During the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments instituted a series of measures to control the spread of the virus. The measures were widely believed to increase women’s risk of violent victimization, most of which is by an intimate partner. We examined help-seeking during this period in a large U.S. city and used an interrupted time series analysis to assess the effects of three government interventions on domestic violence and sexual assault hotline calls and on “911” calls regarding domestic violence, assault, and rape. Declaration of an emergency appeared to reduce victim calls to the rape crisis hotline and the few “911” calls about rape. School closure was associated with a reduction in “911” calls about assault and rape and victim calls to the domestic violence hotline. Implementation of stay-at-home orders was associated with a gradual increase in domestic violence hotline calls. Although “911” calls regarding assault fell by nearly half, calls to police for domestic violence were unchanged. In sum, there was a decrease in help-seeking for sexual assault and assault in general but not for domestic violence during the initial phases of the COVID-19 outbreak. The analysis underscores the importance of distinguishing between the violence itself, calls to police, and calls to helplines when claims are made about changes over time in violence against women. The opportunities and constraints for each can differ widely under usual circumstances, circumstances that were altered by public health interventions related to the pandemic.

在COVID-19大流行的头几个月，政府制定了一系列措施来控制病毒的传播。人们普遍认为，这些措施增加了妇女遭受暴力伤害的风险，其中大部分是由亲密伴侣提供的。我们研究了此期间在美国大城市中的求助情况，并使用了中断时间序列分析来评估三种政府干预措施对家庭暴力和性侵犯热线电话以及在有关家庭暴力，性侵犯和强奸的“ 911”电话中的影响。宣布紧急状态似乎可以减少受害者拨打强奸危机热线的电话，以及为数不多的有关强奸的“ 911”电话。关闭学校与减少打扰和强奸的“ 911”电话以及受害人打给家庭暴力热线的电话有关。在家中下达命令的执行与家庭暴力热线电话的逐步增加有关。尽管有关袭击的“ 911”呼吁减少了近一半，但因家庭暴力而向警察提出的呼吁却没有改变。总之，在COVID-19爆发初期，针对性侵犯和性侵犯的寻求帮助有所减少，但针对家庭暴力的求助却没有减少。该分析强调了在对暴力侵害妇女行为随时间变化提出要求时，区分暴力本身，呼吁警察和拨打求助热线的重要性。在通常情况下，由于与大流行有关的公共卫生干预措施改变了情况，每个人的机会和制约因素可能会大不相同。尽管有关袭击的“ 911”呼吁减少了近一半，但因家庭暴力而向警察提出的呼吁却没有改变。总之，在COVID-19爆发初期，针对性侵犯和性侵犯的寻求帮助有所减少，但针对家庭暴力的求助却没有减少。该分析强调了在对暴力侵害妇女行为随时间变化提出要求时，区分暴力本身，呼吁警察和拨打求助热线的重要性。在通常情况下，由于与大流行有关的公共卫生干预措施改变了情况，每个人的机会和制约因素可能会大不相同。尽管有关袭击的“ 911”呼吁减少了近一半，但因家庭暴力而向警察提出的呼吁却没有改变。总之，在COVID-19爆发初期，针对性侵犯和性侵犯的寻求帮助有所减少，但针对家庭暴力的求助却没有减少。该分析强调了在对暴力侵害妇女行为随时间变化提出要求时，区分暴力本身，呼吁警察和拨打求助热线的重要性。在通常情况下，由于与大流行有关的公共卫生干预措施改变了情况，每个人的机会和制约因素可能会大不相同。在COVID-19爆发初期，性攻击和一般性攻击的寻求帮助有所减少，但家庭暴力并未减少。该分析强调了在对暴力侵害妇女行为随时间变化提出要求时，区分暴力本身，呼吁警察和拨打求助热线的重要性。在通常情况下，由于与大流行有关的公共卫生干预措施改变了情况，每个人的机会和制约因素可能会大不相同。在COVID-19爆发初期，性攻击和一般性攻击的寻求帮助有所减少，但家庭暴力并未减少。该分析强调了在对暴力侵害妇女行为随时间变化提出要求时，区分暴力本身，呼吁警察和拨打求助热线的重要性。在通常情况下，由于与大流行有关的公共卫生干预措施而改变的情况下，每个人的机会和制约因素可以有很大的不同。