What influences professionals’ compliance with mandatory reporting of intimate partner violence?

In this article we looked closer at what influences professionals to comply with mandatory reporting of intimate partner violence (MR-IPV) according to the law or to choose not to report. We included 357 participants that had experienced intimate partner violence (IPV) cases that should have warranted them to comply with MR-IPV. We analyzed several questions related to their workplace, knowledge of and experiences with MR-IPV. When we looked at what influenced the professionals choice to comply with and without consent from the help-seeker, we found that their perception that MR-IPV had applied both regarding a victim and a perpetrator, perception that others complied with MR-IPV were associated with complying, while more time spent with patients, next-of-kin, and others throughout the work-day was associated with not complying. Further, we looked at what influenced professionals to choose not to report when the help-seeker asked them not to, despite potential risk of violence. The results here showed that what influenced this varied depending on whether the case was regarding a perpetrator or victim, and during the last 12 months or throughout their career. We found that more experience with IPV and more knowledge of MR-IPV were associated with choosing not to report, and the perception that the MR-IPV case would have few consequences for them and perceiving that their colleagues complied with MR-IPV was negatively associated with choosing not to report.

Read more about the article here: Nordby, C., Douglas, K.S., Vølstad, A.G. et al. Compliance with mandatory reporting of intimate partner violence among professionals in Norway. BMC Public Health 25, 1664 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-025-22637-z