The one thing I truly miss about college was the "free" (as in, part of being a student, which in itself was expensive) ability to read a full article like the one cited in your link. I'm really curious as to some of the contents in this study, because the abstract wasn't very clear about one or two small details. I was curious about the inclusion of substance abuse, since its mentioned but no numbers are associated with it. Of particular interest to me, in this, is the extremely high rate of repeated E.R. visits. Additionally, less than ten percent of incidents recorded in this study went to the E.R. the week that a police report was filed. Yeesh. And then the E.R visits... some individuals visiting up to 17 times in the four year period, with a mean of 7.17 and median of 5. That's insane.
The abstract for the article you linked (the main benefit it has is more numbers to analyze):
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-011-1662-4
Anyway, in the posts I commented on, I at the time did not realize you were talking about intimate relation abuse. There's a small amount of language used within these articles that obfuscates things a touch (intimate partner is fairly broad, for example) but, well, I'm not really here to dissect an article and its statistics. I'm just going to put some brakes on this, though. I get where you're coming from now and I don't disagree with your conclusion. I have some lingering thoughts on overall statements and numbers, but I really don't have any data to base a conclusion on. For example, 1/4 women are abused (this is up to date as of 2017 by the way, source:
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/nisvs/infographic.html) but that doesn't really express who or how many commit said abuse. A person might be abused more than once by several people, for example. I think it's easy to draw a 1:1 conclusion when that might not be accurate, but I don't know that it is or isn't. Then there is location, and I don't know if the numbers provided in the case study we're talking about are necessarily relevant in other parts of the united states.
Like, that's the thing. I'm not an expert on this subject-matter, and worse, calling it into question is making me feel like an asshole. Ok, well more of an asshole than I normally am.
Can we agree that violence is bad, all the time, no matter who does it or where it happens?