Introduction

Domestic Violence Statistics: Domestic violence is a serious and widespread issue, impacting millions of lives across the globe. Unfortunately, women across the world are still going through a tough situation due to such domestic abuse or violence, and still, even today, many women fail to report the incident.

This article includes all effective recent records of domestic violence occurrences in the U.S. and worldwide, types of violence, victim shares by countries, etc. All statistical analyses will help you effectively understand the prevalence and impact of domestic violence on communities. Here's a look at some key statistics that paint a concerning picture.

In 2023, almost one out of three ever-partnered Turkish women had experienced domestic violence. In comparison, only 12 percent of women living in Switzerland had experienced domestic violence in their lifetime.

As of 2024, Timor-Leste had the highest prevalence of domestic violence against women in the Asia-Pacific region, with ** percent of women having experienced physical or sexual violence in a partnership before. In contrast, approximately *** percent of women in Singapore had experienced domestic violence as of 2024.

In 2019, the highest percentage of females who suffered from intimate partner violence in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region was in Iraq at about **** percent of the females. Within the region, Syria, Libya and Iraq have been suffering from conflict and humanitarian crises.

The main purpose of the EU survey on gender-based violence against women and other forms of inter-personal violence (EU-GBV) is to assess the prevalence of violence in order to address the requirements of the Istanbul Convention. The survey covers psychological, physical and sexual violence by intimate partner, physical and sexual violence by non-partner, sexual harassment at work, violence experienced in childhood and stalking by any perpetrator.

The data collection for the first wave (year 2021) was conducted in voluntary bases and took place between September 2020 and March 2024 in the EU countries, based on their national timetables. Eurostat coordinated data collection in 18 Member States (BE, BG, DK, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, LV, LT, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, SI, SK, FI). Additionally, Italy agreed to share data from their national survey on violence against women, but the implementation of the survey was postponed from 2022 to 2024 due to administrative difficulties. The indicators disseminated for Italy are based on the last national survey conducted in 2014, given that the prevalence of gender-based violence is not expected to differ significantly over time, specifically for prevalence of lifetime violence, and the indicators will be updated when 2024 survey results will be available. Moreover, indicators on sexual harassment at work disseminated for Italy are based on the national victimisation survey of 2022-2023. To cover the full EU, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) and the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) launched a joint data collection in the eight Member States not covered by Eurostat (CZ, DE, IE, CY, LU, HU, RO, SE) following the EU-GBV manual. Accordingly, data disseminated for wave 2021 and estimated EU-average is based on a joint data collection by Eurostat, FRA and EIGE.

The disseminated indicators focus on violence by perpetrator, disaggregated by type of violence, by time of occurrence, by age and by personal characteristics of the respondent; and on frequency, severity, seriousness and reporting of the experienced violence.

However, it is necessary to point out that survey data might only be a close proxy to real prevalence as survey data depends on the willingness of the respondent to disclose any violence experienced. Therefore, to understand the prevalence of violence and disclosure rates by survey respondents, it is important to take into account the extent to which violence is tolerated in the wider community. For example, in cultures where people are ready to talk about their painful experiences, their answers may reflect more accurately their own experiences rather than community norms. To provide some background on country specific context, few indicators on commonness and awareness of support services are disseminated.

It is essential to avoid using sensitive terms that could cause anxiety or concern when introducing the survey. Accordingly, the general recommendation was that the survey name should be neutral when contacting the respondents. The aim was to avoid alerting any perpetrators of domestic violence to the nature of the survey or frightening off any victims of violence, in order to minimise non-response, as some respondents might be discouraged from taking part if the name of the survey included terms like ‘assault’, ‘sexual violence’, or ‘gender-based violence’.

Majority of countries have followed this recommendation and the title of the survey was translated as survey on health, safety or security and well-being or living conditions; quality of life or relationship survey. Only few countries (BG, SK) used gender-based violence in the title of the survey during data collection and explained that this decision was taken as no issue appeared during testing the survey using the word “violence”, or the word "violence" was used in order to avoid misunderstanding regarding the aim of the survey and to reduce non-response due to the fact that respondents were not aware of the real theme of the survey.

However, the pilot survey results indicate that respondents understood the rationale for the choice of neutral survey name once they had been given an explanation, and agreed that it was right. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, the participating countries were strongly encouraged to include experts on violence against women and/or gender-based violence as well as psychologists and psychotherapists in every step of the survey - from the preparation, through the field work to the data dissemination.

Majority of countries included experts on the topic in the project team: gender statisticians, gender-based violence or violence against women researchers, policy experts, psychologists, social workers, experts working on victim support or NGOs, experts on victimization surveys. External experts were included in the preparation of the survey, training of the interviewers and in order to provide support to the interviewers.

Few countries (MT, FI) established the focus group or expert group consisting of different experts in the field and providing the support to the survey during all phases.

In late March of 2020, many governments in Latin America imposed lockdowns in order to avoid the further spread of the virus SARS-CoV-2. As a result of the isolation, a steep rise of gender violence and family abuse cases was identified in several countries in the region. For instance, Mexico's domestic violence reports increased 25 percent in March 2020, in comparison to the same month of the previous year. In Argentina, a hotline for sexual violence victims received more than two thirds more phone calls in April 2020, compared to a year earlier. Argentina is one of the Latin American countries with the highest number of femicide victims.

A collection of resources on combating domestic violence, including awareness-raising campaigns, support services and trainings in the area of combating domestic violence at a national, EU and International level.

The global market for domestic abuse safety apps is experiencing robust growth, projected to reach $222 million in 2025 and exhibiting a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 12.1% from 2025 to 2033. This expansion is driven by several key factors. Increasing awareness of domestic violence and its prevalence, coupled with improved access to smartphones and mobile technology, are making these apps increasingly accessible and vital for victims seeking help. Furthermore, the innovative features offered by these apps, such as GPS tracking, silent alerts, and evidence recording capabilities, provide crucial support and a sense of security for individuals in vulnerable situations. The market segmentation reveals a significant demand across both adult and child user demographics, with iOS and Android platforms catering to the diverse technological preferences. The competitive landscape is populated by a range of established and emerging players, each offering unique features and targeting specific user segments. Regional variations in market penetration are expected, with North America and Europe likely leading the adoption rate due to higher levels of technology penetration and social awareness campaigns. However, growth potential exists globally, particularly in developing regions with increasing smartphone adoption and improved internet infrastructure. The continued market expansion is expected to be fuelled by ongoing technological advancements, such as integration with smart home devices and improved AI-powered features for threat detection and response. However, challenges remain, including concerns about data privacy and security, potential for app misuse or malfunction, and the ongoing need for effective public awareness campaigns to increase app adoption among vulnerable populations. Addressing these challenges will be critical to unlocking the full potential of domestic abuse safety apps in providing essential support and promoting safety for victims worldwide. Furthermore, strategic partnerships between app developers, law enforcement agencies, and support organizations will play a vital role in enhancing the effectiveness and accessibility of these life-saving tools.

San Marino Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data was reported at 1.000 NA in 2017. This stayed constant from the previous number of 1.000 NA for 2015. San Marino Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data is updated yearly, averaging 1.000 NA from Dec 2015 (Median) to 2017, with 2 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.000 NA in 2017 and a record low of 1.000 NA in 2017. San Marino Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s San Marino – Table SM.World Bank: Policy and Institutions. Legislation exists on domestic violence is whether there is legislation addressing domestic violence: violence between spouses, within the family or members of the same household, or in interpersonal relationships, including intimate partner violence that is subject to criminal sanctions or provides for protection orders for domestic violence, or the legislation addresses “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” or “harassment” that clearly affects physical or mental health, and it is implied that such behavior is considered domestic violence.; ; World Bank: Women, Business and the Law.; ;

This data relates to the paper "Defining and Conceptualizing Technology-Facilitated Abuse: A Global Delphi Study", which is based on a study conducted by the Gender and Tech Research Lab at UCL Computer Science. The study is looking to define and conceptualise Technology-Facilitated Abuse (TFA), based on a global sample of experts.

The main purpose of the EU survey on gender-based violence against women and other forms of inter-personal violence (EU-GBV) is to assess the prevalence of violence in order to address the requirements of the Istanbul Convention. The survey covers psychological, physical and sexual violence by intimate partner, physical and sexual violence by non-partner, sexual harassment at work, violence experienced in childhood and stalking by any perpetrator.

The data collection for the first wave (year 2021) was conducted in voluntary bases and took place between September 2020 and March 2024 in the EU countries, based on their national timetables. Eurostat coordinated data collection in 18 Member States (BE, BG, DK, EE, EL, ES, FR, HR, LV, LT, MT, NL, AT, PL, PT, SI, SK, FI). Additionally, Italy agreed to share data from their national survey on violence against women, but the implementation of the survey was postponed from 2022 to 2024 due to administrative difficulties. The indicators disseminated for Italy are based on the last national survey conducted in 2014, given that the prevalence of gender-based violence is not expected to differ significantly over time, specifically for prevalence of lifetime violence, and the indicators will be updated when 2024 survey results will be available. Moreover, indicators on sexual harassment at work disseminated for Italy are based on the national victimisation survey of 2022-2023. To cover the full EU, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) and the European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) launched a joint data collection in the eight Member States not covered by Eurostat (CZ, DE, IE, CY, LU, HU, RO, SE) following the EU-GBV manual. Accordingly, data disseminated for wave 2021 and estimated EU-average is based on a joint data collection by Eurostat, FRA and EIGE.

The disseminated indicators focus on violence by perpetrator, disaggregated by type of violence, by time of occurrence, by age and by personal characteristics of the respondent; and on frequency, severity, seriousness and reporting of the experienced violence.

However, it is necessary to point out that survey data might only be a close proxy to real prevalence as survey data depends on the willingness of the respondent to disclose any violence experienced. Therefore, to understand the prevalence of violence and disclosure rates by survey respondents, it is important to take into account the extent to which violence is tolerated in the wider community. For example, in cultures where people are ready to talk about their painful experiences, their answers may reflect more accurately their own experiences rather than community norms. To provide some background on country specific context, few indicators on commonness and awareness of support services are disseminated.

It is essential to avoid using sensitive terms that could cause anxiety or concern when introducing the survey. Accordingly, the general recommendation was that the survey name should be neutral when contacting the respondents. The aim was to avoid alerting any perpetrators of domestic violence to the nature of the survey or frightening off any victims of violence, in order to minimise non-response, as some respondents might be discouraged from taking part if the name of the survey included terms like ‘assault’, ‘sexual violence’, or ‘gender-based violence’.

Majority of countries have followed this recommendation and the title of the survey was translated as survey on health, safety or security and well-being or living conditions; quality of life or relationship survey. Only few countries (BG, SK) used gender-based violence in the title of the survey during data collection and explained that this decision was taken as no issue appeared during testing the survey using the word “violence”, or the word "violence" was used in order to avoid misunderstanding regarding the aim of the survey and to reduce non-response due to the fact that respondents were not aware of the real theme of the survey.

However, the pilot survey results indicate that respondents understood the rationale for the choice of neutral survey name once they had been given an explanation, and agreed that it was right. Due to the sensitivity of the topic, the participating countries were strongly encouraged to include experts on violence against women and/or gender-based violence as well as psychologists and psychotherapists in every step of the survey - from the preparation, through the field work to the data dissemination.

Majority of countries included experts on the topic in the project team: gender statisticians, gender-based violence or violence against women researchers, policy experts, psychologists, social workers, experts working on victim support or NGOs, experts on victimization surveys. External experts were included in the preparation of the survey, training of the interviewers and in order to provide support to the interviewers.

Few countries (MT, FI) established the focus group or expert group consisting of different experts in the field and providing the support to the survey during all phases.

In 2024, gender-based violence remained a global issue. However, some populations appeared to be more at risk than others. For instance, around *** percent of women with high income aged between 30 and 34 had been subjected to physical or sexual violence in the past year. On the other hand, for women the same age but with low income, the percentage reached ****.

How does donor domestic ideology and partisan politics shape the lives of people in aid-dependent countries? In this paper, we study the impact of the United States Mexico City Policy, which—when in place—prohibits the disbursement of United States aid funds to foreign Non-Governmental Organizations that provide information or services related to abortion care. Since its 1984 inception, every Democratic president has rescinded it, while every Republican has reinstated it. While previous global public health studies reveal how the Mexico City Policy has actually increased unwanted pregnancies and unsafe abortion rates, we argue that these unintended consequences go further than previously understood. We argue that when women lose access to abortion care, they are more likely to lose their lives and suffer life-changing injuries due to violence by their partners. Using global data on United States aid and the health burden caused by intimate partner violence against women in up to 204 countries and territories between 1993 and 2019, we show that the burden of deaths and disability attributed to intimate partner violence increases by approximately 16 percent when the Mexico City Policy is in place.

The Domestic Abuse Safety Apps market has emerged as a vital segment within the broader landscape of personal safety technology. Designed specifically to assist individuals experiencing domestic violence and abuse, these applications function as crucial lifelines, empowering users with immediate access to resources,

Canada CA: Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data was reported at 1.000 NA in 2019. This stayed constant from the previous number of 1.000 NA for 2018. Canada CA: Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data is updated yearly, averaging 1.000 NA from Mar 2010 (Median) to 2019, with 10 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.000 NA in 2019 and a record low of 1.000 NA in 2019. Canada CA: Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Canada – Table CA.World Bank.WDI: Governance: Policy and Institutions. Legislation exists on domestic violence is whether there is legislation addressing domestic violence: violence between spouses, within the family or members of the same household, or in interpersonal relationships, including intimate partner violence that is subject to criminal sanctions or provides for protection orders for domestic violence, or the legislation addresses “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” or “harassment” that clearly affects physical or mental health, and it is implied that such behavior is considered domestic violence.; ; World Bank: Women, Business and the Law.; ;

This survey shows a greater awareness of domestic violence and desire for tougher action to clamp down on it. Only 2% of Europeans are unaware of domestic violence. The survey showed that one European in four knows a woman among friends and family who is a victim of domestic violence. One in five of the EU citizens surveyed said they know someone who commits domestic violence in their circle of friends and family. 87% of those surveyed believed that the EU should be involved in the fight against domestic violence. The survey follows on from a previous Eurobarometer survey conducted in 1999 in the 15 Member States, which comprised the EU at the time, and hence for these countries offers a comparative analysis of the results of the two surveys. The survey follows on from a previous Eurobarometer survey conducted in 1999 in the 15 Member States which comprised the EU at the time (henceforth described as the EU15). The report at hand analyses the evolution of responses in the EU15 in the intervening decade, and will offer a comparative analysis of the results of the two surveys. However, it will also analyse data from the newer Member States, for which no trend comparisons are possible.

The results by volumes are distributed as follows:

• Volume A: Countries
• Volume AA: Groups of countries
• Volume A' (AP): Trends
• Volume AA' (AAP): Trends of groups of countries
• Volume B: EU/socio-demographics
• Volume B' (BP) : Trends of EU/ socio-demographics
• Volume C: Country/socio-demographics ---- Researchers may also contact GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences: https://www.gesis.org/eurobarometer

United States US: Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data was reported at 1.000 NA in 2017. This stayed constant from the previous number of 1.000 NA for 2015. United States US: Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data is updated yearly, averaging 1.000 NA from Sep 2013 (Median) to 2017, with 3 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.000 NA in 2017 and a record low of 1.000 NA in 2017. United States US: Legislation Exists on Domestic Violence: 1=Yes; 0=No data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.World Bank: Policy and Institutions. Legislation exists on domestic violence is whether there is legislation addressing domestic violence: violence between spouses, within the family or members of the same household, or in interpersonal relationships, including intimate partner violence that is subject to criminal sanctions or provides for protection orders for domestic violence, or the legislation addresses “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” or “harassment” that clearly affects physical or mental health, and it is implied that such behavior is considered domestic violence.; ; World Bank: Women, Business and the Law.; ;

The number of family violence crimes in Russia reached **** thousand in 2021, falling by nearly one thousand compared to the previous year. The indicator decreased sharply between 2016 and 2017, when the country's laws decriminalized non-aggravated battery and battery within a family that resulted in no serious harm, unless it took place repeatedly. In total, over **** people became victims of domestic violence crimes in Russia in 2021.

ObjectivesDespite high levels of physical violence against children (VAC) globally (40–50%), the literature on the determinants of VAC remains inconclusive. Most of the literature on this topic is based on cross-sectional data, and the multi-level nature of the drivers of VAC is widely ignored. This leads to model specification problems and an inability to draw causal inferences. Moreover, despite the higher prevalence of VAC in low-and middle-income countries, studies from high income countries dominate the field. We examined the determinants of physical domestic VAC to address these gaps in the literature.MethodsData were collected between 2001 and 2020 from 762 mother–child dyads recruited in the Maternal and Infant Nutrition Interventions in Matlab (MINIMat) study in Bangladesh. We conducted multi-level logistic regression analyses to identify the determinants of physical domestic VAC.ResultsPrevalence of physical domestic violence against girls (69%) and boys (62%) was extremely high. Community-level prevalence of physical domestic VAC increased the likelihood of physical domestic VAC at the individual level across gender (girls - OR-5.66; 95% CI- 3.11-10.32; boys - OR-7.67; CI- 3.95-14.91). While physical domestic violence against mothers was not associated with physical domestic violence against girls, it reduced the likelihood of such violence against boys by 47%. Having 3 or more siblings predicted physical domestic violence against girls (OR-1.97; 95% CI- 1.01-3.81 for 3 siblings; OR-4.58; 95% CI- 2.12-9.90 for 4 or more siblings), but not against boys. While girls in Hindu families were more likely to experience this violence, the boys were not. Mother’s education, employment non-governmental organization (NGO) participation and, household wealth did not predict this violence against any gender.ConclusionWe contend that physical domestic violence against mothers reflects an emphasized patriarchal culture in a family where a boy is less likely to experience physical domestic violence. Social norms and social learning theories explain the greater likelihood of a child experiencing physical domestic violence in a village with a higher level of such violence. We conclude that social norms around physical domestic VAC and patriarchal culture need to be changed to effectively address this violence.

The FRA survey on violence against women is based on face-to-face interviews with 42,000 women across the EU. The survey was carried out between March and September 2012 and presents the most comprehensive survey worldwide on women’s experiences of violence. The survey asked women about their experiences of physical, sexual and psychological violence, including domestic violence, since the age of 15 and over the 12 months before the interview. Questions were also asked about incidents of stalking, sexual harassment, and the role played by new technologies in women’s experiences of abuse. In addition, the survey asked about respondents’ experiences of violence in childhood. The dataset of the FRA violence against women survey is stored with the UK Data Service, which is a recognised international service that is widely used by governmental and non-governmental institutions that produce survey data. The dataset is available free of charge after registration with the service under a Special Licence in various formats. Please visit the page of the dataset on the UK Data Service website to find a description of the dataset and the accompanying documents.