Families under Confinement: COVID-19, Domestic Violence, and Alcohol Consumption

Silverio-Murillo, Adán; JRBdl, Miyar; Hoehn‐Velasco, Lauren

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3688384

Cited by 57 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(For more on crime rates during COVID-19, see also Stickle & Felson, 2020.) While variables and case types may differ across reports, greater attention may be needed on the source of the report—police versus hotline data—than has been available in the U.S., which is an area now being explored by Silverio-Murillo and colleagues (2020) in Mexico City.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…al., 2020; Sediri et. al., 2020; Sharma & Borah, 2020; Stickle & Felson, 2020), as well as forthcoming and working papers (Bullinger, Carr, & Packham, 2020; Davis, Gilbar, & Padilla-Medina, 2020; Leslie & Wilson, 2020; Ravindran & Shah, 2020; Silverio-Murillo, Balmori de la Miyar, & Hoehn-Velasco, 2020). The author is indebted to these scholars for their important contributions in the wake of this study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

When “Shelter-in-Place” Isn’t Shelter That’s Safe: A Rapid Analysis of Domestic Violence Case Differences During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Stay-at-Home Orders

McLay

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: This study explored the COVID-19 pandemic's impacts on domestic violence (DV) with the following research questions: 1) Did DV occurring during the pandemic differ on certain variables from cases occurring on a typical day the previous year? 2) Did DV occurring after the implementation of shelter-in-place orders differ (on these same variables) from cases occurring prior to shelter-in-place orders? Methods: Two logistic regression models were developed to predict DV case differences before and during the pandemic. DV reports (N=4618) were collected from the Chicago Police Department. Cases from March 2019 and March 2020 were analyzed based on multiple variables. One model was set to predict case differences since the pandemic began, and another model was set to predict case differences during the shelter-in-place period later that month. Results: Both models were significant with multiple significant predictors. During the pandemic period, cases with arrests were 3% less likely to have occurred, and cases at residential locations were 22% more likely to have occurred. During the shelter-in-place period, cases at residential locations were 64% more likely to have occurred, and cases with child victims were 67% less likely to have occurred. Conclusions: This study offers a rapid analysis of DV case differences since the pandemic and shelter-in-place began. Additional variables and data sources could improve model explanatory power. Research, policy, and practice in this area must pivot to focus on protecting children whose access to mandated reporters has decreased and moving victims out of dangerous living situations into safe spaces.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

When “Shelter-in-Place” Isn’t Shelter That’s Safe: A Rapid Analysis of Domestic Violence Case Differences During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Stay-at-Home Orders

McLay

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The literature shows an increase in the rate of domestic violence calls for service during the lockdowns for a diverse set of countries.4 However, some of the studies that find an increase in the number of calls to DV-services also show a decrease in DV crime reports rates during the pandemic (Miller et al, 2020;Bullinger et al, 2020;Silverio-Murillo et al, 2020).5 We contribute to this literature with a novel measure of DV incidence that complements the existing one by allowing to monitor cross-country DV-incidence in real-time and with less issues of under-reporting.6 data from a Facebook survey in Spain, and Perez-Vincent et al (2020) that conducted a victimization survey in Argentina right after the lockdown.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 Leslie and Wilson (2020) and Sanga and McCrary (2020) for US cities, Agüero (2020) for Peru, Perez-Vincent et al (2020) for Argentina, Beigelman and Castelló (2020) for Spain, Ravindran et al (2020) for India, Miller et al (2020) for Los Angeles, Bullinger et al (2020) for Chicago, Silverio-Murillo et al (2020) for Mexico City and Ivandic et al (2020) for Greater London.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 lockdown and domestic violence: Evidence from internet-search behavior in 11 countries

Berniell

Facchini

2021

European Economic Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence from Internet-Search Behavior in 11 Countries* * *We are grateful to Sonia Bhalotra and Renata Cuk for helpful discussion. We thank Alejo Isacch and Julián Pedrazzi for excellent research assistance. Facchini gratefully acknowledges financial support from the General Secretariat for Research-Government of Catalonia (SGR2017-1301) and the Spanish Ministry of Education (PID2019-104619RB-C43). Views expressed here do not necessarily correspond to those of our affiliations.

show abstract

“…D A comment on gender-based violence in South Africa during Interestingly, while many other countries observed spikes in gender-based violence (GBV) during COVID-19 lockdown periods (Agüero, 2020;Anderberg et al, 2020;Boserup et al, 2020;Bullinger et al, 2020;Leslie and Wilson, 2020;Mahmud and Riley, 2020;Perez-Vincent et al, 2020;Ravindran and Shah, 2020;Silverio-Murillo et al, 2020), the emerging evidence from telephonic reporting and counselling services, as well as police data, suggests that there was no such increase in GBV during the lockdown in South Africa (Gould, 2020). This is in spite of the fact that the South African lockdown (Level 5 + Level 4) was one of the strictest worldwide and lasted for 66 days.…”

Section: C21 Comparison Of 2020 With 2019mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alcohol and Short-Run Mortality: Evidence from a Modern-Day Prohibition

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On July 13, 2020 a complete nationwide ban was placed on the sale and transport of alcohol in South Africa. This paper evaluates the impact of this sudden and unexpected fiveweek alcohol prohibition on mortality due to unnatural causes. We find that the policy reduced the number of unnatural deaths by 21 per day, or approximately 740 over the five-week period. This constitutes a 14% decrease in the total number of deaths due to unnatural causes. We argue that this represents a lower bound on the impact of alcohol on short-run mortality, and underscores the severe influence that alcohol has on society-even in the short-run.

show abstract

Families under Confinement: COVID-19, Domestic Violence, and Alcohol Consumption

Cited by 57 publications

References 29 publications

When “Shelter-in-Place” Isn’t Shelter That’s Safe: A Rapid Analysis of Domestic Violence Case Differences During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Stay-at-Home Orders

When “Shelter-in-Place” Isn’t Shelter That’s Safe: A Rapid Analysis of Domestic Violence Case Differences During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Stay-at-Home Orders

COVID-19 lockdown and domestic violence: Evidence from internet-search behavior in 11 countries

Alcohol and Short-Run Mortality: Evidence from a Modern-Day Prohibition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About