| Revision as of 15:44, 5 January 2015 edit2a02:2f0a:508f:ffff::5679:c3c8 (talk) →Biased claims in the lede← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:06, 22 January 2015 edit undoJytdog (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers187,951 edits add templateNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Reliable sources for medical articles|synonym1=antibiotic-induced+diarrhea}} | |||
| {{Talk header|search=yes}} | {{Talk header|search=yes}} | ||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
Revision as of 17:06, 22 January 2015
 | Ideal sources for Misplaced Pages's health content are defined in the guideline Misplaced Pages:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Domestic violence.
|
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Domestic violence article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 2 months  |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Domestic violence article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9Auto-archiving period: 2 months |
Template:Men's rights article probation (portions)
| Ideal sources for Misplaced Pages's health content are defined in the guideline Misplaced Pages:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Domestic violence.
|
 | This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Domestic violence is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Factor: education-difference between spouses
I read an abstract once of a study saying women with higher education married to men with lower education than them had higher risk of being abused. Does anyone happen to have the citation of this? (I know the reverse seems to be the case in Bangladesh, so presumably there's some confounding factor here.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwibird (talk • contribs) 08:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Ah, now I found it. Martin (2007) , cites Johnson (2003) as saying that "women with higher education were at greater risk of being physically and sexually assaulted by their partners", although other studies have also shown that unemployed women are at higher risk of marital rape, not sure how to interpret all this. (Martin 2007 seems to be a very good review.)
References
- http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/demography/v040/40.2koenig.html
- Elaine K. Martin, Casey T. Taft, Patricia A. Resick, A review of marital rape, Aggression and Violent Behavior, Volume 12, Issue 3, May-June 2007, Pages 329-347, ISSN 1359-1789, DOI: 10.1016/j.avb.2006.10.003. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6VH7-4MM95WJ-1/2/c7a5b2cdc68b6cb4cc0ff35af32637d0
- Holly Johnson. (2003). The cessation of assaults on wives*. Journal of Comparative Family Studies: Violence Against Women in the Family, 34(1), 75-91. Retrieved February 24, 2009, from Academic Research Library database. (Document ID: 344327771). http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?did=344327771&Fmt=7&clientId=32064&RQT=309&VName=PQD
Revision of Same-sex relationships sections
I am a student charged with creating or revising a Misplaced Pages article to better reflect the goal of my class: social justice, inequality, and the capabilities of humans to make meaningful changes. I have chosen the topic of intimate partner violence as it applies to LGBT communities. This article covers little to do on the subject as I believe it should. This article has developed into a general overview of types of domestic violence, causes, and even some social implications surrounding the topic. However, I have found significant information on the topic in the realm of LGBT relationships. Consequently, I will be adding an article on this specific topic under the current headin of “same-sex relationships”. This section, I feel, I lacking in statistical data and reference. My small section will detail the significance of IPV in the LGBT community, ways that this type of violence occurs, and implications for LGBT individuals. Under the headings of “social view” and “intergenerational cycle of violence” I will also insert a few sentences on the LGBT community, as these topics are relevant beyond what has already been included. I will include data on the prevalence of the issue and donate a few sentences to the efforts of those who are working to bring this issue to light.
With that being said, I need your help Wikipedians. I will be posting a draft of my proposed sections within two weeks. I would appreciate constructive criticism, especially as it applies to organizations of the material and use of citations. Additionally, i will be creating a sub article with greater detail on the topic. If it interests you, please take the time to provide feedback or suggestions on that page as well. Especially on what information should be used in the subsection of this article.
Ratilley (talk) 00:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
- Hello, Ratilley (talk · contribs). Welcome to Misplaced Pages. More coverage on domestic violence among LGBT people definitely needs to be in this article, and I welcome it. Problems with covering it, however, are the limited and conflicting research aspects of it. In the #violence against men section above, I stated the following: Regarding the "Research has suggested that gay men are at higher risk of domestic violence than their heterosexual counterparts." line, there are scholarly sources stating that domestic violence among gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals might be higher than among heterosexual individuals, that gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals are less likely to report domestic violence that has occurred in their intimate relationships than heterosexual couples are, and/or that lesbian couples experience domestic violence less than heterosexual couples do. Other sources state that gay and lesbian couples experience domestic violence at the same frequency as heterosexual couples. See for example, this scholarly source (from 2010, page 49, citing older research from the 2000s) and this scholarly source (from 2009, page 255). I'll look further into the argument that gay male couples experience domestic violence more than heterosexual couples do; my belief is that it's a suggestion that needs to be given WP:Due weight if we include it, just like the other LGBT material, given that so much of domestic violence material focuses on heterosexual couples. For example, this source (Encyclopedia of Victimology and Crime Prevention, Volume 1, 2010, page 312) states, "For several methodological reasons – nonrandom sampling procedures and self-selection factors, among others – it is not possible to assess the extent of same-sex domestic violence. Studies on abuse between gay male or lesbian partners usually rely on small convenience samples such as lesbian or gay male members of an association." Contrary to that first source (the other 2010 one) I cited, this one states that researchers commonly assume that lesbian couples experience domestic violence at the same rate as heterosexual couples, and that researchers have been more cautious regarding reporting domestic violence among gay male couples.
- I will contact WP:LGBT about this topic in case anyone there wants to weigh in on it. Keep in mind that you should use WP:Reliable sources for the content that you plan to add to the Domestic violence article, and especially Misplaced Pages:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) (WP:MEDRS)-compliant sources. Read those guideline pages for what I mean; you have probably already read the WP:Reliable sources guideline since you are with this course. Ideal sources for this topic, like WP:MEDRS states, are literature reviews or systematic reviews published in reputable medical journals, academic and professional books written by experts in the relevant field and from a respected publisher, and medical guidelines or position statements from nationally or internationally recognized expert bodies. Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content. You can, for example, use the book sources I cited above for material about LGBT domestic violence. And regarding your plan to create a sub-article on this topic, keep in mind that a sub-article should generally only be created when needed; this is per the WP:Spinout guideline. A WP:Stub article is often not the best way to go. In short, we should generally only split content into a separate article when covering it in the main article is a WP:SIZE issue, and/or when the intended split content can make for a valid standalone article and can be improved beyond a WP:Stub. Flyer22 (talk) 01:15, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
- You've beaten me to alerting WP:LGBT. Okay, I will now point them directly to this section. Flyer22 (talk) 01:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Note: This is what the Same-sex relationships section looked like after Ratilley's expansion of it. I tweaked/added to the section here and here, and am likely to tweak it or add to it in the future. Given the limited data out there on domestic violence in same-sex relationships, you did a decent job with the text, Ratilley. I would stay away from using university sources for this information, however (not that you added those sources; they were there before your additions). Use of primary sources are seemingly unavoidable in this particular case (domestic violence in same-sex relationships). Flyer22 (talk) 01:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- I agree that it would be very useful to have a new page dedicated to the topic of “LGBT Domestic Violence.” This article could be re-organized to share the same subsections as in the general “Domestic Violence” article. Having a section of “Triggers” and “Family Dynamics” in your new page would be interesting! Although it will be difficult to get this article started because it covers so many arenas, there will be many people to help and support you, as evidenced by this thread. I know this is a recent issue and thus I don’t know how many scholars are looking into it, but just make sure there are academic journals and also statistics to back your claims. Keep up with the good work and I look forward to reading your new contribution!
Appleangel11 (talk) 00:41, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- Appleangel11, like I noted above, there should first be an adequate reason to create a WP:Spinout article; like WP:Spinout notes, there is no need for haste when splitting content into an individual article. Right now, the same-sex content in the Domestic violence article does not need its own Misplaced Pages article. And, like it notes, domestic violence is not well studied among the LGBT community. Flyer22 (talk) 10:24, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
- AVR22 (talk · contribs), I reverted you here because you added far too much detail, detail focused exclusively on lesbian relationships. See the WP:Due weight policy to help understand why I reverted you. As you seemingly noticed, we already have the Domestic violence#Gender aspects section; this is the section where the Same-sex relationships subsection is placed. The reason that it currently does not show up in the table of contents is because of this edit that Doc James made a couple of days ago. That section adequately addresses the topic of male and female same-sex relationships. With your addition, why should lesbian relationships be given so much focus regarding the topic of same-sex relationships? I understand that I noted above that one of the sources states that researchers have been more cautious regarding reporting domestic violence among gay male couples, but I still don't see why this article should give as much detail to lesbian relationships as you gave it. Not only is that a WP:Due weight violation, this article already has WP:SIZE issues (meaning it's big enough as it is). This might be a good time to create a Domestic violence in same-sex relationships article, and then your content about lesbian relationships can go there, though it might still need to be cut down so as to not make that article too disproportionately about lesbian relationships. I don't yet see that there is a need to have a Domestic violence in lesbian relationships article. Flyer22 (talk) 15:59, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
- Note:
It does not appear that AVR22 truly considered my comments above, and was only concerned with getting a grade with regard to WP:Student editing.This is why the poor Domestic violence in lesbian relationships article currently exists; I commented on the matter there at its talk page. Flyer22 (talk) 04:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
- Correction to my "04:12, 16 December 2014 (UTC)" post (also see here): Actually, judging by this and this, AVR22 did truly consider my advice, but did not beef up the article with more content beyond lesbian relationships; so Joe Decker chose the Domestic violence in lesbian relationships title for the article. Flyer22 (talk) 04:30, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Alternative names for domestic violence (WP:Alternative title)
As seen here, here and here, Penbat and I have disagreed on labeling domestic abuse, spousal abuse, battering, family violence and intimate partner violence as domestic violence in the first sentence. I changed the "closely related to" wording that Penbat added; I changed it to "also," and I did this because, like the Domestic violence article and an abundance of WP:Reliable sources make clear, all of these terms are often or usually used interchangeably. Intimate partner violence having its own Misplaced Pages article does not make it distinct from domestic violence; of course, it is domestic violence, and it is currently called such in the lead of its Misplaced Pages article. And the term domestic abuse, a term that Penbat considers broader than the term domestic violence, as shown in the #Children section above, and therefore wants the Domestic violence article titled Domestic abuse, is even more so used interchangeably with the term domestic violence; they are the same thing. Like I told Penbat in the aforementioned Children section, the term domestic violence, just like the term sexual violence, does not only concern physically violent acts. In other words, the term domestic violence is just as broad as the term domestic abuse. I see no valid reason to describe the aforementioned terms as simply related to domestic violence, as opposed to being domestic violence. It's just that a few of these terms cover specific forms of domestic violence.
I'll alert WP:Med to this discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 09:29, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Alerted. Flyer22 (talk) 09:35, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- I am here from WikiProject Medicine. Distinguishing nuance among the terms listed is not easy. In one sense they are equivalent and in another they are different, depending on the level of detail required. I suppose the least surprising thing to do would be to only distinguish terms which have their own standalone Misplaced Pages articles, and to say that any time without its own article must be equivalent for the purposes of the article lead to the subject of the article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 10:37, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- In the first sentence we should state "Domestic violence (also domestic abuse, spousal abuse, battering, family violence and intimate partner violence)" as we do. In the definitions section we can then discuss how some use them the same and others use them slightly differently. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 18:11, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for weighing in, Bluerasberry and Jmh649 (Doc James). Both of your approaches are reasonable. I obviously prefer Jmh649's approach, but I can be fine with leaving "intimate partner violence" out of the parentheses of the first sentence, since it is addressed/linked to in the same paragraph; however, since it is domestic violence, I don't think that we should refer to it as simply closely related to domestic violence. Like I stated above, domestic abuse, spousal abuse, battering, family violence and intimate partner violence are all domestic violence; it's also why I think that the heading Domestic violence should be first in the Definitions section. Flyer22 (talk) 23:23, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- IMO Flyer22's ideas on this are a complete nonsense. We have half a dozen related terms which obviously overlap each other like as with a Venn diagram - so obviously in quite a few contexts they can be used interchangeably but not all contexts. There is no reason why we should pretend that the terms mean the same thing. It is fairly arbitrary selecting "domestic violence" as the article's name. There is a separate article for intimate partner violence anyway. I think the Domestic_violence#Definitions section as it is laid out is very helpful in explaining that for three of the terms the critical point to explain is it is a matter of increasing scope with "family violence" having the largest scope and it incorporates everything else. It is wrong to put "the term "domestic violence" on a pedestal. I am not advocating it but there is a case for calling this article "family violence" as it is the most inclusive expression in this domain. We also have the confusing use of the word "violence" in favour of "abuse" to include non-physical violence but that is a slightly different issue.--Penbat (talk) 08:17, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
- There is nothing that is complete nonsense about what I have stated above. You are treating domestic abuse, spousal abuse, battering, family violence and intimate partner violence as though they are distinct from domestic violence, and that view generally does not hold up when comparing WP:Reliable sources on the matter, especially as far as comparing the term domestic violence to domestic abuse goes in WP:Reliable sources; and not only does the article's Definitions section currently show that, so do an abundance of WP:Reliable sources...easily found on Google Books and Google Scholar. Needless to state, this fact is all in the literature concerning domestic violence/domestic abuse. This is also the reason that creating articles for domestic abuse, spousal abuse, battering and family violence would be unnecessary WP:Content forks. The Intimate partner violence article is not even really needed, and that material could be sufficiently covered in the Domestic violence article, especially since so much of domestic violence is intimate partner violence, and since there is quite a lot that could be validly cut from the Domestic violence article. Different types of domestic violence are still domestic violence; that is my point. And I already addressed the "title of the article" matter above (we go by the WP:Common name policy), and that the term violence is not limited to physical violence (not consistently at least); that the term violence is not limited in that way is clear by how domestic violence and sexual violence are broadly defined. If you want to compare sources on these matters, I would be open to doing that. And perhaps Bluerasberry and Jmh649 (Doc James) would be as well. We can also start a WP:RfC on one or more of these matters.
- On a side note: There is no need to ping me to this discussion via WP:Echo since this article/talk page is on my WP:Watchlist. The only reason that I pinged you above is so that others can click on your username and get a sense of who you are as an editor, if they are not already familiar with you as an editor. I also want to point out that I respect you as an editor, and I don't mean to upset you. You do good work for the psychology corner of Misplaced Pages, and there is no other Misplaced Pages editor as prolific in that corner as you are. Flyer22 (talk) 08:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
- I concur with the view that these terms ideally should be distinguished. Practically, though, I feel that they should not be distinguished in a definition until and unless they can be distinguished with a more detailed explanation and backing in sources. The terms are close enough that it is not incorrect to say they are all the same thing, even if it would be most correct to differentiate them. However, I could never ask anyone to make new Misplaced Pages articles on such a nuanced topic when I would expect even most of the sources cited usually group these things together except when it is useful to deconstruct the terms. Penbat is out of line for saying the ideas are nonsense because they ideas are good, and sometimes differentiation is useful. Without finding sources which define and distinguish these terms and presenting the parts of these concepts which do not overlap, though, as a practical way of presenting something close enough then saying they are the same is good enough until someone does the work to make a solid case that they are different. With taboo topics like this which are not well discussed anywhere and hardly at all internationally (and I see the thorough sourcing - I know a lot is here, but there could be even more) I am not sure if it is worth the time and effort to make these kinds of distinctions when it is so hard to explain differences. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:18, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
- On a side note: There is no need to ping me to this discussion via WP:Echo since this article/talk page is on my WP:Watchlist. The only reason that I pinged you above is so that others can click on your username and get a sense of who you are as an editor, if they are not already familiar with you as an editor. I also want to point out that I respect you as an editor, and I don't mean to upset you. You do good work for the psychology corner of Misplaced Pages, and there is no other Misplaced Pages editor as prolific in that corner as you are. Flyer22 (talk) 08:44, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
- Interesting view, Bluerasberry (pinging you again via WP:Echo because I don't know if you currently have this talk page WP:Watchlisted), that you feel that these terms should ideally be distinguished but that they generally cannot be practically distinguished. I obviously agree with you that trying to distinguish them is not easy, but I can't think of how they could ideally be distinguished, since domestic violence and domestic abuse are very much synonyms and since the other terms are types of domestic violence. I can understand those other terms being distinguished in the fact that they are not domestic violence as a whole and, as stated, instead refer to specific types of domestic violence, but I don't see any distinguishing them beyond that. And battering, like the term violence, is also not a word that only covers physical violence; it covers emotional abuse as well. Flyer22 (talk) 00:40, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Update: Bluerasberry and Jmh649 (Doc James), with this edit, Ewawer (Enthusiast) moved "intimate partner violence" out of the first sentence. I'm okay with that, since that term has its own Misplaced Pages article, but it's still a fact that, as stated above, the term is often used interchangeably with the term domestic violence, and, when people state "domestic violence," it is usually intimate partner violence that they are referring to. I, however, disagree with this edit by Ewawer, which moved mention of intimate partner violence out of the lead; the reason that I gave for reverting is: " should be mentioned in the lead; the lead summarizes the article. And that term is often used interchangeably with 'domestic violence,' as noted lower." Ewawer reverted, stating, "I am try to unclutter the intro." And I reverted once again, adding, "lead material is lead material; it's as simple as that, per WP:LEAD." Flyer22 (talk) 07:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- What is wrong with "intimate partner violence" in the lead? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:12, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Flyer22 Ewawer I put it back. They are often the same, right? If not explain here. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:00, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- If these terms are used interchangeably, then that is an argument for merging the two articles. Alternatively, the IPV article could be renamed "Intimate terrorism", which is what most of that article is about. Enthusiast (talk) 21:30, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- Bluerasberry, Jmh649 (Doc James) and Ewawer (Enthusiast): One point that has been made above is that some of these terms are more interchangeable than others; a few of them (intimate partner violence, spousal abuse and family violence) are aspects of domestic violence, and so are not used as interchangeably as the others. As already noted above, we have the Definitions section for clarification. Bluerasberry, I saw your aforementioned change here, and I tweaked it. Whether intimate partner violence is mentioned in the first sentence or not, I don't mind too much as long as it's mentioned in the lead. Ewawer, as for renaming, like I told you in the edit history of the Intimate partner violence article (seen here and here), intimate terrorism is an aspect of intimate partner violence. Since that article is not solely about intimate terrorism, I don't think, under that circumstance, that your rename proposal is what is best. If there is enough content for that article to be solely about intimate terrorism, then I suppose we could have that article be simply about that, and then leave the Domestic violence article to address intimate partner violence in general. As for merging... Above, I did suggest that the Domestic violence article can sufficiently cover intimate partner violence. But then again, look at how big the Domestic violence article already is; it currently has hidden aspects to its WP:TOC (table of contents) because of its length. Still, domestic violence is usually about intimate partner violence; the Domestic violence article is mostly about that, which makes the Intimate partner violence article seem wholly redundant. One article that definitely needs merging is the Sexual violence by intimate partners article that you recently edited; that is an unnecessary WP:Content fork of the intimate partner violence topic, and it should be merged with the Intimate partner violence article. Flyer22 (talk) 22:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
- I would even go further. Article Domestic violence against men contains a large amount of material on "gender symmetry", which really belongs to the general Domestic violence article. I'm reluctant to say that that material should be moved over as it would make this article unmanageably longer, but the fact remains that it is not strictly relating only to violence against men. Enthusiast (talk) 00:23, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- The Gender aspects section (meaning its subsections included) of the Domestic violence article also addresses the gender symmetry topic. Thing is...when domestic violence against men is addressed, the topic of gender symmetry is usually an aspect because so much of the domestic violence topic focuses on women being victims. The gender symmetry aspect is the argument that domestic violence is not as one-sided as the general research on domestic violence leads people to believe. That's why the lead of the Domestic violence against men article currently states: "IPV against men is a controversial area of research, with terms such as 'gender symmetry', 'battered husband syndrome' and 'bidirectional IPV' provoking a great deal of debate. One of the main tools used to find statistical evidence of male victims of IPV, the conflict tactics scale, has been heavily criticized, and just as heavily defended." Flyer22 (talk) 00:39, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
- So, yeah, Ewawer (Enthusiast), seeing you edit that article moments ago, I think you're going to have to be careful editing that topic or any gender symmetry topic. For this discussion, this is my last time pinging you to this talk page, as I assume it's either on your WP:Watchlist or you'll otherwise check back here if you want to read replies. That stated, I might ping you to this talk page in the future if it seems needed to me. Flyer22 (talk) 00:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
WP:Class assignment
Hello, Lyoh (talk · contribs). I see that as part of a WP:Class assignment, you are with Education Program:Indiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis/Advanced Mental Health for the Occupational Therapist (Fall 2014) and have been expanding the article (as seen here and here). Well, with a WP:Class assignment, the student editor(s) should attempt to communicate with the regular editors of the article so that these sides can collaborate more efficiently, and so that the more experienced editors can guide the student editors if needed, and address any concerns with their additions. For example, the Domestic violence article is big enough as it is, so WP:SIZE is an issue. Seeing as domestic violence is largely (but not solely) a medical issue, making sure that sources added to the article regarding health information are up to the Misplaced Pages:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) (WP:MEDRS) standards is also a concern. I'm pinging Doc James via WP:Echo to see if he perhaps has any opinion on the sources you've added to the article. Lyoh, what is everything you are looking to add to the article? And will others from your course be assisting you? Flyer22 (talk) 15:51, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- @Flyer22:. Hi, Lyoh and myself are the only two IUPUI students that were assigned to actually add information to this article. We didn't know to first communicate with the regular editors because this is our first attempt at adding information to Wiki but would appreciate any help. Thanks for contacting DocJames about our article sources. Can you explain further what you mean by domestic violence being largely a medical issue? In terms of what we are looking to add, the information that Lyoh has already added is all that we were assigned to do for this WP:Class assignment at this time. Thank you for your feedback and edits. SWhit2014 (talk) 22:14, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
- Hello, SWhit2014 (talk · contribs). Thank you for responding. The WP:Class assignment page addresses the best approaches for student editors interacting with regular editors of an article. I'm not sure what you mean by your question pertaining to the medical aspect. Health is a medical matter. And domestic violence is undoubtedly a medical matter; it concerns social aspects as well, but the additions that you and Lyoh are focused on concern health and social aspects. When it comes to sourcing health information on Misplaced Pages, the WP:MEDRS guideline is the one to follow. Flyer22 (talk) 00:01, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- See Misplaced Pages:Student assignments#Editing medicine and health topics (a section of the WP:Class assignment page). Flyer22 (talk) 00:10, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Copy and pasting
| Extended content |
|---|
|
Occupational therapy can impact the health and well-being of survivors of domestic violence by enabling participation in occupation and addressing a diminished skill-set caused by a prolonged situation of occupational apartheid. Occupational therapists work with individuals to develop the skills needed to acquire desired occupational roles and satisfactorily perform everyday tasks. Occupational therapy practitioners can provide services through direct or indirect treatment, advocacy efforts, consultation, or group sessions. They may work with survivors of domestic violence and their families in a variety of settings such as hospitals, skilled nursing and rehabilitation centers, outpatient clinics, mental health facilities, schools, homes, and in shelters or other community programs. Within any of the practice settings, occupational therapists may encounter victims or survivors of domestic violence including individuals who have not reported abuse. Occupational therapists are in a position to uncover information that leads to suspicion of violence or identification of abuse that has occurred. As health care professionals, occupational therapists follow state mandated requirements to report abuse. They may provide specialized treatment for individuals who have:
Domestic violence survivors have experienced trauma and abuse leading to a loss of empowerment and poor self-worth. These consequences of domestic violence may impact the ability to perform occupations. Occupational therapy contributes to recovery by enabling survivors to create new roles, develop satisfying and productive routines, and gain the self-efficacy necessary to overcome the effects of domestic violence. Occupational therapy interventions for this population include:
|
Have moved the text here. These words "Sustained injuries or disabilities as a result of domestic violence, Chosen to remain in and rebuild a relationship in which abuse has occurred, or Decided to leave the abusive relationship and reconstruct their lives." Are exactly the same as this copyrighted work . Have not investigated the rest of it yet. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:58, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Other paraphrasing looks close " Domestic violence survivors have experienced ... a loss of empowerment and self-esteem." from Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:03, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for looking into this and helping out, Doc James. I saw that you had moved the content to the Management of domestic violence article, but then removed it. Flyer22 (talk) 02:19, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Yes needs to be more paraphrased before going live. And should be on the subpage IMO rather than here. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:59, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks to Doc James and Flyer22 for all of your help and feedback. We will make the necessary edits, contact the regular editors for the subpage you mention, and hopefully move this content there. SWhit2014 (talk) 17:38, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Yes needs to be more paraphrased before going live. And should be on the subpage IMO rather than here. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:59, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for looking into this and helping out, Doc James. I saw that you had moved the content to the Management of domestic violence article, but then removed it. Flyer22 (talk) 02:19, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Biased claims in the lede
I removed this from the lede: "Whereas women who experience domestic violence are openly encouraged to report it to the authorities, it has been argued that domestic violence against men is most often unreported because of social pressure against such reporting, with those that do facing social stigma regarding their perceived lack of machismo and other denigrations of their masculinity."
- "Whereas women who experience domestic violence are openly encouraged to report" does not reflect a global point of view. Women may be openly encouraged to report DV in some Western countries, but they certainly are not in most parts of the world. In some parts of the world women can't even legally leave the home without their male guardian (who is often their abuser).
The paragraph was biased and inappropriate for the lede, at least in its current form.2A02:2F0A:508F:FFFF:0:0:5679:C3C8 (talk) 14:34, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Feel free to adjust the wording rather than remove. Governement of Canada is a decent source Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:16, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not sure exactly how it should be adjusted, but the paragraph can't stay in its current form (IMO). The source suggested above by Doc James (talk · contribs · email) - deals primarily with Canada and the US, so it's not very useful for the issue of global context, which is the problem here. Not to say that the document is merely the opinion of its authors: the document itself reads (on the last page):: "Intimate Partner Abuse against Men was prepared by Dr. Eugen Lupri and Dr. Elaine Grandin for the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence. (...) The opinions expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence, Public Health Agency of Canada" so WP:UNDUE must be taken into account if this source is used. 2A02:2F0A:508F:FFFF:0:0:5679:C3C8 (talk) 15:43, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
- Cage, Anthea (2007). "Occupational therapy with women and children survivors of domestic violence: Are we fulfilling our activist heritage? A review of the literature". The British Journal of Occupational Therapy. 70(5): 192-198.
- ^ Javaherian, H., Krabacher, V., Andriacco, K., & German, D. (2007). "Surviving domestic violence: Rebuilding one's life". Occupational therapy in health care. 22(1): 35-59.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Javaherian, H. A., Underwood, R. T., & DeLany, J. V. (2007). "Occupational therapy services for individuals who have experienced domestic violence (statement)". American journal of occupational therapy. 61(6): 704-709.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - Gorde, M. W., Helfrich, C. A., & Finlayson, M. L. (2004). "Trauma Symptoms and Life Skill Needs of Domestic Violence Victims". Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 19(6): 691-708.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class psychology articles
- Mid-importance psychology articles
- WikiProject Psychology articles
- B-Class Crime-related articles
- High-importance Crime-related articles
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- B-Class sociology articles
- Mid-importance sociology articles
- B-Class Systems articles
- Mid-importance Systems articles
- Systems articles in systems psychology
- WikiProject Systems articles
- B-Class Feminism articles
- High-importance Feminism articles
- WikiProject Feminism articles
- B-Class medicine articles
- Mid-importance medicine articles
- All WikiProject Medicine pages