Compliance with mandatory reporting of intimate partner violence among professionals in Norway

Mandatory reporting is a common legislative preventative measure for several types of crimes, among them family violence and specifically intimate partner violence (IPV). Among the individuals who are mandated to report under the law are professionals working with IPV victims and perpetrators in their practice. However, little is known about which characteristics are associated with compliance with the mandatory reporting of IPV (MR-IPV) law, on the one hand, and choosing not to report IPV, on the other.

The current study sampled 357 professionals from 6 different agencies working with IPV victims and/or perpetrators. Six dichotomous outcome variables of compliance with MR-IPV and choosing not to report were analyzed by multiple logistic regression. The independent variables were professionals' perceptions and knowledge of MR-IPV, context and workplace conditions, and experience with IPV cases and risk assessment.

Findings showed that risk of compliance with MR-IPV varied between complying with and without consent. Perceived applicability of MR-IPV for an IPV victim was the only variable that had significantly positively odds ratio for both compliance with and without consent. For choosing not to report, significant variables varied between whether the incident had taken place sometime throughout participants' careers or during the last year, and whether it concerned a victim or a perpetrator. However, knowledge of MR-IPV, experience with IPV cases, expectations of MR-IPV, perceived workplace time management, and perception of compliance were significant for choosing not to report.

Knowledge of the characteristics that are associated with professionals' compliance with MR-IPV is essential to better understand the application of MR-IPV, to implement practice that is consistent with law, and ultimately to prevent IPV. Further research is needed to explore the context of compliance with MR-IPV.