County Variation in Intimate Partner Homicide: A Comparison of Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Victims. Issue 17 (September 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Stansfield, Richard; Mancik, Ashley; Parker, Karen F.; Delacruz, Mariel
• Is Part Of: Journal of interpersonal violence. Volume 36:Issue 17/18(2021)
• Page Start: NP9819
• Page End: NP9838
• Publication Date: 2021-09
• Subjects: homicide -- intimate partner violence -- guns -- economic disadvantage; Violence -- Periodicals; Sex crimes -- Periodicals; Violence -- Périodiques; Crimes sexuels -- Périodiques; 364.15
• DOI: 10.1177/0886260519861657
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0886-2605

Abstract

Over the past 5 years, intimate partner homicides have increased among Hispanic women, although ethnicity has rarely been brought into macro-level research on intimate partner homicide. These trends have occurred alongside many macro-level changes in the United States. Although both Hispanic and non-Hispanic women are most likely to die at the hands of a partner via a firearm, no study to date has examined the importance of licensed firearm dealer availability in addition to leading macro-level correlates of intimate partner homicide. Using data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Violent Death Reporting System, the current study explores the role of licensed firearm dealer availability, economic disadvantage, and other features of counties to explore ethnic-specific variation in intimate partner homicides from 2010 to 2016. Results from multilevel negative binomial models revealed consistency in the estimated effects of the rate of licensed firearm dealers and divorce on partner homicides across all models, although the significant association of gun stores and intimate partner homicide was witnessed in urban counties for total and non-Hispanic (both Black and White) models only. Important variation also exists across racial and ethnic groups, including well-established correlates of overall intimate partner homicide (i.e., economic disadvantage, rurality, non-intimate homicide rate, and state policies).