Dynamic Change Between Intimate Partner Violence and Contraceptive Use Over Time in Young Adult Men’s and Women’s Relationships

Abstract

The negative association between intimate partner violence (IPV) and contraceptive use is well established, but much of this research treats the association as static (e.g., similar across all relationships over development or time). Such studies do not account for individual development of sexual and romantic relationship mental, social, and behavioral well-being, which relate to contraceptive use. These studies are also predominantly woman-focused; such work could be complemented by examining men’s associations. The current study examined how associations between sexual and physical IPV and consistent condom and birth control (BC) use changed across up to seven sequential relationships in young adulthood over a five-year period within a nationally representative sample. Results indicated that physical IPV–contraception associations were significant only across earliest or latest relationships. Sexual IPV–contraception associations were significant over more relationships but often changed in valence (negative to positive). There were few significant differences in these associations between men and women. Developmental context (e.g., prior relationship/IPV experience) may be important when considering IPV–contraception associations. In addition, although the IPV–contraception association does not appear to be a unique problem for women, research needs to explore how underlying mechanisms explaining this association may be a result of gendered and nongendered contexts.

Notes

¹ This does not include the important body of literature that examines IPV and contraception use in same-sex (predominantly MSM) relationships. It is important to note that the current study focused on gendered violence and IPV-contraception associations relating to heterosexual relationships.

² In Wave III there were 432 (3.48%) participants who reported at least one same-sex relationship; 1.13% of participants reported only same-sex relationships; 2.35% of participants reported at least one same-sex relationship and at least one heterosexual relationship (individuals ranged from reporting that 16% of their total relationships were heterosexual to reporting that 96% of their total relationships were heterosexual). Because the data were analyzed by cases, individuals who reported more than one heterosexual relationship were not excluded from the study.

³ Although withdrawal has been noted to have similar (or even better) rates of failure/success for pregnancy prevention compared to some other methods such as sponges or spermicides (Trussell, 2011), other studies indicate that withdrawal has worse pregnancy outcomes compared to exclusive use of other (nonwithdrawal) contraceptives (e.g., Dude, Neustadt, Martins, & Gilliam, 2013). Pairing withdrawal with other methods is common (e.g., Jones, Lindberg, & Higgins, 2014). As AddHealth allowed participants to report up to three different methods, withdrawal-exclusive users are the only participants coded as inconsistent users, compared to withdrawal + other method users, who are allowed to still be coded as consistent BC users.

⁴ Note that 130 men and 168 women reported an 8th partner, indicating questionable power for analyses. For comparison, 187 men and 245 women who reported a 7th partner (and increasingly higher numbers of participants) reported a 6th, 5th, 4th, etc., partner. Although the cutoff can be seen as arbitrary, we wanted to have a balance between N and number of relationships. Although previous TVEM analyses have utilized single time points with sample sizes as small as N = 40 (Shikyo, Lanza, Tan, Li, & Shiffman, 2012), interpretation of the later relationship time points should account for potential power biases.

Additional information

Funding

This study was funded in part by National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) (5P20 GM121341-02). The research used data from Add Health, a program project directed by Kathleen Mullan Harris and designed by J. Richard Udry, Peter S. Bearman, and Kathleen Mullan Harris at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and funded by grant P01-HD31921 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, with cooperative funding from 23 other federal agencies and foundations. Special acknowledgment is due Ronald R. Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for assistance in the original design. Information on how to obtain the Add Health data files is available on the Add Health website (http://www.cpc.unc.edu/addhealth). No direct support was received from grant P01-HD31921 for this analysis.