Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
    • Supplementary Material
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Request JHR at your library
  • Alerts
  • Call for Editor
  • Free Issue
  • Special Issue
  • Other Publications
    • UWP

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Human Resources
  • Other Publications
    • UWP
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Human Resources

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Archive
    • Supplementary Material
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
  • Connect
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • Request JHR at your library
  • Alerts
  • Call for Editor
  • Free Issue
  • Special Issue
  • Follow uwp on Twitter
  • Follow JHR on Bluesky
Research ArticleArticles
Open Access

Domestic Violence Reports and the Mental Health and Well-Being of Victims and Their Children

Manudeep Bhuller, View ORCID ProfileGordon B. Dahl, Katrine V. Løken and Magne Mogstad
Journal of Human Resources, April 2024, 59 (S) S152-S186; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.1222-12698R1
Manudeep Bhuller
Manudeep Bhuller is a Professor at University of Oslo .
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: manudeep.bhuller{at}econ.uio.no
Gordon B. Dahl
Gordon B. Dahl is a Professor at UC San Diego .
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Gordon B. Dahl
  • For correspondence: gdahl{at}ucsd.edu
Katrine V. Løken
Katrine V. Løken is a Professor at Norwegian School of Economics .
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: katrine.loken{at}nhh.no
Magne Mogstad
Magne Mogstad is a Professor at University of Chicago .
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: magne.mogstad{at}gmail.com
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1

    Lifetime Prevalence of Domestic Violence around the World

    Notes: Data for DV come from the OECD’s Violence against Women Database. Data for labor force participation rates come from the World Bank/ILO. Both variables are for 2019. The world average and Western Europe markers represent population-weighted averages. Western Europe includes Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK. The sample is restricted to 118 countries with a population of two million or more.

  • Figure 2
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2

    Time Patterns for Victim and Child Outcomes Compared to Matched Controls Who Are Never Victimized

    Notes: Solid lines are for victims and dashed lines are for a matched set of controls (on age, gender, and immigrant status) that are never victims during the period. See text for definitions of the outcomes.

  • Figure 3
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3

    Family Structure

    Notes: The figures show DiD estimates for being married, conditional on being either married (Panel A) or not married (Panel B) at baseline, for victims around the DV event. Panel C shows number of children. Panel D documents moves across municipalities. See corresponding estimates in Table 1.

  • Figure 4
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4

    Financial Resources

    Notes: The figures show DiD estimates for per capita consumption expenditure for the victim’s household, defined as total household income net of taxes and transfers, subtracting out net savings, and adjusting for household size using EU-scale weights for adults and children (Panel A) and spouse disposable income (Panel B). See corresponding estimates in Table 1.

  • Figure 5
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5

    Mental Health: Victims and Their Children

    Notes: The figures show DiD estimates for mental health diagnosis defined as having at least one mental-health-related visit in the year. See corresponding estimates in Table 2.

  • Figure 6
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6

    Other Outcomes: Victims

    Notes: Doctor visits is the number of visits to a primary care physician in a year; data only start in 2007, so the long-run average impact is for t + 1 to t + 4. Employment refers to earning more than the minimum amount required to qualify for a variety of government-provided employment benefits. Earnings is measured in Norwegian kroner (NOK); the exchange rate is roughly 8 NOK to 1 USD. See corresponding estimates in Table 5.

  • Figure 7
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 7

    Child Event Study Outcomes

    Notes: Child protective services and foster care are dummy variables that equal one if child protective services or foster care occurred at any point in the year. Crime is whether a child is charged with a crime and above 16 years old. See corresponding estimates in Table 7.

  • Figure 8
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 8

    Child Educational Outcomes, RD Estimates

    Notes: Plots of outcomes with dots representing averages for six-month bins. The estimated lines are based on the underlying, daily data residualized by controlling for predetermined characteristics, victim age, education, immigrant status, gender, and child gender. Gray lines denote pointwise 90 percent confidence intervals. See corresponding estimates in Table 10.

Tables

  • Figures
  • Additional Files
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Home Environment

    Dependent VariableDiD EstimateDep. Mean [% Effect]
    (1)(2)
    Long-Run Average Impact (t + 1 to t + 6)
    Married | married in 2000 (surviving marriages)−0.390**0.77
    (0.013)[−51%]
    Married | not married in 2000 (new marriages)−0.260**0.33
    (0.011)[−79%]
    Number of children−0.0302.27
    (0.017)[−13%]
    Live in same municipality as in 2020−0.024**0.64
    (0.006)[−4%]
    Per capita consumption expenditure−29,048**318,195
    (5,994)[−9%]
    Spousal earnings−122,425**285,562
    (8,471)[−43%]
    • Notes: For marriage outcomes in total, N = 17,267 (35 percent of victims were married in the year 2000); for municipality outcome, N = 16,971; for consumption, N = 16,725 and spousal earnings, N = 16,728. Dependent mean refers to period t – 2, and percent effect is the DiD estimate divided by the dependent mean. Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by victim. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Mental Health: Victims and Their Children

    Dependent VariableDiD EstimateDep. Mean [% Effect]
    (1)(2)
    Immediate Impact (t = 0)
    Victim mental health0.151**0.43
    (0.009)[35%]
    Child mental health0.033*0.17
    (0.019)[19%]
    Long-Run Average Impact (t + 1 to t + 4)
    Victim mental health0.028*0.43
    (0.015)[7%]
    Child mental health0.026*0.17
    (0.015)[15%]
    • Notes: N = 8,406 for victims, N = 15,557 for children. For mental health visits, data only start in 2007, so the long-run average impact is for t + 1 to t + 4. Mental health diagnosis is defined as having at least one mental-health-related visit in the year. Dependent mean refers to period t – 2, and percent effect is the DiD estimate divided by the dependent mean. Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by victim. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Mental Health by Type of Disorder: Victims and Their Children

    Dependent Variable:DiD EstimateSEDep. Mean% Effect
    (1)(2)(3)(4)
    Panel A: Victim
    Immediate impact (t = 0)
     Mood disorders0.140**0.0090.23061%
     Addiction disorders0.0000.0040.0580%
     Depression disorders0.068**0.0080.18836%
     Social problems0.096**0.0060.063152%
     Sleep disorders0.019**0.0050.05535%
     Anxiety disorders0.134**0.0080.19768%
    Long-run average impact (t + 1 to t + 4)
     Mood disorders0.037**0.0140.23016%
     Addiction disorders0.0050.0070.0589%
     Depression disorders0.0120.0130.1886%
     Social problems0.0110.0090.06317%
     Sleep disorders0.0020.0080.0554%
     Anxiety disorders0.044**0.0140.19722%
    Panel B: Children
    Immediate impact (t = 0)
     Mood disorders0.013**0.0040.04827%
     Addiction disorders−0.0100.0110.014−71%
     Depression disorders0.0190.0120.02673%
     Social problems−0.0070.0180.023−30%
     Sleep disorders0.006**0.0030.01443%
     Anxiety disorders0.009**0.0040.03522%
    Long-run average impact (t + 1 to t + 4)
     Mood disorders0.024**0.0100.04850%
     Addiction disorders0.0050.0110.01436%
     Depression disorders0.023*0.0130.02689%
     Social problems−0.0280.0230.023−121%
     Sleep disorders0.009**0.0040.01464%
     Anxiety disorders0.017*0.0100.03549%
    • Notes: See notes to Table 2. For mental health visits, data only start in 2007, so the long-run average impact is for t + 1 to t + 4. Mental health diagnosis defined as having at least one mental-health-related visit in the year for a specific disorder. Dependent mean refers to period t – 2, and percent effect is the DiD estimate divided by the dependent mean. Standard errors in parentheses. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Heterogeneous Mental Health Effects: Victims and Their Children

    Victim Employed in 2000Mental Health Visit in 2007Long Relationship (>4 Yrs. in 2000)
    Dependent VariableBaselineYesNoYesNoYesNo
    (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)
    Immediate Impact (t = 0)
    Victim mental health0.152**0.176**0.118**0.086**0.191**0.130**0.017
    (0.009)(0.013)(0.013)(0.015)(0.012)(0.013)(0.013)
    Child mental health0.033*0.0350.034**0.039**0.0300.0370.026**
    (0.019)(0.027)(0.011)(0.018)(0.026)(0.033)(0.011)
    Long-Run Average Impact (t + 1 to t + 4)
    Victim mental health0.026**0.0300.026−0.0140.056**0.0280.034
    (0.011)(0.021)(0.023)(0.027)(0.020)(0.018)(0.022)
    Child mental health0.026*0.0190.044**0.0300.0300.0210.024
    (0.015)(0.021)(0.018)(0.034)(0.018)(0.020)(0.019)
    • Notes: See notes to Table 2. Splits based on values prior to a DV event, which is the year 2000 for Columns 2, 3, 6, and 7 and the year 2007 for Columns 4 and 5 (since for mental health visits, data only start in 2007). Dependent mean refers to period t – 2, and percent effect is the DiD estimate divided by the dependent mean. Standard errors in parentheses. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

    • View popup
    Table 5

    Other Outcomes: Victim

    Dependent VariableDiD EstimateDep. Mean [% Effect]
    Immediate Impact (t = 0)
    Doctor visits1.31**12.3
    (0.23)[11%]
    Employment−0.0060.61
    (0.004)[−1%]
    Earnings in NOK−5,638**225,149
    (1,524)[−3%]
    Disability insurance0.014**0.21
    (0.003)[7%]
    Long-Run Average Impact (t + 1 to t + 6)
    Doctor visits0.36212.3
    (0.363)[3%]
    Employment−0.025**0.61
    (0.004)[−4%]
    Earnings in NOK−11,920**225,149
    (3,119)[−5%]
    Disability insurance0.023**0.21
    (0.006)[11%]
    • Notes: N = 10,223 (doctor visits); N = 17,267 (employment, earnings, disability insurance). For doctor visits, data only start in 2007, so the long-run average impact is for t + 1 to t + 4. Dependent mean refers to period t – 2, and percent effect is the DiD estimate divided by the dependent mean. Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by victim. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

    • View popup
    Table 6

    Heterogeneous Victim Effects: Gender

    Dependent VariableBaselineFemaleMale
    (1)(2)(3)
    Immediate Impact (t = 0)
    Victim mental health0.152**0.167**0.075**
    (0.009)(0.010)(0.025)
    Doctor visits1.31**1.49**0.71
    (0.23)(0.27)(0.50)
    Employment−0.006−0.004−0.018*
    (0.004)(0.005)(0.010)
    Earnings in NOK−5,638**−5,794**−4,091
    (1,524)(1,489)(5,273)
    Disability insurance0.014**0.017**0.000
    (0.003)(0.004)(0.008)
    Long-Run Average Impact (t + 1 to t + 6)
    Victim mental health0.026**0.042**−0.045
    (0.011)(0.017)(0.039)
    Doctor visits0.3620.243−0.570
    (0.363)(0.648)(1.05)
    Employment−0.025**−0.023**−0.045**
    (0.008)(0.008)(0.018)
    Earnings in NOK−11,920**−8,999**−29,021**
    (3,119)(3,170)(10,505)
    Disability insurance0.023**0.026**0.018
    (0.006)(0.007)(0.014)
    • Notes: Number of observations by gender: mental health: 6,932 females, 1,474 males; doctor visits: 8,358 females, 1,865 males; employment, disability insurance: 14,228 females, 3,039 males; earnings: 14,098 females, 3,026 males. Baseline estimates come from Tables 2 and 5. Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by victim. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

    • View popup
    Table 7

    Child Event Study Outcomes

    Dependent VariableDiD EstimateDep. Mean [% Effect]
    (1)(2)
    Immediate Impact (t = 0)
    Child protective services0.064**0.102
    (0.010)[63%]
    Foster care0.0020.019
    (0.005)[11%]
    Charged with a crime0.020**0.037
    (0.008)[54%]
    Long-Run Average Impact (t + 1 to t + 6)
    Child protective services0.031**0.102
    (0.012)[31%]
    Foster care0.0080.019
    (0.006)[42%]
    Charged with a crime0.0060.037
    (0.007)[16%]
    • Notes: N = 41,828 (child protective services, foster care), N = 27,827 (charged and aged 16 or above). Dependent mean refers to period t – 2, and percent effect is the DiD estimate divided by the dependent mean. Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by victim. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

    • View popup
    Table 8

    Comparison to OLS

    Dependent VariableOLSOLS w/ Additional Controls(2) + Lagged OutcomeBaseline DiDDep. Mean
    (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)
    Immediate Impact (t = 0)
    Victim mental health0.389**0.382**0.297**0.151**0.43
    (0.007)(0.007)(0.007)(0.009)
    Employment−0.125**−0.096**−0.028**−0.0060.61
    (0.005)(0.005)(0.004)(0.004)
    Child mental health0.099**0.091**0.060**0.033*0.17
    (0.004)(0.004)(0.004)(0.019)
    Child protective services0.176**0.145**0.113**0.064**0.10
    (0.002)(0.003)(0.002)(0.010)
    Long-Run Average Impact (t + 1 to t + 6)
    Victim mental health0.171**0.158**0.121**0.028*0.43
    (0.004)(0.004)(0.004)(0.015)
    Employment−0.133**−0.098**−0.058**−0.025**0.61
    (0.005)(0.004)(0.004)(0.008)
    Child mental health0.069**0.058**0.046**0.026*0.17
    (0.003)(0.003)(0.003)(0.015)
    Child protective services0.119**0.099**0.087**0.031**0.10
    (0.001)(0.002)(0.002)(0.012)
    • Notes: N = 20,151 (mental health visits); N = 20,446 (doctor visits); N = 32,902 (employment, disability insurance); N = 28,304 (earnings). DiD only for victims (half of the sample). OLS is based on a sample of non-victims matched to controls; for details, see the text. Column 4 repeats estimates from Tables 2 and 5. For doctor visits and mental health visits, data only start in 2007, so the long-run average impact is for t + 1 to t + 4. Additional controls include year, years of education, age, gender, immigrant status, married, and number of children. Lagged outcome is the average of six periods before treatment. Dependent mean refers to period t – 2. Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by victim. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

    • View popup
    Table 9

    Comparison to First Differences

    Dependent VariableFirst Difference (Relative to −2)First Difference w/ ControlsBaseline DiDDep. Mean
    (1)(2)(3)(4)
    Immediate Impact (t = 0)
    Victim mental health0.176**0.162**0.151**0.43
    (0.007)(0.008)(0.009)
    Victim employed0.003−0.004−0.0060.61
    (0.005)(0.006)(0.004)
    Child mental health0.044**0.025**0.033*0.17
    (0.004)(0.004)(0.019)
    Child protective services0.074**0.033**0.064**0.10
    (0.004)(0.004)(0.010)
    Long-Run Average Impact (t + 1 to t + 6)
    Victim mental health0.051**0.034**0.028*0.43
    (0.006)(0.006)(0.015)
    Victim employed−0.014**−0.025**−0.025**0.61
    (0.004)(0.005)(0.008)
    Child mental health0.074**0.033**0.026*0.17
    (0.004)(0.004)(0.015)
    Child protective services0.084**0.078**0.031**0.10
    (0.003)(0.002)(0.012)
    • Notes: N in Columns 1 and 2 for immediate and long run, respectively, are 19,429 and 71,379 (mental health visits), 34,534 and 97,732 (employment), 36,948 and 147,321 (child mental health visits), 83,656 and 244,066 (child protective services). Column 2 adds in controls for age, year, gender, and immigrant status. Baseline DiD estimates taken from Tables 2, 5, and 6. Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by victim. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05, ***p < 0.01.

    • View popup
    Table 10

    RD Estimates: Schooling

    RD EstimatesDep. Mean [Percent Effect]
    National exam score−0.077**−0.42
    (0.030)[−18%]
    On-time completion of 1st year of high school−0.047**0.59
    (0.023)[−8%]
    • Notes: N = 19,583 children for national exam score; N = 13,564 children for on-time completion of first year of high school. RD estimates using triangular weights and a window of ± 6 years around the event. National exam score is normalized to be mean zero and standard deviation one for the entire sample of test takers. Control variables include years of education, age, gender, immigrant status, married and number of children for the victim and child gender. Standard errors in parentheses, clustered by victim. Significance: *p < 0.10, **p < 0.05.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Tables
  • Free alternate access to The Journal of Human Resources supplementary materials is available at https://uwpress.wisc.edu/journals/journals/jhr-supplementary.html


    • 1222-12698R1_supp.pdf
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Human Resources: 59 (S)
Journal of Human Resources
Vol. 59, Issue S
1 Apr 2024
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Human Resources.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Domestic Violence Reports and the Mental Health and Well-Being of Victims and Their Children
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Human Resources
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Human Resources web site.
Citation Tools
Domestic Violence Reports and the Mental Health and Well-Being of Victims and Their Children
Manudeep Bhuller, Gordon B. Dahl, Katrine V. Løken, Magne Mogstad
Journal of Human Resources Apr 2024, 59 (S) S152-S186; DOI: 10.3368/jhr.1222-12698R1

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Domestic Violence Reports and the Mental Health and Well-Being of Victims and Their Children
Manudeep Bhuller, Gordon B. Dahl, Katrine V. Løken, Magne Mogstad
Journal of Human Resources Apr 2024, 59 (S) S152-S186; DOI: 10.3368/jhr.1222-12698R1
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • I. Introduction
    • II. Setting and Data
    • III. Research Designs
    • IV. Results
    • V. Discussion
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • The Economics of Child Mental Health: Introducing the Causes and Consequences of Child Mental Health Special Issue
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Prescription for Disaster
  • Occupation and temperature-related mortality in Mexico
  • Employers’ Language Proficiency Requirements and Hiring of Immigrants
Show more Articles

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • I14
  • I18
  • J12
  • J62
UW Press logo

© 2026 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System

Powered by HighWire