That is, young people who are labeled as or considered to be violent and aggressive at any point in time are then assumed to be dangerous for the rest of their lives.
This is a contentious issue because there is a desire to protect both parties involved (or that have the potential to become involved) in teen dating violence.
While classifying the perpetrator as a threat may be detrimental to his or her life and future relationships, not classifying the perpetrator this way may put future partners at risk.
There is considerable debate over whether we as a society have an accurate picture of the prevalence and severity of teen dating violence by gender.
Other research indicates that boys who have been abused in childhood by a family member are more prone to IPV perpetration, while girls who have been abused in childhood by a family member are prone to lack empathy and self-efficacy; but the risks for the likelihood of IPV perpetration and victimization among adolescents vary and are not well understood.
There is a common misconception that aggression is stable over time.
By contrast, boys are more likely to report experiencing less severe acts, such as being pinched, slapped, scratched or kicked.
Girls are more likely to report committing less serious forms of IPV, including as a means of self-defense, whereas boys are more likely to report committing more severe acts of IPV, including threats, physical violence and controlling a partner.