The Lancet Psychiatry Commission on intimate partner violence and mental health: advancing mental health services, research, and policy

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is the most common form of violence worldwide and contributes substantially to the global burden of mental health problems. The Lancet Psychiatry Commission on intimate partner violence and mental health met to consider progress in reducing the prevalence of IPV and associated mental health harms, and to establish a roadmap for strengthening responses across mental health services, research, and policy. Mental health care is delivered predominantly through primary care globally, but the relationship between IPV and severe mental health problems, and how best to address IPV within secondary mental health care, have been neglected. We therefore focus mainly on the changes needed to address IPV within secondary mental health care. Our focus on mental health is pragmatic rather than exclusionary, and we also recognise the need for broader change across multiple disciplines, systems, and institutions. Mental health care for survivors and others affected by intimate partner violence: the case for research and investmentThe Lancet Psychiatry Commission on Intimate Partner Violence and Mental Health: advancing mental health services, research, and policy1 provides an invaluable summary of research showing that women who experience intimate partner violence (IPV), and children who are directly and indirectly affected, are at elevated risk of developing mental health problems, as are male IPV perpetrators. The Commission's recommendation is that mental health service providers, whether specialists or in primary health care, consider the likelihood of trauma exposure among individuals presenting with common mental health problems, and are able to counsel appropriately and provide or refer for support. Full-Text PDF The way forward against intimate partner violence in the PhilippinesIntimate partner violence (IPV) is a multifactorial problem encountered in various life periods, necessitating an individualised, life-course approach.1 Such an approach might pose substantial challenges in low-income and middle-income countries, such as the Philippines, where gaps in mental health care remain unaddressed. Full-Text PDF