Intimate partner violence statistics: prevalence, pregnancy risk, and maternal homicide

She came in for a routine 28-week visit with a carefully neutral expression. Blood pressure was up. She mentioned "stress at home" when I asked about sleep. When her partner stepped out for coffee, she finally said he controlled her phone, tracked her appointments, and had shoved her twice since the pregnancy started. She did not want police involved. She wanted someone to know she was not fine, and she wanted a plan that would not make things worse.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is not a rare social problem that occasionally crosses into clinical care. It is a common exposure with measurable effects on injury, chronic illness, depression, PTSD, pregnancy outcomes, and, in the most severe cases, death. Homicide is a leading cause of death during pregnancy and the postpartum year in the United States. That finding still sits outside how many systems talk about maternal mortality.

This article pulls the numbers clinicians and patients most often need: lifetime and past-year prevalence among U.S. women, IPV during pregnancy, pregnancy-associated homicide, health consequences, screening guidance and real-world screening rates, economic burden, and barriers to help-seeking. Every figure below comes from a named primary source.

How common is IPV among U.S. women

CDC defines intimate partner violence as abuse or aggression by a current or former spouse or dating partner. Forms include physical violence, sexual violence, stalking, and psychological aggression. Severity and frequency vary. Some people experience a single episode. Others live with years of control and injury.

The most recent national estimates come from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) 2023/2024 Intimate Partner Violence Data Brief, released by CDC in 2026. Survey data were collected from September 2023 through September 2024 among 15,609 U.S. adults. Because of methodology changes, CDC cautions against direct comparison with earlier NISVS years.

More than 1 in 3 women (34.0%, or nearly 43.5 million) experienced contact sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner during their lifetime. Nearly 1 in 3 women (29.9%) experienced those forms of violence and reported at least one related impact, such as injury, fear, safety concerns, medical care, missed work or school, or contacting law enforcement.

Broken down by type in the same brief: about 19.7% of women experienced contact sexual violence by an intimate partner (including 8.6% who experienced rape), 22.5% experienced physical violence, and 12.2% were stalked by a partner. Severe physical violence was reported by 18.2% of women.

Past-year burden is also large. In the 12 months before the survey, more than 1 in 20 women (5.2%, or 6.7 million) experienced contact sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner. About 3.4% of women reported those experiences plus at least one IPV-related impact in the same window.

Psychological aggression is reported separately and is widespread. Nearly 1 in 3 women (30.2%, or 38.6 million) experienced psychological aggression by an intimate partner in their lifetime, including expressive aggression and coercive control such as financial restriction, isolation from family or friends, and monitoring of daily activities. State-level lifetime prevalence of contact sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking among women ranged from 21.0% to 48.1%.

IPV during pregnancy

Pregnancy does not reliably protect against abuse. In some relationships, control and violence escalate when a partner becomes pregnant. Clinically, this period is also when many women have their most consistent contact with the health system. Missed screening here is especially costly.

A December 2024 CDC MMWR analysis of Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) data from nine U.S. jurisdictions (2016-2022) found that 5.4% of women with a recent live birth reported any IPV during pregnancy. Emotional IPV was most common (5.2%), followed by physical IPV (1.5%) and sexual IPV (1.0%). These estimates are almost certainly undercounts. PRAMS is self-reported months after delivery, and the analysis focused on violence by a husband or partner rather than all former partners.

The same report linked every IPV type examined to delayed or no prenatal care, depression during pregnancy, substance use during pregnancy, and low infant birth weight. Physical IPV, sexual IPV, and any IPV were each associated with preterm birth. Physical IPV was associated with pregnancy-related hypertension (adjusted prevalence about 1.3 times as high as among women without physical IPV). Depression, cigarette smoking, and marijuana or illicit substance use during pregnancy were roughly twice as common among women reporting IPV as among women who did not report that form of violence.

Those associations matter for obstetric practice. A woman who misses early prenatal care, presents with hypertensive disease, or screens positive for depression is not automatically experiencing IPV. Still, IPV should be on the differential, and screening should not depend on a clinician's gut feeling. For broader context on preventable pregnancy deaths and care gaps, see our overview of maternal mortality statistics. Relationship control can also shape reproductive decisions. If you are tracking cycles while deciding about pregnancy timing, tools such as our ovulation calculator and period calculator can help with timing, but safety planning belongs in the same conversation when control or violence is present.

Homicide and maternal death

This is the statistic that should reframe how the public understands maternal death: homicide is a leading cause of death during pregnancy and the postpartum period in the United States.

Wallace and colleagues analyzed National Center for Health Statistics mortality files for 2018-2019 and published the findings in Obstetrics & Gynecology in 2021. Among females who were pregnant or within one year postpartum, there were 3.62 homicides per 100,000 live births. That rate was 16% higher than homicide mortality among nonpregnant, nonpostpartum females of reproductive age (3.12 deaths per 100,000 population). A later analysis of 2020 mortality files found a higher pregnancy-associated homicide rate of 5.23 per 100,000 live births (up from 3.30 in 2018 and 3.95 in 2019), with homicide risk 35% greater for pregnant and postpartum women than for nonpregnant, nonpostpartum peers (Wallace, American Journal of Public Health, 2022).

Homicide during pregnancy or within 42 days of the end of pregnancy exceeded all leading causes of maternal mortality, including hypertensive disorders and hemorrhage, by more than twofold in the 2018-2019 analysis. Infection was among those leading obstetric causes as well. In absolute counts for 2018-2019, 273 of 4,705 female homicide victims ages 10-44 were pregnant or within one year of pregnancy. About half were pregnant at death; the rest were postpartum. Nearly 7 in 10 pregnancy-associated homicides involved a firearm, and about two-thirds of fatal injuries occurred in the home.

Risk is not evenly distributed. Pregnancy-associated homicide prevalence was highest among non-Hispanic Black females (12.47 per 100,000 live births) and among adolescents and young women. For non-Hispanic Black females ages 10-24, the ratio reached 21.09 per 100,000 live births.

Death certificates often cannot identify whether the perpetrator was an intimate partner. Broader surveillance still makes the IPV connection hard to ignore: CDC notes that about one in five homicide victims overall are killed by an intimate partner, and that over half of female homicide victims are killed by a current or former male intimate partner (National Violent Death Reporting System). Standard maternal mortality ratios often classify homicide as pregnancy-associated rather than pregnancy-related, which can exclude violent deaths from the maternal mortality conversation even when they are among the most common ways pregnant and postpartum people die.

Health consequences

IPV is both an acute injury risk and a chronic disease risk factor. The health effects show up in emergency departments, primary care, gynecology clinics, and mental health settings, often without violence ever being named in the chart.

According to CDC, survivors may develop conditions affecting the heart, musculoskeletal system, digestive tract, reproductive system, and nervous system, many of them chronic. Mental health effects are among the best documented. Survivors can experience depression and post-traumatic stress symptoms. They also face higher rates of behaviors such as smoking, binge drinking, and higher-risk sexual activity that further compound long-term health risk.

NISVS 2016/2017 data remain the most detailed national source for specific IPV-related impacts among women. In that report, about 2 in 5 U.S. women (41.0%, or 51.2 million) experienced contact sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner and reported at least one related impact in their lifetime. Looking at population-level estimates among all U.S. women: 35.3% reported being injured, 33.7% reported PTSD symptoms, 29.9% reported concern for safety, 28.5% reported being fearful, 18.2% needed help from law enforcement, and 13.9% needed medical care because of IPV. Common injuries included mental or emotional harm (28.4%), minor bruises or scratches (25.9%), and cuts, major bruises, or black eyes (15.8%).

In clinic, chronic pain, sleep disruption, gastrointestinal symptoms, and poorly controlled mood disorders sometimes sit on top of an unacknowledged trauma history. IPV also intersects with anxiety and depression in women and postpartum depression. During pregnancy, the PRAMS analysis shows depression prevalence roughly twice as high among women reporting IPV. National surveys capture exposure and selected impacts well, but they understate the full cascade from delayed diagnosis to interrupted contraception and reproductive coercion. The true clinical burden is larger than any single survey can show.

Screening and USPSTF guidance

In June 2025, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force reaffirmed a Grade B recommendation: clinicians should screen for IPV in women of reproductive age, including those who are pregnant and postpartum, and provide or refer people who screen positive to multicomponent interventions with ongoing support. The recommendation is consistent with the 2018 USPSTF statement and is covered as a preventive service.

USPSTF notes that brief questionnaires used in primary care and prenatal settings can identify recent abuse. Named tools include HARK, HITS, and WAST; accuracy varies by instrument and setting. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 518 advises screening all women at periodic intervals, including at the first prenatal visit, at least once per trimester, and at the postpartum checkup, with ongoing support and referral options.

Practice still lags guidance. A 2019 analysis in the Maternal and Child Health Journal (Halpern-Meekin et al.) found that only 49.2% of women reported being screened for IPV during prenatal care, with state rates ranging from about 30% to 63%. A 2023 American Journal of Public Health analysis by Kozhimannil and colleagues reported that 29.7% of birthing people were not screened during pregnancy and 48.0% were not screened postpartum.

Screening fails for predictable reasons: time pressure, lack of private space, partners present in the room, limited referral pathways, and clinician discomfort. Virtual visits add risk if a controlling partner can overhear answers. Mandatory reporting rules vary by state and can deter disclosure when patients fear child welfare involvement, immigration consequences, or retaliation. USPSTF materials note that facilitators of disclosure include a trusted clinician relationship and private, direct questions in a safe setting.

Screening alone is not the intervention. The USPSTF evidence base is strongest for multicomponent programs (often studied in pregnant and postpartum populations) that combine ongoing support, multiple contacts, and services that address depression and safety planning. Social needs are part of those programs too. Brief one-time counseling plus a pamphlet has a weaker track record. Access barriers compound the problem; patients who already struggle to get consistent care may be least likely to be screened repeatedly. Our review of women's healthcare access disparities outlines how insurance gaps and provider shortages shape who gets preventive services at all.

Cost burden and help-seeking barriers

IPV is expensive in ways that are both personal and structural. Peterson and colleagues estimated the lifetime economic burden of IPV among U.S. adults in a 2018 American Journal of Preventive Medicine analysis. The national total was approximately $3.6 trillion, including about $2.1 trillion in medical costs and $1.3 trillion in lost productivity among victims and perpetrators, plus criminal justice and other costs. The estimated lifetime cost per female victim was $103,767, compared with $23,414 per male victim. CDC continues to cite these figures in its IPV overview materials.

Those dollars reflect emergency visits, mental health care, lost workdays, criminal justice involvement, and long-term health sequelae. They still undercount housing instability, interrupted education, and the cost to children who witness violence. Witnessing violence is an adverse childhood experience with lifelong health associations, as CDC notes.

Help-seeking remains incomplete even when harm is severe. In NISVS 2016/2017 data, about 13.9% of U.S. women needed medical care because of IPV, 12.1% needed legal services, 6.1% talked to a crisis hotline, 6.0% needed victim advocate services, and 5.5% needed housing services at some point in their lifetime. Those are population percentages, not rates among victims only, and they still show how often formal systems are never engaged.

Barriers include fear of escalation, financial dependence, child custody threats, shame, distrust of police or courts, language barriers, immigration status concerns, and isolation. Some patients disclose only after multiple visits and only if asked privately. Clinicians can lower friction without forcing a disclosure: ask alone, normalize the question, offer resources without requiring a patient to accept a label, and know local advocacy and legal options. Leaving is a process, not a single decision.

If you or someone you know is experiencing intimate partner violence, confidential help is available through the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-SAFE (7233) or thehotline.org. In an emergency, call 911. For patients managing reproductive health alongside safety concerns, a cycle length calculator or late period calculator can support bodily autonomy; they do not replace safety planning.

Frequently asked questions about intimate partner violence and women's health

How common is intimate partner violence among U.S. women?

According to CDC NISVS 2023/2024 data, 34.0% of U.S. women (nearly 43.5 million) have experienced contact sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetime. About 5.2% (6.7 million) reported those experiences in the past 12 months. Nearly 30% of women reported lifetime IPV with at least one related impact such as injury, fear, or medical care.

How often does IPV occur during pregnancy?

In CDC PRAMS data from nine U.S. jurisdictions for 2016-2022, 5.4% of women with a recent live birth reported IPV during pregnancy. Emotional IPV (5.2%) was more common than physical (1.5%) or sexual (1.0%) IPV. All types were linked to delayed or no prenatal care, depression, substance use, and low birth weight. True prevalence is likely higher because of underreporting.

Is homicide a leading cause of maternal death?

Yes. Wallace et al. (2021) found 3.62 pregnancy-associated homicides per 100,000 live births in 2018-2019, 16% higher than among nonpregnant peers. A 2022 follow-up put the 2020 rate at 5.23 per 100,000 live births. In the 2018-2019 analysis, homicide during pregnancy or within 42 days exceeded leading obstetric causes of maternal mortality by more than twofold. Standard maternal mortality metrics often exclude homicide, which can hide the scale of violent death.

What health problems are linked to IPV?

CDC links IPV to injury, chronic conditions across multiple organ systems, depression, PTSD symptoms, and higher-risk health behaviors. NISVS 2016/2017 data show that about 1 in 3 U.S. women reported IPV-related injury and about 1 in 3 reported PTSD symptoms over their lifetime. During pregnancy, IPV is associated with roughly double the prevalence of depression compared with women not reporting IPV.

Should clinicians screen for IPV?

Yes. The USPSTF gives a Grade B recommendation to screen women of reproductive age, including pregnant and postpartum patients, and to refer those who screen positive to multicomponent ongoing support. ACOG recommends screening at the first prenatal visit, at least once each trimester, and postpartum. Real-world prenatal screening rates remain incomplete, with studies finding roughly half of patients unscreened in some samples.

What is the economic cost of IPV?

Peterson and colleagues estimated a $3.6 trillion lifetime national economic burden of IPV, including medical care, lost productivity, and criminal justice costs. The average lifetime cost was about $103,767 per female victim. These figures, published in 2018 and still cited by CDC, underestimate some long-term social costs such as housing instability and effects on children who witness violence.