Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2011 Mar;83(3):274-80.
doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2010.07.013.

A family planning clinic partner violence intervention to reduce risk associated with reproductive coercion

Elizabeth Miller  1 , Michele R Decker, Heather L McCauley, Daniel J Tancredi, Rebecca R Levenson, Jeffrey Waldman, Phyllis Schoenwald, Jay G Silverman
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

A family planning clinic partner violence intervention to reduce risk associated with reproductive coercion

Elizabeth Miller et al. Contraception. 2011 Mar.

Abstract

Background: This study examined the efficacy of a family-planning-clinic-based intervention to address intimate partner violence (IPV) and reproductive coercion.

Study design: Four free-standing urban family planning clinics in Northern California were randomized to intervention (trained family planning counselors) or standard of care. English-speaking and Spanish-speaking females ages 16-29 years (N = 906) completed audio computer-assisted surveys prior to a clinic visit and 12-24 weeks later (75% retention rate). Analyses included assessment of intervention effects on recent IPV, awareness of IPV services and reproductive coercion.

Results: Among women reporting past-3-months IPV at baseline, there was a 71% reduction in the odds of pregnancy coercion among participants in intervention clinics compared to participants in the control clinics that provided standard of care. Women in the intervention arm were more likely to report ending a relationship because the relationship was unhealthy or because they felt unsafe regardless of IPV status (adjusted odds ratio = 1.63; 95% confidence interval=1.01-2.63).

Conclusions: Results of this pilot study suggest that this intervention may reduce the risk for reproductive coercion from abusive male partners among family planning clients and support such women to leave unsafe relationships.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Flitcraft AH, Hadley SM, Hendricks-Matthews MK, McLeer SV, Warshaw C. Diagnostic and treatment guidelines on domestic violence. JAMA. 1992. Accessed 2/22/2010, http://www.vahealth.org/civp/projectradarva/AMADiag&TreatGuide.pdf.
    1. Family Violence Prevention Fund National consensus guidelines on identifying and responding to domestic violence victimization in health care settings. 2004. Accessed 2/22/2010, http://www.endabuse.org/programs/healthcare/files/Consensus.pdf.
    1. American Congress of Obstetrics and Gynecology Violence against women project. 2007. Accessed 2/22/2010, http://www.acog.org/departments/dept_notice.cfm?recno=17&bulletin=585.
    1. Miller E, Decker M, McCauley H, et al. Pregnancy coercion, intimate partner violence and unintended pregnancy. Contraception. 2010;81(4):316–22. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Keeling J, Birch L. The prevalence rates of domestic abuse in women attending a family planning clinic. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2004;30:113–4. - PubMed

Publication types