Citation

Cook RJ, Dickens BM. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2009; 106(1): 72-75.

Affiliation

Faculty of Law, Faculty of Medicine and Joint Centre for Bioethics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Publisher Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.ijgo.2009.03.011

PMID

19368921

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV), usually men's violence against women, appears universal. It may be associated with pregnancy, but this may be because pregnant women receive more medical attention. Violence may cause bruises, abrasions, and cuts, but its extremes include hospitalization, death, and suicide. IPV is often disclosed when women are asked why they feel in poor health or depressed. A legal dilemma arises when healthcare providers consider that intervention such as law-enforcement is appropriate, but patients refuse approval. Patients may fatalistically accept violence, or fear loss of support for their children and themselves if their partners are held in custody. Legal reforms, such as punishing spousal rape, may provide some protection of women's autonomy. Ethical dilemmas concern intervention without patients' approval, and whether treating violent injuries without taking preventive action breaches the principle to Do No Harm. Professional advocacy and social action have been urged to expose and reduce IPV.

Language: en