UW News

August 8, 2002

Long-term protection orders effective

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is an all-too frequent occurrence in the United States, with an estimated 1.5 million women experiencing 5 million physical or sexual assaults at the hands of their intimate partners annually. Civil protection orders are considered a means of protecting women from future acts of violence, but how effective are they?

In the first large-scale study of the effectiveness of protection orders, researchers at the Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center found that having a permanent protection order (one lasting at least 12 months) is associated with an 80 percent reduction in police-reported physical violence during the first year after an IPV incident. Women with temporary protection orders, however, were more likely to have experienced psychological abuse reported to the police and equally likely to have experienced physical abuse as women without any protection order at all.

“Civil Protection Orders and Risk of Subsequent Police-Reported Violence” appears in the Aug. 7 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. Dr. Victoria Holt, UW professor of epidemiology, and Dr. Mary Kernic, UW assistant professor of epidemiology, are the study’s primary investigators. Both are faculty members in the School of Public Health and Community Medicine.

The researchers collected data for all 2,691 female residents of Seattle who had police-reported episodes of IPV inflicted by a current or former male partner between Aug. 1, 1998 and Dec. 31, 1999. Using police reports, the researchers categorized IPV incidents as involving either physical abuse (assault, reckless endangerment or unlawful imprisonment) or psychological abuse (harassment, menacing, stalking, threats, criminal trespass, property damage).

In King County, residents can first apply for an emergency temporary protection order (lasting two weeks). A commissioner or judge then determines if a permanent protection order (usually lasting 12 months) should be issued. Women in the study — including those who did and did not obtain protection orders — were similar in terms of age, pregnancy status, and IPV history.

The research is the first study of protection-order effectiveness to use data from a large population of women in a major U.S. city. The study was based entirely on Seattle Police Department records, as opposed to personal interviews with subjects.

“Although approximately 20 percent of U.S. women who experience intimate partner violence obtain protection orders, we knew little about their effectiveness in preventing a recurrence of abuse,” Holt explained. “It’s been suggested that protection orders may in fact aggravate violence in certain conditions.

“We found that permanent, but not temporary, protection orders are associated with a significant decrease in the risk of police-reported violence against women by their male partners.”


  • addition to Holt and Kernic, the investigators were Dr. Thomas Lumley, UW assistant professor of biostatistics; Dr. Marsha Wolf, formerly of the Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center; and Dr. Fred Rivara, UW professor of pediatrics and adjunct professor of epidemiology