Citation

Langhinrichsen-Rohling J. Sex Roles 2009; 62(3-4): 179-193.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/s11199-009-9628-2

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This paper summarizes five challenging ongoing controversies involving gender and U. S. intimate partner violence (IPV) (i.e., gender symmetry of perpetration; utility of typologies; understanding bi-directionally violent couples; violence motivations and self-defense, and treatment effectiveness). Reviewed evidence support three central theses that: 1) there are subtypes of IPV; 2) women are as involved as men with some but not all subtypes of IPV, and 3) recognition of these gender-related challenges will improve policy, treatment, and working models of IPV. Within this paper, a dyadic culture-family-attachment-skill deficit model of IPV is conceptualized and three types of bi-directionally violent couples are named and described (dyadic dominance, dyadic dysregulation, and dyadic couple violence). Practice and policy implications of these advances are articulated.