In moments of elevated firearm injury risk such as mental health crises, interpersonal conflicts, and more, families face difficult and urgent decisions about how to manage or reduce access to firearms themselves. How these families approach, access, and utilize these strategies — many of which differ by location and circumstance — is of vital importance to preventing a wide range of firearm-related injury and violence, including suicide and homicide.
As we mark Domestic Violence Prevention Month this October and, as a field, consider new ways to support those affected, we connected with our colleague, Jennifer Paruk, PhD, MPH, a researcher investigator at the University of Michigan Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention, for a brief conversation about her current research into the ways Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) can be deployed around instances of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). Dr. Paruk also shared a bit about her broader efforts to support families in Michigan.
As we mark Domestic Violence Prevention Month this October and, as a field, consider new ways to support those affected, we connected with our colleague, Jennifer Paruk, PhD, MPH, a researcher investigator at the University of Michigan Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention, for a brief conversation about her current research into the ways Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) can be deployed around instances of Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). Dr. Paruk also shared a bit about her broader efforts to support families in Michigan.
Along with Dr. April Zeoli, I’ve been looking into how Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are being used to respond to intimate partner violence (IPV). ERPOs are civil orders that let law enforcement, and in some states intimate partners and other family members, as well as select others such as healthcare providers, ask a court to temporarily remove and prohibit someone’s access to firearms when they are at risk of harming themselves or others.
In Florida, where only law enforcement can petition the court for an ERPO, we found that 26% of ERPO cases involved a use or threat of violence against an intimate partner. And within that group, 20% of the respondents (those under the ERPO) already had a current or past domestic violence protective order against them. That overlap is interesting. We know firearm removal doesn’t always happen consistently even when it’s ordered as part of a domestic violence protective order, so we need to better understand how ERPOs and protective orders may be working together.
One important distinction between ERPOs and domestic violence protective orders that’s important to highlight: ERPOs only remove someone’s firearms and prohibit them from having firearms for a temporary period of time. Protective orders include a broader set of protections and firearm removal is sometimes, but not always, part of that. There’s still a lot we don’t know about ERPOs and IPV, especially how survivors of IPV themselves feel about ERPOs being filed on their behalf by law enforcement.
My goal is to help families during heightened risk for firearm injury. That’s bigger than just intimate partner violence or ERPOs specifically. My research work includes a full range of strategies people use to reduce firearm access during these times of heightened risk, whether that’s for suicide prevention or interpersonal violence. This range of strategies includes everything from secure firearm storage at home, to voluntary and temporary out-of-home storage, to legal tools like ERPOs and domestic violence protective orders.
Overall, I want to understand how families are actually using these different options, and figure out how we can better support them.
When we look at the latest data, women are most likely to be killed by a current or previous intimate partner, and firearms are the most common method of these homicides. And when we look at suicide deaths overall, firearms are again the most common method there, too.
One of the teams I work closely with is the Michigan Firearm Law Implementation Program (M-FLIP) here at the University of Michigan. M-FLIP’s mission is to provide free resources, training, and technical assistance to help Michiganders understand our state’s firearm safety laws and how they work.
M-FLIP recently conducted a large study here in Michigan, surveying Michiganders all across the state on their knowledge and attitudes towards firearm laws in Michigan. We’re excited to analyze the data and report the findings to the state!
Every family and every situation is different. People facing heightened risk, whether that’s related to suicide or violence, need different options depending on their circumstances. I’m hoping my research can help give families a range of choices so they can find what actually fits their situation and reduces the risk of firearm injury or death.
It’s not about a one size fits all solution. It’s about making sure people have options that meet them where they are.