Police-reported violence among same-sex intimate partners in Canada, 2009 to 2017

Intimate partner violence is a serious issue which continues to negatively affect victims long after the abuse has ended (McGarry et al. 2017; Campbell et al. 2002). This complex issue, broadly, involves physical, sexual, emotional and financial abuse, between current and former partners (Northcott 2012; Coker et al. 2002). While, presently, there are no legislated offences in the Canadian Criminal Code specifically related to intimate partner violence, Criminal Code offences of general application, such as physical and sexual assault, criminalize intimate partner violence. There are Criminal Code provisions which consider the fact that an offender abused their intimate partner an aggravating factor for sentencing purposes (Heslop et al. 2016).

Even with ample tools, programs and policies at the national, provincial and community levels dedicated to reducing and preventing intimate partner violence in Canada (McCormick and Irwin 2016; Gill and Fitch 2016; Hilton and Eke 2016; Beaupré 2015; Benoit et al. 2014; Northcott 2012), there remains much to be done in the area. In particular, while many studies (Simpson 2018; Calton et al. 2016; Parry and O’Neal 2015; Perreault 2015; Sinha 2013; Beauchamp 2004) have shown that people who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual are at increased risk for victimization in general, there is little quantitative research on the extent and nature of violence which takes place within same-sex intimate relationships in Canada (Langenderfer-Magruder et al. 2016; Ristock 2011). Related studies suggest that individuals in same-sex partnerships who experience intimate partner violence may face special barriers when it comes to disclosing their experiences or seeking help. For example, the threat of exposing one’s sexual orientation to others and fears about other people’s misguided beliefs that abuse among same-sex partners is mutual have been identified as obstacles which are often unique to victims in same-sex relationships. Moreover, individuals who are in same-sex intimate partnerships are vulnerable to “minority stress”, the psychological pressure from being a member of a minority group that is stigmatized or marginalized. Additionally, previous negative experiences such as discrimination and harassment, and perceptions or anticipation of stigma and negative stereotypes—all of which are particularly prevalent among individuals in same-sex partnerships—may lead to beliefs that these experiences will occur in various other facets of life (Calton et al. 2016; Baker et al. 2015; Edwards et al. 2015; Parry and O’Neal 2015; Benoit et al. 2014; Overstreet and Quinn 2013; Brown 2008; Rostosky et al. 2007). All these factors can reduce the reporting of violence to police and help-seeking among this share of the population.

This Juristat article aims to help shed light on the nature of violence which is experienced within same-sex intimate partnerships. Using data from the Incident-based Uniform Crime Reporting Survey, this article will examine, for the first time, the characteristics of police-reported violence among same-sex intimate partners in Canada. In order to increase the scope of analysis and allow for a more detailed examination of incident, victim and accused characteristics, data from 2009 to 2017 are pooled.^Note 

In addition, data from the most recent (2014) General Social Survey on Canadians’ Safety (Victimization) is included in order to examine the self-reported experiences of various forms of intimate partner violence whether it was reported to the police or not (Text box 3).

While the focus of this article is violence among individuals in same-sex relationships, information on gender-diverse individuals is not included (see Text box 1). Research has shown that people who identify as transgender or non-gender conforming are especially vulnerable to violence in general, as well as violence within an intimate partner setting (Langenderfer-Magruder et al. 2016; Mitchell-Brody et al. 2010; Stotzer 2009). However, the data sources used in this article do not allow for the examination of the experiences of individuals belonging to this segment of the population.^Note 

In this article, intimate partner violence is often abbreviated as IPV.

Start of text box 1

End of text box 1

Decline in police-reported same-sex intimate partner violence between 2009 and 2017

Each year between 2009 and 2017, more than 2,300 incidents of intimate partner violence (IPV) involving same-sex partners were reported by police in Canada (Chart 1; Table 1). Over this nine-year period, there were a total of 22,323 incidents of same-sex IPV, representing about 3% of all police-reported IPV incidents reported during this time. Of note, current same-sex spouses (current married and common-law partners only) represented approximately 3% of police-reported spousal violence—that is, violence involving current married and common-law same-sex and opposite-sex partners. This is higher than the share of couples in Canada who were in same-sex spousal partnerships (1%) (see Text box 2).^Note 

Recent research has noted that, in some incidents of violence among same-sex partners which are reported to police, the true intimate nature of the relationship between the victim and the accused may not have been disclosed to the police. Reluctance to report the actual relationship to the police may be due to victims’ fear of hostility or belief that the police may not take the crime seriously (Israel et al. 2016). As a result, the number of police-reported same-sex IPV incidents is likely an under estimation of the true magnitude of IPV among this population group.

Consistent with recent trend analysis of rates of intimate partner violence in Canada (Burczycka et al. 2018), the number of police-reported same-sex IPV incidents declined by 11% between 2009 and 2017 and was fairly consistent for both male and female victims (-10% and -12%, respectively). The decline among opposite-sex intimate partners, however, was of a smaller amount (-6%).

Start of text box 2

End of text box 2

More than half of police-reported same-sex IPV is between males

More than half (55%) of incidents of police-reported same-sex intimate partner violence between 2009 and 2017 involved a male victim and a male accused. Close to 10,000 incidents (or 45%) of same-sex IPV involved female partners. Said differently, accused persons in police-reported same-sex IPV are more than twice as likely to be female (45%) when compared to incidents involving opposite-sex partners, where 18% of those accused are female. This in part, however, may be attributable to the fact that, in the general population, male victims are less likely than female victims to report incidents of partner violence to police (Straus 2014; Felson et al. 2002).

Female victims of police-reported same-sex IPV generally younger

Victims of police-reported intimate partner violence in same-sex relationships were often adults between the ages of 18 and 44. About three-quarters of both female victims (77%) and male victims (72%) of same-sex IPV were within this age range (Table 2).^Note  However, there were more female victims of same-sex IPV than male victims under the age of 18 (8% compared to 4% among male victims). The median age of female victims of same-sex IPV was 29, while for male victims it was slightly higher, with a median age of 33 years.

Overall, similar to incidents involving opposite-sex partners, same-sex IPV often involved partners who were close in age. According to police-reported data, among both males and females, the majority (69% among males and 78% among females) of same-sex IPV incidents involved partners whose age difference was 10 years or less.^Note  Therefore, the overall age distribution of persons accused of same-sex IPV was generally similar to the victims. The median age for accused females in same-sex IPV incidents was 29, and for males accused the median age was 31.

Overall, victims and persons accused of police-reported incidents of same-sex IPV were proportionately slightly younger than those involved in opposite-sex IPV. However, this may be reflective of the fact that in the Canadian population overall, people who report being in same-sex unions tend to be younger (at least when it comes to spousal relationships, for which Census data are available), and younger people, in general, are at increased risk for violent victimization, even after taking other risk factors such as sex and history of drug or alcohol use into account (Perreault 2015).

Same-sex IPV more common among boyfriends and girlfriends

More than half (55%) of police-reported incidents of IPV within same-sex partnerships involved boyfriends and girlfriends (current and former), and nearly four in ten (38%) involved spousal relationships. About one in twelve (8%) incidents involved same-sex partners in other intimate relationships.^{Note Note Note} 

In comparison, among opposite-sex intimate partners, just over half (51%) of incidents of IPV involved those in boyfriend and girlfriend relationships, 48% involved spouses and 1% involved other intimate relationships.^Note  Violence among same-sex boyfriends and girlfriends was more common for females than males, while males were more likely to experience violence in other intimate relationships (Chart 2).

More than half (58%) of incidents of same-sex IPV were between partners who were in a current relationship, while about one in three (34%) incidents involved former partners. Among opposite-sex partners, 68% of incidents of police-reported IPV involved current relationships.

Major assault more common among male same-sex partners

The types of violence reported among same-sex partners remained consistent between 2009 and 2017. Physical assault, the most commonly reported form of violence in general, accounted for the majority of all incidents of same-sex IPV reported by police.^Note  Over the nine-year period, three out of four incidents of same-sex IPV reported by both women (77%) and men (78%) were physical assault—which includes common, major and other assaults (Table 3). While the majority of these incidents were common (level 1) assault, the least serious form of assault, for both female and male same-sex partners, the proportion was larger among females (64% of all female same-sex IPV incidents compared to 59% among males).^Note  Instead, males were more likely to have reported major assault incidents (18% versus 12%), the more serious forms of assault (levels 2 and 3).^Note  This was consistent with previous findings of major assault being more common among male victims, especially in family-related incidents of violence (Burczycka and Conroy 2018; Burczycka and Ibrahim 2016).

Uttering threats was the second most commonly reported offence in incidents involving both female and male same-sex IPV. This type of offence accounted for 9% and 12%, respectively, of same-sex IPV incidents reported among females and males. Females were slightly more likely than males to have reported criminal harassment (8% versus 5%), or indecent or harassing communications (3% versus 1%).^Note 

Types of crime committed by males and females in same-sex relationships different from those by their opposite-sex counterparts

When the type of violence in same-sex IPV incidents is compared with incidents involving opposite-sex partners, differences were noted. For example, while common assault was the most frequently reported type of offence in both same-sex and opposite-sex IPV incidents, males accused in same-sex intimate partner incidents (59%) were somewhat less likely to have committed this offence than males accused in opposite-sex incidents (63%). Major assault (18%) and uttering threats (12%) were more common among same-sex males accused than opposite-sex males accused (12% and 8%, respectively).

The types of offences involving females accused also differed between those in same-sex and those in opposite-sex partnerships, but to a lesser extent. Specifically, females accused of same-sex IPV did not commit the same types of crime as females accused of opposite-sex IPV. For example, females accused of same-sex IPV were less likely than females accused of opposite-sex IPV to have been involved in a major assault (12% versus 22%), but were almost twice as likely to have been accused of uttering threats (9% compared to 5% among opposite-sex females accused) or criminally harassing their partner (8% compared to 4%).

Start of text box 3

End of text box 3

Weapons use in same-sex IPV incidents more common among males

Overall, the use of a weapon such as a firearm or a knife was relatively uncommon in incidents of police-reported same-sex IPV. Incidents where such weapons were present more often involved male same-sex partners (17%, compared to 12% among female same-sex partners) (Table 4).^Note  Instead of weapons, similar to opposite-sex incidents, physical force was used in the majority of IPV incidents involving same-sex partners (reported among 70% of same-sex incidents involving female partners and 68% for male partners).^Note  It is worth noting that, overall when it comes to IPV, weapons were most often present in incidents involving females accused in opposite-sex relationships (24%) (Table 5). Research to date has noted that this may be due to women’s need to compensate for their lack of physical strength in comparison to their male partner (Poon et al. 2014).

More than 11,000 incidents, or almost half (49%), of same-sex IPV reported by police between 2009 and 2017 involved the victim suffering physical injuries.^Note  This proportion was slightly lower than among incidents involving opposite-sex IPV partners (54%). However, similar to opposite-sex IPV, the vast majority (95%) of these incidents resulted in the victims experiencing minor physical injuries which did not require professional medical treatment.^Note  Incidents which led to major physical injuries or death accounted for 2% of same-sex IPV, the same proportion as those involving opposite-sex partners.

Most police-reported IPV incidents come to attention of police on the same day as they occur

Similar to opposite-sex IPV, the vast majority (87%) of police-reported IPV incidents involving same-sex partners came to the attention of police on the same day that they happened.^Note  While there were some delays in reporting IPV incidents to police among same-sex partners, close to none of the incidents were reported more than three-months after the incident had occurred (1% among males and females). Similarly, 1% of male victims of opposite-sex IPV and 2% of female victims had a delay in reporting of more than three months.

Delay in reporting same-sex IPV to the police most often involved sexual offences. In particular, about one in five (19%) incidents of same-sex sexual offences reported between 2009 and 2017 came to the attention of police more than three months after the incident had occurred (see Text box 4).^Note  Although a delay of reporting opposite-sex IPV to police also most often involved sexual offences, the proportion among this group was slightly lower (13% of opposite-sex sexual offences were reported to police more than three months after the incident).

Charges less commonly laid in incidents of IPV involving same-sex partners

An incident is considered to be cleared when a charge is laid or recommended against an accused, or when it is dealt with by other means (for example through referral of the accused to a diversionary program).^Note  Between 2009 and 2017, most incidents of police-reported IPV among both same-sex and opposite-sex partners resulted in the laying or recommendation of a charge. However, clearance by charge remained consistently less common in IPV incidents involving same-sex partners than among those involving opposite-sex partners (Chart 3).

On average, over the nine-year period, approximately 68% of same-sex IPV incidents involving male partners resulted in the laying of or recommendation for a charge, compared to 84% of opposite-sex incidents involving males accused (Table 6). Similarly, 61% of females accused in same-sex incidents were charged or recommended for a charge, compared to 71% of females in opposite-sex partnerships. Differences in the proportions of those charged or recommended for a charge by same- or opposite-sex status were in large part attributed to partners requesting that no further action be taken against the accused. In about one-fifth of police-reported same-sex IPV incidents involving males (19%), and about as many involving females (21%), the victims requested that no further action be taken against their partners.^Note  This compared to 7% and 12%, respectively, of opposite-sex IPV incidents involving males and females accused.

There are many factors which may impact a victims’ decision to proceed with charges in cases of intimate partner violence after they’ve been reported to police. Among some of the factors suggested by researchers as being possible explanation for, or having an impact on victims’ reluctance to proceed are: victims’ fear of retaliation by the perpetrator; victim’s emotional or financial reliance on the perpetrator; victim’s view that the crime was unintentional or not significant enough to warrant prosecution; victims’ prior negative experiences with the justice system; initial use of prosecution as a means of leverage or threat (Murphy et al. 2014; Fleury-Steiner et al. 2006; Hare 2006; Spohn et al. 2001). However, the extent to which these factors impact decision-making among victims of same-sex IPV is not known.

Females accused of same-sex IPV see largest increase in charge rates

While overall there has been an increase in the proportions of individuals accused of IPV being charged or recommended for a charge between 2009 and 2017, the largest increase (25%) was observed among females accused in relation to incidents of same-sex IPV (from 54% in 2009 to 67% in 2017). In comparison, increases to lesser degrees were observed for males charged or recommended for charges relating to same-sex IPV (+6%) and opposite-sex IPV (+5%), as well as for females involved in opposite-sex IPV (+2%).

There are many factors which go into the decision by police to lay or recommend charges. Among these factors are: the nature of the violent incident, the characteristics of the accused individual including their sex, and the nature of the relationship between the victim and the accused (Dawson and Hotton 2014).

Start of text box 4

End of text box 4

Same-sex incidents account for larger proportions of IPV in the regions of Ontario and Quebec

Between 2009 and 2017, Ontario (4.3%) and Quebec (4.2%) had larger proportions of police-reported intimate partner violence involving same-sex partners relative to other provinces and territories (Chart 4; Table 7). The Atlantic region also had a proportion of same-sex IPV which was larger than the national proportion (3.7%), and this was driven by the number of incidents reported in Newfoundland and Labrador. Specifically, although Newfoundland and Labrador accounted for 1% of the IPV incidents reported in Canada,^Note  incidents involving same-sex partners accounted for 5.1% of the incidents reported in the province—the largest provincial proportion in the country.

Over the nine-year period covered in this study, the share of police-reported IPV incidents involving same-sex partners was almost the same for urban and rural areas (3.4% and 3.5%, respectively) (Table 8).^Note  While IPV in some cities accounted for relatively small proportions of the overall IPV in the country over the nine-year period, the proportions of incidents that involved same-sex intimate partners in many cities were larger than the national level (3.4%). For example, same-sex IPV made up 11.6% of all IPV in the census metropolitan area (CMA) of St. John’s, followed by 7.0% in Trois-Rivières and 6.7% in Barrie, however, in all three cases total IPV (same-sex and opposite-sex IPV combined) accounted for relatively small proportions (less than 0.5% each) of the overall national number reported by police.

Proportion of same-sex spousal violence lower in Ottawa and Vancouver

Data from the census show that although same-sex couples in marriages and common-law relationships tend to live in larger cities, increasingly, more people living in smaller cities are reporting being in same-sex couples (Statistics Canada 2016b). Looking specifically at spousal violence,^Note  the proportions of same-sex spousal violence incidents were consistent with the shares of same-sex spouses within the largest Canadian cities.^Note  However, there were a couple of exceptions to this: While the proportion of same-sex spouses in Ottawa was slightly larger than the national proportion (1.3% versus 0.9%), same-sex spousal violence accounted for a smaller proportion than the national share (1.9% versus 2.5%) (Chart 5). Similarly, despite having a slightly larger share of same-sex spouses (1.2%) compared to the national share, Vancouver had a proportion of same-sex spousal violence that was below the national level (1.6%).

While geographical differences in the shares of police-reported same-sex IPV may give some insight to the prevalence of this type of crime in these areas, research suggests that factors such as provincial policies and availability of programs and resources can lead to geographical differences in reporting of IPV to police (Dawson and Hotton 2014). Furthermore, these differences may be reflective of the nature of the relationship between local police and residents, and the willingness of individuals in same-sex relationships to report incidents of violence that are intimate in nature. Of note, Simpson (2018) found that individuals who self-identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual were generally less likely to state that they believe their local police treat people fairly.^Note 

Same-sex IPV victims in rural areas most likely to request that no further action be taken against partner

Research has shown that there are characteristics of rural and urban communities which create disparities in the experiences of people living in these areas. For example, studies have shown that social isolation among sexual minorities is more common in rural communities, due to limited access to resources and services for information and support, conservative attitudes or negative perceptions towards sexual minorities, and reduced anonymity (Logie and Lys 2015; Poon and Saewyc 2009; Riddell et al. 2009). These elements may put individuals with same-sex partners living in rural communities at increased risk for being stigmatized and victimized, and may contribute to relationship violence (Ristock 2011; Ristock and Timbang 2005). Therefore, understanding the experiences of individuals living in smaller communities and how these experiences differ from those of people living in urban areas may provide insights on the specific needs of different communities.

Police-reported data show that, overall, the amount of time it took to report an IPV incident to police among same- and opposite-sex partners was similar for rural and urban areas.^Note Note  However, the findings differed when it came to whether or not charges were laid or recommended against the accused. About half (51%) of same-sex IPV incidents reported in rural areas were cleared by the laying or recommendation of charges, compared to 70% reported in urban areas (Chart 6). The other half (49%) of same-sex IPV incidents reported in rural areas were cleared otherwise, largely attributed to victims requesting that no further action be taken against the accused. Victims of same-sex IPV living in rural areas were more than twice as likely as those in urban areas to request that no further action be taken by the police against their accused (35% versus 15%).

Differences in charge rates between urban and rural areas where the IPV incident involved same-sex partners were consistent with findings for those involving opposite-sex partners. However, incidents resulting in the laying of or recommendation for charges were more common among opposite-sex partners. More precisely, the majority of opposite-sex IPV incidents reported in rural (78%) and urban (83%) areas resulted in charges. The number of victims of opposite-sex IPV who requested that no further action be taken against their accused was half that of victims of same-sex IPV (14% of opposite-sex victims in rural areas and 6% in urban areas).

Males in urban areas most likely to be charged in same-sex IPV incidents

Among individuals accused of same-sex IPV, males in urban areas were the most likely to have been charged, followed by females accused in urban areas (73% and 65%, respectively). Much lower but equal proportions of males and females accused of same-sex IPV in rural areas were charged (51% each). These differences were driven by the number of victims requesting that no further action be taken against their accused. Specifically, in more than one in three same-sex IPV incidents involving males (36%) and females (34%) in rural areas, the victim requested that no further action be taken against the accused, compared to 13% and 16%, respectively, of male and female victims in urban areas.

Current same-sex partners more likely to be charged

Clearance status in incidents of same-sex IPV differed by relationship type, and the findings were consistent for those living in rural and urban areas. More specifically, charges were more often laid (or recommended) when same-sex partners were in current relationships: 56% of current boyfriends or girlfriends and 52% of current spouses accused of same-sex IPV in rural areas were cleared by charge (Chart 7).^Note  In rural areas, same-sex individuals in these relationships were the least likely to request that no further actions be taken against their partners (34% and 31%, respectively). This pattern also occurred among same-sex individuals living in urban areas, though as previously stated, the proportions were higher in urban areas.^Note 

It is worth mentioning that across Canada, all police jurisdictions have supported a pro-charging policy on intimate partner violence. However, there are differences across police services with regard to the share of cases being cleared by the laying or recommendation of a charge (Dawson and Hotton 2014).

Same-sex intimate partner homicides more common among men

Statistics Canada, through the Homicide Survey, collects information annually on all homicides in Canada.^Note  Between 2009 and 2017, there were a total of 760 homicides involving intimate partners in Canada. Of these, 5% (or 36 homicides) involved same-sex intimate partners (Table 9).^Note Note  However, to allow for a more detailed analysis of homicides involving same-sex intimate partners, data from 1998 to 2017 have been combined.

Of the 1,786 homicides involving intimate partners reported by police between 1998 and 2017, those involving same-sex intimate partners accounted for approximately 4% (or 73 homicides).

Similar to incidents involving opposite-sex partners, the vast majority (86%) of same-sex intimate partner homicides over the 20-year period studied involved male offenders. In more than half (59%) of the cases, the incident involved an accused individual between the ages of 25 and 44, similar to opposite-sex intimate partner homicides.

Current boyfriends and girlfriends make up largest share of same-sex intimate partner homicides

The majority of opposite-sex intimate partner homicides reported between 1998 and 2017 tended to involve current spouses (61%), however, this was not the case for homicides involving same-sex intimate partners. Specifically, of the 73 same-sex partner homicides reported during the same time period, about one-quarter (26%) involved current spouses. Instead, a larger proportion of same-sex intimate partner homicides involved current boyfriends and girlfriends (38%) and other same-sex intimate partners made up 29%. In comparison, 11% of opposite-sex intimate partner homicides involved current boyfriends and girlfriend and 3% involved other intimate partners.^Note  As with other kinds of violent crime, however, these differences may be in part attributable to the fact that individuals in same-sex partnerships are more likely to be younger and in boyfriend, girlfriend or other intimate relationships.

Because intimate partner homicides occur within complex interpersonal contexts that often involve a history of violence (Burczycka et al. 2018), understanding some of the motives behind these homicides are important for violence prevention policy. The most common police-reported apparent motives in same-sex intimate partner homicides were: an argument or quarrel (40%) and frustration, anger or despair (19%). In comparison, these motives were reported in 37% and 26%, respectively, of homicides involving opposite-sex intimate partners. Jealousy was a motive in 12% of same-sex intimate partner homicides and 20% of opposite-sex intimate partner homicides.

Summary

Uncertainties about homophobic reactions, preconceived stigma, concerns over self-disclosure, minority stress and beliefs that police will be biased are just some of the factors which impact whether a victim of same-sex intimate partner violence will report the incident to police or seek help from others. While there have been several studies conducted on the victimization experiences of individuals who identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual, little is known about the nature of violent crime that occurs within same-sex intimate relationships in Canada. Broadening the scope of research in the area of intimate partner violence is crucial in order to allow for more gender-inclusive perspectives in developing prevention programs.

Over a nine-year study period, about 3% of police-reported incidents of intimate partner violence involved same-sex partners. The characteristics of these same-sex IPV incidents revealed that those involving male same-sex partners were more likely to be classified as a major assault and involve the presence of weapons. The laying or recommendation of charges was less common among same-sex partners than opposite-sex partners. In particular, same-sex IPV reported in rural areas were less likely to result in the laying or recommendation of charges against the accused, in large part attributable to the request of victims that no further actions be taken against their accused.

While the current study provides statistics that inform conversations on violence among intimate partners belonging to a vulnerable segment of the population, limitations of the data sources used indicate that there is need for further research into this issue. For example, new approaches to data collection should allow for an expansion of the analysis to include individuals with diverse gender identities or expressions, for example those who identify as gender non-binary; attention should also be drawn to those who may experience multiple minority stress factors such as being a visible minority member of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender population. Future studies could also benefit from analysis of self-reported data which may inform the factors which impact reporting of criminal incidents to police, decisions regarding proceeding with criminal charges, and help-seeking efforts among people with diverse genders or sexual orientations. These elements, together with an assessment of the availability and effectiveness of current services, programs and policies available for individuals with different genders or in various types of sexual partnerships, would give a more complete picture of the unfulfilled needs of members of this population who may be especially vulnerable.

Detailed data tables

Table 1 Incidents of police-reported intimate partner violence in Canada, by sex of victim, and same-/opposite-sex status, 2009 to 2017

Table 2 Incidents of police-reported same-sex intimate partner violence in Canada, by sex and age group of victim and accused, 2009 to 2017

Table 3 Persons accused of police-reported intimate partner violence, by sex of the accused, same-/opposite-sex status and type of offence, Canada, 2009 to 2017

Table 4 Incidents of police-reported same-sex intimate partner violence in Canada, by sex of accused, type of weapon present, and level of injury, 2009 to 2017

Table 5 Incidents of police-reported opposite-sex intimate partner violence in Canada, by sex of accused, type of weapon present, and level of injury, 2009 to 2017

Table 6 Incidents of police-reported intimate partner violence in Canada, by sex of accused, clearance status, and same-/opposite-sex status, 2009 to 2017

Table 7 Incidents of police-reported intimate partner violence in Canada, by sex of victim, same-/opposite-sex status and province or territory, 2009 to 2017

Table 8 Incidents of police-reported intimate partner violence in Canada, by same-/opposite-sex status, census metropolitan area and urban or rural police services, 2009 to 2017

Table 9 Intimate partner homicides in Canada, by same-/opposite-sex status, 1998 to 2017

Survey description

Uniform Crime Reporting Survey

This article uses the Incident-based Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Survey Trend Database to pool incidents of violence among same-sex intimate partners which came to the attention of, and were substantiated by Canadian police services between 2009 and 2017. This database contains all police services who have consistently responded to the UCR over the entire period of the file. As of 2009, the UCR trend file includes data reported by police services covering 99% of the population in Canada, while coverage was lower in previous years. In order to maintain the highest level of consistent coverage over time, analysis begins in 2009. The purpose of the Trend Database is to facilitate comparisons of incident, victim and accused characteristics over time.

One incident can involve multiple offences. In order to ensure comparability, counts are generally presented based upon the most serious offence in the incident as determined by standard classification rules used by all police services.

General Social Survey on Canadians' Safety (Victimization)

Self-reported information presented in this report is based on Cycle 28 of the General Social Survey (GSS) on Canadians’ Safety (Victimization) conducted in 2014. In 2014, Statistics Canada conducted the victimization cycle of the GSS for the sixth time.

The purpose of the survey is to provide data on Canadians’ personal experiences with eight offences, examine the risk factors associated with victimization, examine rates of reporting to the police, assess the nature and extent of spousal violence, measure fear of crime, and examine public perceptions of crime and the criminal justice system. The target population was persons aged 15 and older living in the Canadian provinces and territories.

Homicide Survey

The Homicide Survey collects police‑reported data on the characteristics of all homicide incidents, victims and accused persons in Canada. The Homicide Survey began collecting information on all murders in 1961 and was expanded in 1974 to include all incidents of manslaughter and infanticide. Although details on these incidents are not available prior to 1974, counts are available from the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Survey and are included in the historical aggregate totals.

Whenever a homicide becomes known to police, the investigating police service completes the survey questionnaires, which are then sent to Statistics Canada. There are cases where homicides become known to police months or years after they occurred. These incidents are counted in the year in which they become known to police (based on the report date). Information on persons accused of homicide are only available for solved incidents (i.e., where at least one accused has been identified). Accused characteristics are updated as homicide cases are solved and new information is submitted to the Homicide Survey. Information collected through the victim and incident questionnaires is also accordingly updated as a result of a case being solved.

Due to revisions to the Homicide Survey database, annual data reported by the Homicide Survey prior to 2017 may not match the annual homicide counts reported by the UCR. Data from the Homicide Survey are appended to the UCR database each year for the reporting of annual police reported crime statistics. Each reporting year, the UCR includes revised data reported by police for the previous survey year. In 2017, a review of data quality was undertaken for the Homicide Survey for all survey years prior to 2017. The review included the collection of incident, victim and charged/suspect‑chargeable records that were previously unreported to the Homicide Survey. In addition, the database excludes deaths, and associated accused records, which are not deemed as homicides by police any longer (i.e., occurrences of self-defence, suicide, criminal negligence causing death that had originally been deemed, but no longer considered homicides, by police). For operational reasons, these revisions were not applied to the UCR.

References

Baker, L., S. Young, A.-L. Straatman, M. Sfeir and N. Etherington. 2015. “Intimate partner violence in rainbow communities: A discussion paper informed by the learning network knowledge exchange—November 2014.” Centre for Research and Education on Violence Against Women and Children.

Beauchamp, D. 2004. “Sexual orientation and victimization.” Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics Profile Series. No. 16. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85F0033M.

Beaupré, P. 2015. “Cases in adult criminal courts involving intimate partner violence.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Benoit, C., L. Shumka., R. Phillips, M. C. Kennedy and L. Belle-Isle. 2014. Issue Brief: Sexual Violence Against Women in Canada.

Brown, C. 2008. "Gender-role implications on same-sex intimate partner abuse." Journal of Family Violence. Vol. 23, no. 6. p. 457-462.

Burczycka, M. and D. Ibrahim. 2016. “Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile, 2014.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Burczycka, M., S. Conroy and L. Savage. 2018. “Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile, 2017.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Burczycka, M. and S. Conroy. 2018. “Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile, 2016.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Calton, J. M., L. B., Cattaneo and K. T. Gebhard. 2016. "Barriers to help seeking for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer survivors of intimate partner violence." Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. Vol. 17, no. 5. p. 585-600.

Campbell, J., A. S. Jones, J. Dienemann, J. Kub, J. Schollenberger, P. O'campo, A. C. Gielen and C. Wynne. 2002. "Intimate partner violence and physical health consequences." Archives of Internal Medicine. Vol. 162, no. 10. p. 1157-1163.

Coker, A. L., K. E. Davis, I. Arias, S. Desai, M. Sanderson, H. M. Brandt and P. H. Smith. 2002. "Physical and mental health effects of intimate partner violence for men and women." American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Vol. 23, no. 4. p. 260-268.

Criminal Code. R.S.C., 1985, c.C-46.

Dawson, M. and T. Hotton. 2014. “Police charging practices for incidents of intimate partner violence in Canada.” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency. Vol. 51, no. 5. p. 655-683.

Edwards, K. M., K. M. Sylaska and A. M. Neal. 2015. "Intimate partner violence among sexual minority populations: A critical review of the literature and agenda for future research." Psychology of Violence. Vol. 5, no. 2. p. 112.

Felson, R.B., S. F. Messner, A. W. Hoskin and G. Deane. 2002. “Reasons for reporting and not reporting domestic violence to the police.” Criminology. Vol. 40, no. 3. p. 617-648.

Ferlatte, O., T. S. Hottes, T. Trussler and R. Marchand. 2017. "Disclosure of sexual orientation by gay and bisexual men in government-administered probability surveys." LGBT Health. Vol. 4, no. 1. p. 68-71.

Fleury‐Steiner, R. E., D. Bybee, C. M. Sullivan, J. Belknap and H. C. Melton. 2006. "Contextual factors impacting battered women's intentions to reuse the criminal legal system." Journal of Community Psychology. Vol. 34, no. 3. p. 327-342.

Gill, C. and L. Fitch. 2016. "568 Proactive community-policing responses to domestic and intimate partner violence (D/IPV) in Canada." Injury Prevention. Vol. 22, no. A204.

Hare, S. C. 2006. "What do battered women want? Victims' opinions on prosecution." Violence and Victims. Vol. 21, no. 5. p. 611.

Heslop, L., T. Kelly, R. David, K. . 2016. Programming Response for Intimate Partner Violence. Department of Justice Canada. Catalogue no. J2-444/2017W-PDF.

Hilton, N. Z. and A. W. Eke. 2016. "Non-specialization of criminal careers among intimate partner violence offenders." Criminal Justice and Behavior. Vol. 43, no. 10. p. 1347-1363.

Holtzman, S., L. Landis, Z. Walsh, E. Puterman, D. Roberts and K. Saya-Moore. 2016. "Predictors of HIV testing among men who have sex with men: A focus on men living outside major urban centres in Canada." AIDS Care. Vol. 28, no. 6. p. 705-711.

Hottes, T. S., O. Ferlatte, M. Gilbert, S. D. Cochran and V. M. Mays. 2015. "Misclassification and undersampling of sexual minorities in population surveys/Cochran and Mays respond." American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 105, no. 1. p. E5.

Israel, T., A. Harkness, T. R. Avellar, K. Delucio, J. N. Bettergarcia and J. A. Goodman. 2016. "LGBTQ-affirming policing: Tactics generated by law enforcement personnel." Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology. Vol. 31, no. 3. p. 173-181.

Langenderfer-Magruder, L., D. L. Whitfield, N. E. Walls, S. K. Kattari and D. Ramos. 2016. "Experiences of intimate partner violence and subsequent police reporting among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer adults in Colorado: Comparing rates of cisgender and transgender victimization." Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Vol. 31, no. 5. p. 855-871.

Logie, C. H. and C. Lys. 2015.“The process of developing a community-based research agenda with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer youth in the Northwest Territories, Canada.” International Journal of Circumpolar Health. Vol. 74, no. 1. p. 28188.

McCormick, A. V. and M. C. Irwin. 2016. "Intimate partner violence in Canada: Policies, practices, and prevalence." Domestic Violence in International Context. p. 42-62.

McGarry, J., P. Ali and S. Hinchliff. 2017. "Older women, intimate partner violence and mental health: A consideration of the particular issues for health and healthcare practice." Journal of Clinical Nursing. Vol. 26, no. 15-16. p. 2177-2191.

Mitchell-Brody, M., A. J. Ritchie, J. Finney, L. A. Gay, Lesbian Center, J. Lindo, Milwaukee LGBT Center, A. Skillman, Equality Michigan and R. Waggoner. 2010. National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs.

Murphy, S. B., K. M. Edwards, S. Bennett, S. J. Bibeau and J. Sichelstiel. 2014. "Police reporting practices for sexual assault cases in which “the victim does not wish to pursue charges." Journal of Interpersonal Violence. Vol. 29, no. 1. p. 144-156.

Northcott, M. 2012. Intimate Partner Violence Risk Assessment Tools: A Review. Department of Justice Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.

Overstreet, N. M. and D. M. Quinn. 2013. “The intimate partner violence stigmatization model and barriers to help seeking.” Basic and Applied Social Psychology. Vol. 35, no. 1. p. 109-122.

Parry, M. M. and E. N. O’Neal. 2015. “Help-seeking behaviour among same-sex intimate partner violence victims: An intersectional argument.” Criminology, Criminal Justice Law and Society. Vol. 16. p. 51.

Perreault, S. 2015. “Criminal victimization in Canada, 2014.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Poon, J., M. Dawson, M. Morton. 2014. “Factors increasing the likelihood of sole and dual charging of women for intimate partner violence.” Violence Against Women. Vol. 20, no. 12, p. 1447-1472.

Poon, C. S. and E. M. Saewyc. 2009. “Out yonder: Sexual-minority adolescents in rural communities in British Columbia.” Research and Practice: American Journal of Public Health. Vol. 99, no. 1. p. 118-124.

Riddell, T., M. Ford-Gilboe and B. Leipert. 2009. “Strategies used by rural women to stop, avoid, or escape from intimate partner violence.” Health Care for Women International. Vol. 30, no. 1-2. p. 134-159.

Ristock, J. L. 2011. Intimate Partner Violence in LGBTQ Lives. London. Routledge.

Ristock, J. L. and N. Timbang. 2005. “Relationship violence in lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer (LGBTQ) communities.” Violence Against Women Online Resources.

Rostosky, S. S., E. D. B. Riggle, B. E. Gray and R. L. Hatton. 2007. "Minority stress experiences in committed same-sex couple relationships." Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. Vol. 38, no. 4. p. 392.

Rotenberg, C. 2017. “Police-reported sexual assaults in Canada, 2009 to 2014: A statistical profile.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Simpson, L. 2018. “Violent victimization of lesbians, gays and bisexuals in Canada.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Sinha, M. 2013. “Measuring violence against women: Statistical trends.” Juristat. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 85‑002‑X.

Spohn, C., D. Beichner and E. Davis‑Frenzel. 2001. “Prosecutorial justifications for sexual assault case rejection: Guarding the ‘gateway to justice’.” Social Problems. Vol. 48, no. 2. p. 206‑235.

Statistics Canada. 2016a. Census of Population. Data Tables, 2016 Census. Catalogue no. 98-400-X.

Statistics Canada. 2016b. “Same-sex couples in Canada in 2016.” Census in Brief. Catalogue no. 98-400-X.

Statistics Canada. 2019. Custom tabulation. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics.

Stotzer, R. L. 2009. "Violence against transgender people: A review of United States data." Aggression and Violent Behavior. Vol. 14, no. 3. p. 170-179.

Straus, M. A. 2014. “Why the overwhelming evidence on partner physical violence by women has not been perceived and is often denied.” In Current Controversies and Prevalence Concerning Female Offenders of Intimate Partner Violence. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma. Vol. 18, no. 1. p. 1-19. Routledge.

Turchik, J. A., C. L. Hebenstreit and S. S. Judson. 2016. "An examination of the gender inclusiveness of current theories of sexual violence in adulthood: Recognizing male victims, female perpetrators, and same-sex violence." Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. Vol. 17, no. 2. p. 133-148.