experiences and Consequences: A Pilot Study

• NCJ Number: 200928
• Journal: Journal of Family Violence Volume: 18 Issue: 2 Dated: April 2003 Pages: 83-92
• Author(s): T. K. Logan; Robert Walker; Jennifer Cole; Stephanie Ratliff; Carl Leukefeld
• Editor(s): Vincent B. Van Hasselt, Michel Hersen
• Date Published: April 2003
• Length: 10 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Report (Study/Research)
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This pilot study examined preliminary data about intimate violence experiences and associated social support, health, mental health, and substance use differences in rural and urban women with protective orders against an intimate partner.

Abstract

Most studies on female victims of intimate violence have used urban samples. However, literature suggests that the rates of intimate violence are similar in urban and rural areas, but the experiences of intimate violence victims in rural areas may be vastly different. Using a protective order sample of 23 women (15 urban and 8 rural), this pilot study provides an access point that is relatively similar for comparisons across rural and urban areas. Using a small sample size causes the results to be preliminary with a number of findings relative to rural and urban differences in victimization, alcohol use, and health. Measures in the study focused on six major areas: (1) demographic; (2) socioeconomic; (3) social support; (4) victimization experiences; (5) substance use; and (6) health and mental health complaints, as well as service utilization. Findings were similar to what was expected based on previous literature. Rural women were significantly less likely to have had a job and had lower overall incomes. Dramatic differences included: (1) almost all urban women graduated from high school compared to only one-quarter of rural women; (2) almost 90 percent of rural women reported being homeless compared to 20 percent of urban women; (3) rural women reported limited economic options and few social support options; and (4) half of the rural women reported talking to health or mental health professionals compared to one-third of urban women. Both rural and urban women reported using on average four or five different services to cope with the abuse. Another difference was the victimization experience with rural women encountering abuse significantly earlier in their relationship than urban women. It is clear that rural and urban intimate violence victims have different experiences and different needs within the context of health and victimization. However, accessing rural women is difficult. References