Abstract
Background Although family physicians (FPs) often encounter patients who have been subjected to intimate partner violence (IPV), the data on FPs’ response to IPV is limited. This study aimed to determine FPs’ attitudes towards IPV survivors in the Çankaya district of Ankara, Turkey. Methods An online questionnaire designed to elicit sociodemographic information and FPs’ attitudes towards IPV was distributed between 20 August 2021 and 20 October 2021. Results Eighty-nine FPs participated in the study. Of the participants, 71.9% had a patient diagnosed with IPV during their practice. Of these physicians, 100% diagnosed physical, 56.3% sexual, 71.9% psychological, 53.1% economic, and 10.9% cyber violence. Among these physicians, sexual, psychological, and economic violence were determined at higher rates by family medicine specialists (FMSs) compared to general practitioners (GPs), by FPs who had received IPV training compared to those who were untrained, and by female physicians compared to males (P < 0.05). Despite diagnosing IPV, some physicians did not intervene/guide their patients, and some only consoled their patients because they thought the situation was inevitable. The reasons for not taking official action included insufficient time, feeling uncomfortable talking about violence, lack of information about the detection and reporting, and the thought that the woman would not leave her abusive partner. Conclusions The results showed that among the physicians who encountered IPV, female sex, family medicine speciality training, and IPV training resulted in acting more consciously in diagnosing violence, implementing referral and notification systems, and approaching IPV survivors. The prevention of IPV could be made possible by supporting FPs with ongoing training, breaking down stereotypes and prejudices about gender roles, and changing the structures that maintain unequal power relationships.
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy
Reference36 articles.
1. Adalı T, Koyuncu Y, Sinan Türkyılmaz A, Hancıoğlu A, Taştı E, Kreuter F, Lepkowski JM, Akyıldırım O, Nishimura R, Akarsu A (2021) Surveys in Covid-19 and post Covid-19 days. No. 9754915113. Available at [Accessed 29 December 2022]
2. Survivors of intimate partner violence speak out.;Journal of General Internal Medicine,2003
3. Çatak AT (2015) Birinci Basamakta Çalışan Hekim, Ebe ve Hemşirelerin Kadına Yönelik Aile İçi Şiddeti Tanıma ve Bildirim Konusundaki Tutum ve Davranışları. Tıpta Uzmanlık thesis, Pamukkale Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi.
4. Çevik H (2020) Ankara’da Belediyelere Bağlı Kadın Sığınmaevlerinde Barınan Kadınların Sosyodemografik Özellikleri ve Birinci Basamak Sağlık Hizmetlerine Yönelik Düşünceleri (The sociodemographic characteristics and the thoughts on primary healthcare of the women in the women’s shelters affiliated with the municipalities in Ankara). Speciality in Family Medicine thesis, Ankara University.
5. Barriers to screening for intimate partner violence: a mixed-methods study of providers in family planning clinics.;Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health,2010