Domestic/Family Violence Death Reviews: An International Comparison
Domestic/Family Violence Death Reviews: An International Comparison
复制标题
DOI：
10.1177/1524838013517561
复制
发表时间：
2015-04-01
影响因子：
6.4
通讯作者：
Walsh, Carolyn
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bugeja, Lyndal;Dawson, Myrna;Walsh, Carolyn
自1990年以来，在一些高收入国家建立了家庭/家庭暴力死亡审查，作为一种机制，为以预防为重点的干预措施提供信息，以减少家庭/家庭暴力。D/ fvdr在结构、治理、病例识别过程和纳入标准、审查措施和产出方面有所不同。在美国之外，国家之间和国家内部的异质性程度尚未得到探讨。这项研究包括对D/ fvdr及其核心要素进行国际比较，以便为其他发达国家以及暴力是主要死亡原因的低收入和中等收入国家建立D/ fvdr提供信息。这种审查也是今后评价D/ fvdr的必要基础。审查确定了在过去二十年中建立了D/ fvdr的71个司法管辖区，其中25个符合纳入标准。所有审查过的D/ fvdr都将减少死亡作为审查进程的目标；然而，没有人报告实际减少。所审查的D/ fvdr的重点是亲密伴侣杀人案；然而，最近建立的D/ fvdr包括其他家庭关系。几乎三分之一接受审查的家庭/家庭发展报告报告说，由于审查过程提出的建议，家庭/家庭制度发生了变化。虽然D/ fvdr在许多方面相似，但在一些重要方面存在差异，这使得难以确定考虑建立此类倡议的司法管辖区的最佳做法。为了分享知识，现有网络应在国内和国际上扩大，以包括可能正在考虑这一倡议的司法管辖区。
Domestic/Family Violence Death Reviews (D/FVDRs) have been established in a number of high-income countries since 1990 as a mechanism to inform prevention-focused interventions to reduce domestic/family violence. D/FVDRs differ in their structure, governance, case identification processes and inclusion criteria, review measures, and outputs. Outside of the United States, the extent of heterogeneity across and within countries has not been explored. This study comprised an international comparison of D/FVDRs and their core elements to inform the establishment of D/FVDRs in other developed countries, and potentially low-and middle-income countries where violence is a leading cause of death. Such a review is also a necessary foundation for any future evaluation D/FVDRs. The review identified 71 jurisdictions where a D/FVDRs had been established in the past two decades, 25 of which met the inclusion criteria. All D/FVDRs examined stated a reduction in deaths as a goal of the review process; however, none reported an actual reduction. The focus of the D/FVDRs examined was on intimate partner homicides; however, more recently established D/FVDRs include other familial relationships. Almost one third of the D/FVDRs examined reported changes to the domestic/family system that occurred as a result of recommendations made from the review process. While similar in many ways, D/FVDRs differ along a number of important dimensions that make it difficult to identify best practices for jurisdictions considering the establishment of such an initiative. To share knowledge, existing networks should be expanded nationally and internationally to include jurisdictions that may be considering this initiative.