Building a Transdisciplinary Team to Prevent Intimate Partner Homicide: A Research Note

• Published date: 01 November 2023
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/10887679231178786
• Author: Jesenia M. Pizarro,Jill T. Messing,Millan AbiNader,April M. Zeoli,Kathryn Spearman,Jacquelyn Campbell
• Date: 01 November 2023
• Subject Matter: Special Issue Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/10887679231178786

Homicide Studies

2023, Vol. 27(4) 454 –471

© 2023 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/10887679231178786

journals.sagepub.com/home/hsx

Special Issue Article

Building a Transdisciplinary

Team to Prevent Intimate

Partner Homicide: A

Research Note

Jesenia M. Pizarro1, Jill T. Messing1,

Millan AbiNader2, April M. Zeoli3,

Kathryn Spearman4, and Jacquelyn Campbell4

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) and intimate partner homicide (IPH) are complex

global problems. Transdisciplinary research approaches offer the potential to

increase the understanding of these events and inform best practices for prevention.

To encourage scholars to adopt transdisciplinary practices when investigating

multifaceted problems, this note employs a case study approach to detail one such

effort—The Preventing and Assessing Intimate Partner Homicide Risk (PAIR) Studies.

The goal of the PAIR Studies is to improve the understanding of IPH to inform the

development of best practices for prevention. The note concludes with a discussion

of the benefits of transdisciplinary approaches.

Keywords

transdisciplinary, intimate partner homicide, anti-violence, case study

1Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ, USA

2University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

3University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

4Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

Corresponding Author:

Jesenia M. Pizarro, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Arizona State University, 411 N. Central

Avenue, Suite 647, Mail Code 4420, Phoenix, AZ 85004, USA.

Email: Jesenia.Pizarro@asu.edu

1178786HSXXXX10.1177/10887679231178786Homicide StudiesPizarro et al.

research-article2023

Pizarro et al. 455

Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) and Intimate Partner Homicide (IPH) are global prob-

lems that transcend borders and cultures. According to the World Health Organization

(2021), globally one in three women experience IPV during their lifetimes, which

includes psychological, physical, and/or sexual abuse committed by an intimate or ex-

intimate partner. In the United States (U.S.) approximately 5.7 million women and

3.3 million men annually report being victimized in an act of IPV that causes physical or

psychological harm or results in the need for services (Leemis et al., 2022). In addition

to disproportionately being the victims of IPV, women are also disproportionately the

victims of IPH (also called Intimate Partner Femicide or IPF), with the majority (77.9%)

of IPH committed by men against women (Fridel & Fox, 2019). Approximately 40% to

50% of women who are murdered are killed by a current or former intimate partner

(Fridel & Fox, 2019; Jack et al., 2018). In heterosexual relationships, most female vic-

tims of IPH are killed by men who abused them and most male victims of IPH are killed

by women that they abused (Campbell et al., 2003; Harden et al., 2019).

The effects of IPV and IPH are not confined to the focal victim, they also affect the

victims’ families and friends who may experience psychological distress and strain due

to the abuse, injury, or death of loved ones (Armour, 2002). It is estimated that up to one

in four children in the U.S. experience parental/caregiver IPV in their childhood

(Finkelhor et al., 2015). Moreover, children are often secondary victims of IPH.

Approximately 43% of multiple victim IPHs involve the death of children, and many

victims of IPH are parents whose children suffer their loss (Abolarin et al., 2019). When

a female parent is killed in an IPH, children may witness the homicide or find the body

(Lewandowski et al., 2004). Children and youth who survive the IPH of a parent suffer

multiple traumas and may experience adverse sequalae across psychological, social,

physical, and academic domains (Aborisade et al., 2018, Alisic et al., 2017).

Given that IPV is the most common precursor to IPH, there are multiple potential

intervention points across disciplines and professions that present opportunities to pre-

vent these homicides. For example, Domestic Violence High Risk Teams work to

intervene with high-risk IPV survivors, and domestic violence fatality review teams

work to better understand the circumstances of IPH in order to make policy and prac-

tice recommendations to prevent future IPHs in their communities (Snider, 2019).

Both teams generally include representatives from the criminal and civil legal sys-

tems, the health professions, the social service sector, and the community (Messing,

Campbell, et al., 2020; Websdale et al., 2019). Similarly, when a fatal or near-fatal IPV

occurs, multiple systems manage the aftermath—medical systems engage in lifesav-

ing measures or autopsies if the violence was fatal and may treat physical and psycho-

logical injuries suffered by additional victims and surviving family. The criminal

justice system has the authority to sanction IPH and IPV offenders. The civil legal

system plays a role in the safety of IPV survivors through orders of protection (also

called restraining orders) and makes determinations regarding families, for example

about the custody of children. IPV survivors may seek the assistance of the social

service sector at any point in the healthcare, civil, or criminal processes, or indepen-

dently of these processes. If there is a fatality, those left behind (including children)