ARTICLE CRITIQUE

Substance Abuse and the Effects on Intimate Partner Violence: An Article Critique Amy Salomone Wayne State University

Introduction

ARTICLE CRITIQUE

Alcohol and illegal substance abuse can cause unpredictable behaviors to emerge in normal individuals, as well as people that are under duress, are unstable, or may be prone to violent outbursts. Therefore, it is not unfathomable to hypothesize that substance abuse may be positively correlated the instance of arrests, convictions, and rearrests reported in cases of intimate partner violence. The study intends to provide evidence as to the involvement of alcohol and other substance use in instances of arrest, conviction, and rearrests in cases of intimate partner violence. This study researches cases of assault of male on female violence in 19 jurisdictions taking place in 3 states. The article aims to answer key research questions throughout the collection and interpretation of the data. These questions include: are offenders who have been drinking or using illegal substances at the time of the incident more likely to be arrested, convicted and prosecuted, or to re-offend than those who have not been using such substances? (Hirschel, Hutchison, & Shaw, 2010, p. 84). The article seeks to answer these questions by studying past cases of intimate partner violence taking place in Connecticut, Idaho, and Virginia; the study does, however, limit the cases to only those of male perpetrators acting on female victims in which the act is classified as intimate partner intimidation and assault (Hirschel, Hutchison, & Shaw, 2010). This is in an attempt to narrow down the data to the cases that encompass the most common occurrences of intimate partner violence in relation to information needed for the study. Methodology The study was performed using a sample that included intimate partner intimidation and assault cases reported to the police in the year 2000 in 19 jurisdictions in three states: Connecticut, Idaho, and Virginia (Hirschel, Hutchison, & Shaw, 2010, p.

ARTICLE CRITIQUE 84). The researchers limited the scope of the study by narrowing down the sample subjects to only male perpetrators that were drinking or using drugs that abused female

victims that were not under the influence of any substance. The study was also limited to only cases in which the offense reported to the police was aggravated assault, simple assault, or intimidation. The final sample comprised 1, 123 male on female intimidation and assault cases (Hirschel, Hutchison, & Shaw, 2010, p. 85). The sample ranged all ages and ethnicities, as well as including both first time offenders and reoffenders. Information on the cases was obtained from the National Incident Reporting System (NIRS) and the data was then analyzed through a predictive analytic program to predict whether or not alcohol and drug use affected whether a perpetrator of abuse would be more likely to be arrested, prosecuted and convicted, or rearrested if they were under the influence of a substance during the time of delinquency. Results The data is presented in the article through charts generated from the analytic software used to evaluate the information presented in the cases; the authors also describe the results throughout the article as well. After analyzing the data on all 1,123 cases used in the sample the research revealed there was no correlation between the use of alcohol and illegal substances and the event of offender being more likely to be arrested. The research also revealed there was no relationship between alcohol and illegal substances and the likelihood of an offender being convicted and prosecuted in the case of intimate partner abuse. The only notable connection of alcohol and illegal substance use in cases of intimate partner abuse was that of the association between the substance use in relation to rearrests. Through analysis of the data the authors found that offenders that have

ARTICLE CRITIQUE already served time for abuse charges were much more likely to be rearrested if they

were found to be under the influence of alcohol or an illegal substance when the act took place. Discussion A strong point of the article is that the authors of the study provided plenty of background research as to compare their current study to past studies that have been executed. However, there are also some vulnerabilities and weaknesses in this study. The study took place in the year 2010, yet the authors used data from the years 2000. It is generally believed that the most up-to-date information should be used when performing research. Also, as the authors explained the study and what they hoped to accomplish they stated that they controlled for relevant factors to obtain accurate data; however, they did not go into detail about what factors were controlled and how this was done. The reader may be interested in knowing these factors and methods of control, so they can determine if this study was conducted in a sound manner. The researchers limited the scope of the study by narrowing down the sample subjects to only male perpetrators that were drinking or using drugs that abused female victims that were not under the influence; the researchers limited the type of abuse committed as well. It was acknowledged by the authors that the sample was limited in order to cover only the most common circumstance in which intimate partner violence occurs. The general consensus on the method used would be that it was an appropriate method used to collect the data the authors were seeking. Using past case studies was the best option for collecting the information needed because it is not possible to randomly sample cases of intimate partner violence in an ethical way in order to yield all the

ARTICLE CRITIQUE

information needed for the study. The authors of the study decided upon only using cases that took place in Connecticut, Idaho, and Virginia. They explain later in the article this decision was based on laws for which each state operates. To clarify, did state law mandate arrest, or leave arrest to the discretion of the responding officers in the case of intimate partner violence offenses? Connecticut and Virginia represent states that have mandatory arrest laws, while Idaho leaves the choice of arrest to the discretion of the responding officer (Hirschel, Hutchison, & Shaw, 2010, p. 84). To ensure reliability the researchers should have used two states that had the mandatory arrest laws, as well as two states with the discretionary arrest law. That way any potential bias caused by the differentiation can be eradicated from the study; as a result, the may lack external validity when the concept of substance use and intimate partner violence is tested in another study with a different sample. The authors did base their conclusions on the results of their study as well as relating the results of the study to past studies that have been conducting in the same area of interest. The conclusions the author drew from the data obtained by the study seemed to be accurate based on the information given. The authors were able to justify their results and conclusions based on the data they acquired through analyzing the case studies. Overall, the authors found no correlation between alcohol and illegal substance use and the likelihood of arrest or conviction in intimate partner violence offenses. However, a connection seemed to exist between likelihood of a rearrests when the perpetrator has already been convicted of a past crime and they were under the influence of alcohol and/or illegal substance at the time the violent act occurred.

ARTICLE CRITIQUE References

Hirschel, D., Hutchison, I., & Shaw, M. (2010). The Interrelationship Between Substance Abuse and the Likelihood of Arrest, Conviction, and Re-offending in Cases of Intimate Partner Violence. Journal of Family Violence, 25(1), 81-90. doi:http://dx.doi.org.proxy.lib.wayne.edu/10.1007/s10896-009-9272-1