In 2023, there were a total of 12,326 victims of domestic violence and intimate partner violence offenses in Finland. Most domestic violence victims were women, amounting to over 8,353 that year. By comparison, there were roughly 4,000 male victims the same year.

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.

The Mayor's Office to End Domestic and Gender-Based Violence (ENDGBV) develops policies and programs, provides training and prevention education, conducts research and evaluations, performs community outreach, and operates the New York City Family Justice Centers. The office collaborates with City agencies and community stakeholders to ensure access to inclusive services for survivors of domestic and gender-based violence (GBV) services. GBV can include intimate partner and family violence, elder abuse, sexual assault, stalking, and human trafficking. ENDGBV operates the New York City Family Justice Centers. These co‐located multidisciplinary domestic violence service centers provide vital social service, civil legal and criminal justice assistance for survivors of intimate partner violence and their children under one roof. The Brooklyn Family Justice Center opened in July 2005; the Queens Family Justice Center opened in July 2008; the Bronx Family Justice Center opened in April 2010; Manhattan Family Justice Center opened in December 2013 and Staten Island Family Justice Center opened in June 2015. OCDV also has a Policy and Training Institute that provides trainings on intimate partner violence to other City agencies. The New York City Healthy Relationship Academy, with is part of the Policy and Training Institute, provides peer lead workshops on healthy relationships and teen dating violence to individuals between the age of 13 and 24, their parents and staff of agencies that work with youth in that age range. The dataset is collected to produce an annual fact sheet on intimate partner violence in New York City. The fact sheet is produced annually by the end of February and is placed on the ENDGBV website. The criminal justice numbers (IPV Homicides, DIRs) are provided by the New York City Police Department; the NYC Domestic Violence Hotline call numbers are provided by Safe Horizon, which is contracted by the City to manage the hotline. The other data is provided by ENDGBV.

The dataset comprises responses from diverse individuals, addressing demographic factors (residence type, age, education level, family structure), monthly income, initial experience of torture, current abuse situation, marital duration, extramarital involvement, primary abuse location, stance on male torture legislation, abuse victimization status, among others. Collected through a survey consisting of 23 questions, predominantly offering binary responses, it encompasses quantitative data derived from individual male responses. The survey targeted 2000 residents from Bangladesh's 9 major cities, prioritizing professionals across sectors and ensuring representation of unemployed individuals, employees, and business owners.

In 2024, domestic violence was still a global issue affecting women all around the world. One of the main issues with domestic violence was the acceptance and justification of it. For instance, more than ******************** still considered a husband to be justified in beating his wife if she was to neglect the children or refuse sexual relations.

Number and percentage of Canadians who have experienced intimate partner violence since age 15 or in the past 12 months by type of intimate partner violence, gender, selected victim demographic characteristics, Canada, provinces and territories, 2018.

The Mayor’s Office to End Domestic and Gender-Based Violence (ENDGBV) formulates policies and programs, coordinates the citywide delivery of domestic violence services and works with diverse communities and community leaders to increase awareness of domestic violence. ENDGBV collaborates closely with government and nonprofit agencies that assist domestic violence survivors and operates the New York City Family Justice Centers. These co‐located multidisciplinary domestic violence service centers provide vital social service, civil legal and criminal justice assistance for survivors of intimate partner violence and their children under one roof.

Victims of police-reported intimate partner and non-intimate partner violence, by gender of victim, province or territory and census metropolitan area, 2009 to 2024.

Domestic abuse numbers, prevalence, types and victim characteristics, based upon findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales and police recorded crime.

This data set contains New York City Police Department count data for domestic violence related offenses (murder, rape, sex offense, felony assault, strangulation and stalking) by the victim's race and the victim's gender for calendar years 2017, 2018 and 2019.

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.

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.

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 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.

Domestic abuse numbers, prevalence, types and attitudes experienced by women and men aged between 16 and 59 years and 60 to 74 years, based upon annual findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales.

The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) is an ongoing nationally representative survey that assessed experiences of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence among adult women and men in the United States and for each individual state. The survey focused exclusively on violence and collected information about: Sexual violence by any perpetrator, including information related to rape, being made to penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, unwanted sexual contact, and non-contact unwanted sexual experiences Stalking, including the use of newer technologies such as text messages, emails, monitoring devices (e.g., cameras and GPS, or global positioning system devices), by perpetrators known and unknown to the victim Physical violence by an intimate partner Psychological aggression by an intimate partner, including information on expressive forms of aggression and coercive control Control of reproductive or sexual health by an intimate partner The NISVS project and data collection was overseen by the Centers for Disease and Prevention (CDC). The overall cost of the NISVS project was shared between the CDC, the Department of Defense (DoD) and the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). ICPSR has multiple versions of NISVS data that you can access by clicking on the links provided below.

The study used quantitative methods to investigate the effects of victim gender, victim sexuality, and type of violence on victim blaming scores among social workers.This experiment employed a 2x2x2 factor independent-measures design as there were three independent variables, each with two levels: victim gender (male/female), victim sexuality (heterosexual/homosexual), and type of violence (psychological/physical). Participants were randomly allocated into one of the eight conditions.80 participants took part.

This study examines the prevalence of violence against American Indian and Alaska Native women and men, using a large nationally representative sample from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS). More specifically, it provides estimates of sexual violence, physical violence by intimate partners, stalking, and psychological aggression by intimate partners. It also provides estimates of interracial and intraracial victimizations and briefly examines the impact of violence. This study is based on two of the NISVS samples that were included in the 2010 data collection effort --the general population sample and the American Indian and Alaska Native oversample. This American Indian and Alaska Native oversample was collected from geographical areas (telephone exchanges) where at least 50% of the population identifies themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native. To increase the generalizability of the American Indian and Alaska Native sample (and to add interviews conducted by cell phone), a new "combined" sample was created by including (a) all respondents in the American Indian and Alaska Native oversample and (b) 677 respondents in the general population sample who identified themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native. By combining these samples, a new sample was obtained that is large enough to produce reliable and valid estimates for all women and men in the United States who identify themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native. For a more exact discussion of the sample, see the NIJ Technical Report. The combined sample includes 2,473 women and 1,505 men who identified themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native. Results from the combined American Indian and Alaska Native sample were compared to results from the sample of respondents in the general population sample who identified themselves as non-Hispanic White alone. The comparison sample includes 7,646 women and 6,050 men who identified themselves as non-Hispanic White alone. There are 5 data files included with this study. Dataset 1 (General Population Raw Data) contains 18,957 cases and 26,114 variables. Dataset 2 (American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) Oversample Raw Data) contains 3,612 cases and 22,932 variables. Dataset 3 (Respondent-level Data) contains 21,378 cases and 493 variables. Dataset 4 (Perpetrator-level Data) contains 51,535 cases and 446 variables. Dataset 5 (Weights File) contains 3,978 cases and 9 variables.

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of the time and the sex of victims and perpetrators on the rates of family and community physical violence in a Brazilian municipality over seven years (2008–2014). METHODS We made a census analysis from non-fatal victims attended in the Forensic Institute of the Scientific Civil Police. The monthly and annual violence rates were calculated based on the population size of the municipality. Time series was evaluated by negative binomial regression models, based on the number of cases with population offset and considering the effect of the sex of victims and perpetrators. RESULTS A total of 3,324 cases of family and 4,634 cases of community violence were analyzed. There was a significant increase in family violence rates for female victims and male perpetrators. Family violence rates were always higher for female victims than for male and it was always lower for female perpetrators than for male (p < 0.001). There was a lower risk of community violence for male victims after 2013 and a decrease of aggression perpetrated by men over time. Men and women were similarly affected by community violence; however, the perpetrators were more frequently men. CONCLUSIONS The results indicate a trend of increasing female victims in the family violence, mainly perpetrated by men. The reduction in community violence rates could be the result of policies to reduce crime.

This statistic presents public acceptance of domestic violence against women and men in the European Union (EU) in 2016. While the vast majority of respondents stated that domestic violence against both genders was unacceptable, slightly more respondents thought that incidents regarding men should not always be punished.