Summary: The paper examines domestic violence beyond its purely social dimension, highlighting the biological consequences of prolonged exposure to severe stress and the potential development of a disabling neuro‑immune‑endocrine dysfunction. From a psychoneuroimmunology perspective, it explains how dysregulation of the hypothalamic‑pituitary‑adrenal (HPA) axis and neuroinflammation may contribute to immune disorders, sleep disturbances, metabolic dysfunction, and alterations of the gut‑brain axis.
What appears as a psychological imbalance in a survivor often has an objectively measurable biological substrate that, without appropriate intervention, can lead to cumulative somatic, emotional and social effects. When domestic violence is persistent and repetitive, it becomes a relevant aggravating factor in medico‑legal assessments of vulnerability and injury.
The article argues for stronger medico‑legal expertise and interdisciplinary collaboration—medical, psychological, social and legal—emphasizing the need for in‑depth clinical evaluation based on integrated assessment and advanced functional testing. It also underscores the importance of prompt, stigma‑free institutional response that directly improves quality of life and functional reintegration, including restorative‑justice mechanisms where applicable.
Keywords: domestic violence, chronic stress, hypothalamic‑pituitary‑adrenal axis, psychoneuroimmunology, neuro‑immune‑endocrine dysfunction, neuroinflammation, gut‑brain axis, restorative justice, medico‑legal expertise
Introduction
Violence—whether physical, psychological, sexual or economic—acts as a major stressor that can damage the entire organism. In the face of aggression, the body triggers the “fight‑or‑flight” survival response, regulated by the hypothalamic‑pituitary‑adrenal (HPA) axis and the sympathetic‑adrenal‑medullary (SAM) system. A brief activation is adaptive; however, the chronic exposure typical of domestic violence turns acute stress into chronic stress, depleting physiological and psychological resources. An initially protective mechanism can develop into pathological, affecting sleep, endocrine function, immune response, mental health and overall quality of life.
Domestic violence is more than a criminal act or moral deviance; This proves a repetitive phenomenon capable of producing lasting structural and functional changes. Ongoing abuse chronically activates stress systems, fostering neuro‑endocrine hypersensitivity and low‑grade systemic inflammation—effects that can range from mood disorders to immune and metabolic dysfunction, even to potentially degenerative processes. This reality calls for an integrative approach that treats domestic violence as both a trigger and an aggravating factor of systemic pathology.
domestic violence should be evaluated not only in moral‑social registers but also as a medico‑legal reality with objectively measurable biological effects, directly influencing evidentiary standards and protective orders issued by courts.
Unlike classic approaches, this paper examines domestic violence beyond its social dimension, drawing attention to a possible neuro‑immune‑endocrine dysfunction linked to prolonged abuse. Through a psychoneuroimmunology lens, the research focuses on the biological substrate of sustained severe stress, describing how HPA‑axis dysregulation and neuroinflammation may become disabling factors. This framing makes a strong case for interdisciplinary medico‑legal expertise and for recovery‑oriented mechanisms, including restorative‑justice tools where they are applicable.
Medical dysfunctions induced by chronic stress in domestic violence: from neuro‑endocrine to immunology and metabolism
The body’s stress response involves two primary physiological pathways: the sympathetic‑adrenal‑medullary (SAM) system and the hypothalamic‑pituitary‑adrenal (HPA) axis. In the acute phase, SAM rapidly releases catecholamines (adrenaline, noradrenaline, dopamine) to prepare the organism for “fight‑or‑flight.” Simultaneously, the HPA axis prompts cortisol secretion, a hormone essential for short‑term adaptation that raises blood glucose, blood pressure and mobilizes energy stores.
Under normal conditions, negative feedback and parasympathetic activation terminate the stress response and restore homeostasis. In prolonged, severe stress—commonly seen in domestic violence—stress systems remain hyperactive. Hypercortisolism may develop, followed by glucocorticoid‑receptor desensitization, impaired autoregulation and a low‑grade “silent” systemic inflammation. These processes foster persistent neuro‑endocrine dysfunction and metabolic disturbances, progressively eroding physiological adaptability.
Clinically, individuals exposed to domestic violence often present a broad, nonspecific symptom palette that is frequently fragmented: headaches, sleep problems, heightened infection susceptibility, digestive issues, palpitations, dizziness, hypertension, irritability, restlessness, exhaustion, depressive mood and cognitive difficulties (concentration, memory, intrusive thoughts). Behaviorally, compensatory mechanisms such as social isolation, substance utilize or work‑related over‑engagement may emerge.
Chronic stress is linked to an increased risk of immune dysregulation, including a higher incidence of autoimmune diseases in stress‑related disorders (Song et al., 2018). Persistent stress also correlates with circadian rhythm disruption, sleep disorders, anxiety, depression, as well as metabolic and cardiovascular dysfunctions (obesity, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia). Medical literature describes neuroinflammation associated with chronic stress, which may contribute to neurodegenerative conditions such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease.
The central nervous system, neuro‑endocrine axes (adrenal, thyroid, gonadal) and the immune system form a bidirectional regulatory network essential for homeostasis. Chronic disruption of this network can produce cumulative health impacts, manifested as persistent inflammation, immune dysfunction and metabolic disturbances. These biological changes can also generate or amplify psychiatric symptoms, mimicking affective and anxiety disorders or intensifying their severity.
The impact of stress on the immune system
Stress influences immunity in a dual manner, depending on exposure intensity and duration. Acute stress can be adaptive, temporarily boosting immune mechanisms involved in protection and healing.
In contrast, chronic stress—frequent in domestic‑violence contexts—gradually impairs immune response. Increased susceptibility to recurrent infections, intestinal dysbiosis and compromised mucosal barriers can trigger systemic and neuroinflammatory processes.
Persistent stress is associated with relevant immunological dysregulations, including lymphocyte dysfunction, an imbalance between innate and adaptive immunity, and elevated pro‑inflammatory cytokine release. These alterations may promote the onset and worsening of autoimmune diseases and increase biological vulnerability to certain cancers.
A Swedish cohort study (Song et al., 2018) found that individuals diagnosed with stress‑related disorders have a significantly higher risk of developing autoimmune diseases compared with the general population.
These findings demand heightened clinical attention—and interdisciplinary assessment—to immune dysfunction in people subjected to prolonged severe stress within abusive relationships.
Phases of stress
The biological response to stress follows a three‑stage adaptive model. In domestic‑violence settings, repeated severe stress can accelerate the shift from protective physiological reactions to chronic systemic dysfunction. The three phases—alarm, resistance and exhaustion—describe how the body initially adapts, then gradually loses regulatory capacity under continuous activation.
During the alarm phase (acute stress), lasting from hours to days, SAM and HPA systems quickly mobilize stress hormones. Innate immunity is activated, with rises in natural‑killer (NK) cells, neutrophils and pro‑inflammatory cytokines (IL‑6, TNF‑α), even as adaptive immunity may be temporarily suppressed. This response is beneficial short‑term, yet repeated exposure can render the immune imbalance persistent.
Continued stress drives the resistance phase, characteristic of chronic stress, wherein the body maintains a compensatory activation state at a high physiological cost. Low‑intensity, prolonged secretion of pro‑inflammatory cytokines by monocytes and macrophages occurs alongside reduced NK‑cell activity. Adaptive immunity may suffer reduced T‑cell proliferation, Th1/Th2 imbalance, and altered B‑cell function with lower antibody production. Dendritic cells may also lose maturation capacity, compromising specific anti‑infection and anti‑tumor responses.
The exhaustion phase, which can endure for long periods, features elevated cortisol that eventually leads to glucocorticoid‑receptor resistance through down‑regulation or progressive depletion of adaptive mechanisms. Feedback inhibition becomes disrupted, and cortisol’s anti‑inflammatory effects wane. This dysfunction promotes chronic inflammation and may contribute to metabolic and cardiovascular consequences such as insulin resistance, hypertension and dyslipidemia. Over time, the HPA axis may become chronically over‑stimulated and glucocorticoid receptors desensitized (Gerber et al., 2021).
Chronic stress as a disease trigger
Chronic stress is recognized as a major aggravating factor and potential trigger for disease, especially in contexts of prolonged severe stress like domestic violence.
A Swedish cohort study (Song et al., 2018) that followed over 106,000 patients with stress‑related disorders and more than one million unexposed individuals reported a significantly higher incidence of autoimmune disease among the exposed group—9.1 cases per 1,000 person‑years versus 6.0–6.5 cases per 1,000 person‑years in control groups, including sibling comparisons. These data support the hypothesis that stress‑associated immune dysregulation contributes meaningfully to autoimmunity.
A central mechanism involves glucocorticoid‑receptor (GR) dysregulation. In chronic stress, GR efficiency in controlling inflammation can decline. These receptors protect the hippocampus—a brain region critical for memory, orientation and stress regulation. Impaired GR function may foster neuroinflammation and contribute to cognitive decline associated with prolonged severe stress.
Neuroinflammation and brain injury in chronic stress
Chronic stress typical of prolonged domestic‑violence exposure repeatedly activates the HPA axis, prompting persistent release of pro‑inflammatory cytokines. These cytokines can cross a compromised blood‑brain barrier, activating microglia—the brain’s immune cells—and initiating a neuroinflammatory cascade that affects neuronal function (Ishikawa & Furuyashiki, 2022).
Neuroinflammation is linked to varied clinical manifestations, including anxiety, anhedonia, physical and emotional exhaustion, psychomotor slowing and hypervigilance. Such symptoms are frequently reported in chronic‑stress syndromes and correlate with central nervous system inflammatory processes (Ravi et al., 2021).
Biologically, sustained severe stress in domestic violence can induce functional—and in some cases structural—brain changes with clinical and medico‑legal relevance, potentially impairing long‑term cognitive, emotional and social functioning. When confirmed through appropriate clinical assessments and medical investigations, these changes can form part of the evidentiary basis for evaluating injury to psychophysical integrity.
Neuroinflammation as a contributor to neurodegenerative vulnerability (Parkinson’s disease)
Chronic inflammatory processes linked to prolonged severe stress can create a biological environment conducive to neurodegeneration, involving oxidative and nitrosative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction and endocrine disturbances, including persistent cortisol alterations. In domestic‑violence scenarios where stress is repetitive and cumulative, these mechanisms may sustain low‑grade neuroinflammation.
Scientific literature describes neuroinflammation and oxidative stress as key elements in Parkinson’s disease pathogenesis, affecting dopaminergic neurons. While chronic stress alone is not a singular causal factor, it can act as an aggravating or modulatory element, reducing neurological resilience and accelerating degenerative processes in susceptible individuals (Knezevic et al., 2023).
Stress‑related health profile: multisystem disease
Post‑traumatic stress disorder (PTSD): neuroinflammatory and neuroendocrine correlations
PTSD research describes an association between severe, persistent trauma exposure and neuroinflammatory processes mediated by HPA‑axis dysregulation and altered cortisol responses. This dysregulation is linked to elevated peripheral inflammatory markers (e.g., C‑reactive protein) and chronic microglial activation, leading to increased release of pro‑inflammatory cytokines such as IL‑6, TNF‑α and IL‑1β.
Neurobiological consequences include amygdalar hyperactivity (heightened anxiety), reduced hippocampal volume (memory deficits) and prefrontal cortex hypoactivity (impaired emotional regulation) (Jan et al., 2022). These changes contribute to the complex clinical picture of PTSD, characterized by hypervigilance, intrusive thoughts, cognitive and affective disturbances, underscoring the neurobiological dimension of severe‑stress syndromes.
The gut‑brain axis
Intestinal barrier dysfunction and stress‑induced dysbiosis
Prolonged stress—common in domestic‑violence contexts—can disrupt the gut‑brain axis, a bidirectional network linking the central nervous system, gastrointestinal tract and immune system. Key components include the intestinal microbiome, tight‑junction epithelial cells and mucosal immunity.
Stress may reduce mucosal blood flow, slow intestinal motility and weaken tight junctions, facilitating translocation of antigens and pro‑inflammatory substances into circulation—a phenomenon known as “leaky gut.” This triggers intestinal immune activation and sustains systemic inflammation, interfering with psychoneuroimmunologic balance.
Functional alterations of the microbiome often manifest as dysbiosis, with increased pro‑inflammatory bacteria and reduced protective species. This imbalance contributes not only to intestinal inflammation but also to neuropsychiatric symptoms such as anxiety and depression through neuroinflammatory pathways and gut‑brain axis dysfunction (Bertollo et al., 2025; Borre et al., 2014).
People exposed to chronic severe stress in abusive relationships frequently report persistent digestive symptoms (bloating, abdominal discomfort, altered bowel habits) that commonly co‑occur with affective manifestations, reflecting a systemic biological imbalance rather than a purely psychological issue.
Stress as a risk factor for weight gain and metabolic disease
Chronic stress is a recognized contributor to weight gain and metabolic disorders such as obesity, insulin resistance, type 2 diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidemia. Elevated cortisol and excessive sympathetic activation produce multiple metabolic effects: altered appetite and increased food intake, hepatic glucose release, free‑fatty‑acid mobilization from adipose tissue and muscle catabolism via amino‑acid release.
Simultaneously, fatigue, depressive mood and hormonal imbalances affecting satiety and hunger signals (leptin, ghrelin) can reduce physical activity and energy expenditure, fostering weight accumulation and a vicious cycle linking stress, metabolic dysfunction and exhaustion.
Sleep disturbances and circadian rhythm
Sleep disorders rank among the most common chronic‑stress consequences and are frequently observed in domestic‑violence survivors, arising from continuous activation of stress axes and circadian disruption.
Cortisol, which follows a diurnal pattern, antagonizes melatonin—the hormone essential for initiating and maintaining nighttime sleep. Persistent HPA‑axis activation (high cortisol) and SAM activation (adrenaline, noradrenaline) can cause difficulty falling asleep, fragmented REM sleep, reduced deep (N3) sleep, altered sleep architecture and shorter total sleep time.
These disturbances impede physical and cognitive recovery, perpetuating a feedback loop of stress, fatigue and emotional vulnerability.
Combined effects of chronic stress and sleep loss on immunity
Chronic stress and sleep disorders are interlinked factors that can markedly impair immune function. Among domestic‑violence survivors, poor restorative sleep often co‑occurs with ongoing stress‑axis activation, leading to neuroendocrine and immunologic exhaustion.
Sleep deprivation diminishes cellular immunity—particularly T‑cell activity and NK‑cell function—while elevating inflammatory markers such as IL‑6 and C‑reactive protein, and altering adaptive immune responses. These changes weaken the body’s ability to combat infections, may exacerbate existing autoimmune conditions and promote chronic inflammatory disease progression (Garbarino et al., 2021).
In the setting of prolonged severe stress, these mechanisms create a complex clinical picture where somatic manifestations and immune dysfunction become essential considerations in integrated medical evaluation.
Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) and its overlap with depression
Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), also known as myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME/CFS), is a multisystem condition with a multifactorial pathogenesis. Contributing mechanisms include HPA‑axis dysfunction, neurotransmitter imbalances (serotonin, dopamine), neuroinflammation, persistent immune activation, increased intestinal permeability (“leaky gut”), dysbiosis, hormonal disturbances, oxidative and nitrosative stress, and mitochondrial impairment.
The clinical picture is dominated by extreme fatigue disproportionate to exertion, cognitive “brain fog,” non‑restorative sleep and neurovegetative dysfunction. Though CFS is often mistaken for depression, research highlights distinct neuroendocrine and immunologic profiles, suggesting a physiologically observable exhaustion rather than a primary affective disorder.
Individuals subjected to prolonged severe stress—including domestic‑violence survivors—may exhibit CFS‑compatible features: HPA‑axis dysregulation, abnormal cortisol secretion, microglial activation and elevated pro‑inflammatory cytokines. These alterations can underpin profound physical, emotional and cognitive exhaustion.
ME/CFS should not be reduced to simple somatization but understood as a somatic expression of systemic dysfunction linked to chronic stress, warranting an integrative, multisystem medical approach.
Stress‑driven reactivation of latent infections
Chronic stress, especially when repeatedly encountered in abusive environments, can act as a negative immunomodulator, facilitating reactivation of latent pathogens. Relevant agents include herpesviruses (Epstein–Barr, Herpes simplex), intracellular bacteria (Chlamydia pneumoniae, Mycoplasma spp.) and fungi, with reactivation driven by HPA‑axis disruption and altered cellular immunity.
Professor Christian Schubert notes in Was uns krank macht, was uns heilt (2018) that chronic stress perturbs communication among the nervous, endocrine and immune systems, generating low‑grade inflammation and sustaining immune imbalances. This stress‑inflammation‑immune dynamic can contribute to complex functional syndromes such as ME/CFS, where extreme fatigue, cognitive impairment and neurovegetative dysfunction are common yet difficult to classify within conventional medical paradigms.
Functional‑medicine practice often emphasizes advanced immunologic and molecular testing to detect latent pathogens in patients with chronic‑fatigue and multisystem dysfunction, as subclinical reactivation can perpetuate systemic inflammation and chronic symptomatology.
assessments of these individuals should incorporate comprehensive immunologic evaluation and personalized strategies that address infection status, systemic inflammation and neuroendocrine dysregulation. Such integrative approaches can improve diagnostic accuracy and prevent premature labeling of complex biological manifestations as mere “somatization” without thorough medical investigation.
Directions for integrative intervention: medical, psychological, social and legal approaches
Effective intervention for domestic‑violence survivors requires an integrative framework that simultaneously meets biological, psychological, social and legal needs. Isolated actions by a single discipline often fall short of restoring function and preventing chronicization of harm. Only genuine interdisciplinary cooperation can sustain durable recovery, balancing protection with functional reintegration of the survivor.
Medical approach
The medical goal is to restore neuro‑endocrine and immunologic homeostasis, prioritizing functional balance of the HPA axis. This involves identifying and, where possible, reducing stressors; conducting integrated clinical assessments; employing advanced functional diagnostics; and delivering personalized integrative therapy. Recovery should align with bio‑psycho‑social rehabilitation models and the psychoneuroimmunology paradigm.
The primary clinical target is to dampen stress hyperreactivity and recalibrate the coordinated immune, neuro‑endocrine and metabolic systems, thereby regaining overall functional equilibrium.
Psychological approach
Psychological intervention must move beyond a narrow symptom‑focused model that treats distress solely as an emotional reaction. Modern approaches rest on experience‑dependent neuroplasticity, whereby the brain can reorganize neural circuits through safe, repeated, guided training (Davidson & McEwen, 2012).
The aim is to activate neurobiological self‑regulation mechanisms that complement medical rebalancing. By reducing HPA‑axis hyperactivation and allostatic load (McEwen, 1998), the foundation for emotional, cognitive and somatic recovery is established—critical for restoring functional capacity and social participation.
Professor Tudorel Butoi (2012) emphasizes the necessity of professional psychological assessment to understand the victim’s vulnerability within legal contexts, enabling accurate appraisal of repeated adverse exposure. He also highlights the importance of evaluating the aggressor’s risk profile and potential for recidivism, essential for protective measures and psychosocial intervention.
This perspective aligns with psychoneuroimmunology and modern rehabilitation, which advocate for integrated medical, psychological and legal action as decisive factors in functional recovery and social reintegration. For courts, prosecutors and experts, grasping these correlations yields a more faithful assessment of vulnerability, moral injury and realistic rehabilitation pathways.
Psychological intervention must be grounded in clear professional standards, verifiable clinical competence and effective interdisciplinary collaboration, with the central objective of stimulating neuroplasticity and reducing stress reactivity—not merely managing symptoms. Neuroplasticity thrives in a psychologically safe therapeutic alliance, fostering trust between survivor and specialist as a catalyst for functional recovery.
This framework also holds indirect evidentiary value, as restored cognitive and emotional coherence can facilitate more accurate judicial evaluation of the impact of abusive acts.
In domestic‑violence cases, the psychologist’s ethical and professional duty becomes a matter of public interest, tasked with preventing further severe‑stress exposure. Poorly calibrated interventions can amplify vulnerability and reactivate symptomatology.
From this viewpoint, psychological care is not simply supportive but an integral component of institutional diligence to protect the survivor. A lack of coordination among professionals can sustain chronic stress exposure, a factor linked to higher morbidity and functional decline (Schubert, 2018). Apparent psychological imbalance often reflects measurable neuro‑immune‑endocrine dysfunction, reinforcing the scientific basis for medico‑legal evaluation and moral‑injury assessment.
Social approach
Authentic social support extends beyond emergency response. Structured, specialist‑coordinated intervention must assess the event’s psychological impact alongside the survivor’s physical health, housing stability and financial situation. Without such comprehensive analysis, assistance remains fragmented and the risk of returning to abusive contexts stays high.
A key component of rehabilitation is socio‑professional reintegration, providing financial stability and a foundation for lasting autonomy. Access to training, re‑skilling, employment assistance and mentorship should be viewed as integral to recovery, not an afterthought.
International best‑practice models from Germany, Austria and Nordic countries demonstrate the effectiveness of multidimensional programs that combine safe shelter, psychological counseling, legal aid, social benefits and professional reintegration within a unified, dignity‑focused framework.
Adapting these principles to the Romanian setting could shift social assistance from a one‑off reaction to a true instrument of prevention and social reconstruction.
Legal component
Legal protection for survivors must be swift, effective and tailored to concrete risks, avoiding formalism that perpetuates vulnerability and ongoing abuse. In Romania, the primary immediate tool is the protection order established under Law 217/2003 on the prevention and combat of domestic violence. This order allows courts, upon request by the victim or authorized institutions, to quickly impose measures such as evicting the aggressor, prohibiting proximity or contact, and monitoring compliance through police authorities.
A protection order may be issued for up to six months and is self‑executing. Violating its provisions constitutes a criminal offense under Article 32 of Law 217/2003, attracting penal liability. The court may also mandate the aggressor’s participation in psychological counseling or behavioral‑rehabilitation programs (Article 33(1)(i)), as a complementary measure aimed at preventing recurrence.
Although temporary, these measures are essential for breaking the abuse cycle. Their effectiveness hinges on linking medico‑legal, psychological and social evidence with the factual dynamics of the case, ensuring that the long‑term health impacts of chronic severe stress are properly documented. In practice, symptoms such as anxiety, adaptation disorders, sleep disturbances and associated somatic dysfunctions are common but often under‑utilized in judicial assessment, leading to underestimation of risk and insufficient protective orders.
Comparatively, European statutes offer broader protection. Germany’s Gewaltschutzgesetz (2002) permits civil protection orders for up to one year, renewable when risk persists. In severe cases, emergency divorce (Härtefallscheidung) under §1565 (2) BGB can be invoked when continued cohabitation threatens physical or psychological health. Similar provisions exist in Austria and the Nordic states, where stalking is treated as an autonomous offense, reflecting the cumulative nature of psychological abuse and associated stress.
Domestic violence now extends into the digital realm, with perpetrators employing electronic monitoring, unauthorized account access, social‑media manipulation and online intimidation. This creates persistent psychological pressure comparable to chronic stress, undermining victim autonomy and amplifying neuro‑immune‑endocrine imbalance.
In such scenarios, early preservation of digital evidence—through preservation orders and forensic IT examinations—becomes a critical element of the special diligence required by European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence, which obliges states to ensure effective protection of life, integrity and privacy (Articles 2, 3 and 8 ECHR).
prompt, stigma‑free intervention centered on immediate survivor safety must be a priority. Repeated relocation of victims, used in lieu of prosecuting aggressors, is counterproductive and can erode quality of life, cause physical and emotional exhaustion, increase economic vulnerability and raise recidivism risk. Relocation should be a last resort, not a substitute for criminal or civil accountability.
Effective legal protection cannot remain a mere formal application of statutes; it must integrate medical, psychological and social case evaluation through genuine interdisciplinary cooperation. Recognizing the clinical and psychoneuroimmunological dimensions of prolonged severe stress lays the groundwork for proactive, prevention‑oriented justice, aligned with Article 22(1) of the Romanian Constitution guaranteeing the right to life and physical and psychological integrity.
European Court of Human Rights precedents and legal implications
European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence establishes a positive duty of states to exercise special diligence in domestic‑violence cases, derived primarily from Articles 2, 3 and 8 of the Convention. This duty requires not only legislative frameworks but also effective preventive and protective measures: rapid, efficient intervention, thorough investigation and preservation of relevant evidence, including digital data, as essential to safeguarding fundamental rights.
In Opuz v. Turkey (2009), the Court held that states must intervene promptly and effectively when authorities are aware—or should be aware—of an imminent risk to a victim’s life or integrity. Failure to act breaches Articles 2 and 3.
In Talpis v. Italy (2017), the Court reaffirmed the need for special diligence in preventing recidivism and ensuring effective victim protection, emphasizing that mere existence of legal norms is insufficient without concrete, coherent application.
In Bălșan v. Romania (2017), the Court condemned formalistic responses and lack of coordination among competent institutions, finding that state inaction or delay not only jeopardized victim protection but also amplified suffering and risk of revictimization, infringing the Convention‑guaranteed rights.
These rulings make clear that domestic violence must be viewed not only as a criminal or moral issue but also as a situation demanding swift, firm, integrated legal action. Recognizing the clinical and neuro‑immune‑endocrine impacts of prolonged severe stress strengthens the legal basis for robust judicial measures, as victim protection directly influences health outcomes.
current European standards require moving beyond reactive, formalistic approaches toward active judicial prevention, achieved through interdisciplinary intervention, effective protection and coherent gender‑based violence combat.
Medico‑legal causality and international approaches
Establishing causality in domestic‑violence cases demands a cumulative analysis of biological and legal elements, reflecting contemporary doctrinal trends. A shift is evident from the classic paradigm of identifying only visible “physical traces” toward evaluating systemic impact on a person’s full integrity—physical, psychological and functional.
This evolution is mirrored in the UK’s Coercive‑Control models, which criminalize abuse lacking obvious external signs, recognizing gradual deterioration of psychophysical health as a serious injury (Serious Crime Act 2015; Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018). The focus moves from isolated lesions to continuous coercion, intimidation and destabilization that produce cumulative health and autonomy effects.
European Court of Human Rights jurisprudence, through the concept of psychophysical integrity derived chiefly from Article 3 ECHR, obliges states to ensure effective protection against severe suffering. In this framework, biological mechanisms of chronic stress—neuroinflammation and HPA‑axis dysregulation—gain medico‑legal relevance for assessing injury thresholds and functional impairment.
In some U.S. Medico‑legal contexts, scholarly work cites structural brain changes (e.g., hippocampal atrophy) and HPA‑axis disturbances as evidence supporting bodily injury claims, extending beyond the traditional somatic‑psychic dichotomy. Suffering is no longer viewed solely as a subjective dimension but can be evaluated through functional and biological indicators relevant to damage assessment.
Using biological markers should not be confined to profiling aggressors. Prior research highlighted how genetic polymorphisms (MAOA, COMT) and neurobiological imbalances can modulate criminal behavior (Nedelcu, 2025). This paper extends the paradigm to victims, proposing that psychoneuroimmunology and epigenetics serve as complementary indicators of prolonged severe‑stress exposure, suggesting that repeated domestic violence can generate measurable structural and functional biological changes.
Symmetric evidentiary approaches are supported by emerging molecular and functional forensic methods capable of documenting not only aggressor profiles but also injury realities induced by chronic stress. Ignoring these dimensions would yield an incomplete clinical picture and jeopardize justice quality, undermining the fundamental right to health and integrity.
Conclusion
Domestic‑violence intervention requires an integrative framework that transcends the narrow “psychological trauma” label often used in courts. Centering on repeated severe psychological stress and its systemic bodily effects provides a more accurate understanding of the survivor’s reality. Recognizing the immuno‑neuro‑endocrine dimension of chronic stress justifies proactive legal action aimed not only at formal protection but also at functional recovery, fulfilling the right to health, dignity and integrity.
Based on the evidence presented, prolonged exposure to domestic violence should be evaluated not merely through subjective suffering but as a medico‑legal condition amenable to objective documentation. Neuroinflammation and associated biological dysregulations indicate pathological processes that directly affect central‑nervous‑system function and neuro‑endocrine‑immune balance, with potential long‑term consequences. This perspective demands a reassessment of how legal consequences of domestic violence are appraised, as cumulative effects can be comparable—in mechanism and severity—to those caused by direct physical aggression.
Restorative justice can serve as a complementary tool to criminal and civil proceedings, aiming to lower recidivism risk and facilitate functional recovery where safety conditions permit. While it cannot replace legal accountability, it may help rebuild autonomy and dignity through accountability, repair and social reintegration, embedded within a multidisciplinary strategy.
Looking forward, chronic stress induced by abuse should be recognized as a relevant factor in assessing the gravity of offenses and, when case‑specific data warrant, as a determinant in evaluating health injury. Such an approach would correct the reductive tendency to confine victim suffering to the affective sphere, ignoring the objective, sometimes disabling, neuro‑immune‑endocrine and multisystem dysfunctions. Health impairment can no longer be interpreted as a mere emotional reaction but as a complex deterioration of psychophysical integrity with direct medical and legal implications.
Scientific bibliography
Bertollo, A. G., Silva, A. P., Ferreira, A. B., & Lima, F. B. (2025). Hypothalamus–pituitary–adrenal and gut–brain axes in the biological interaction pathway of depression. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 19, 154105.
Borre, Y. E., O’Keeffe, G. W., Clarke, G., Stanton, C., Dinan, T. G., & Cryan, J. F. (2014). The impact of microbiota on brain and behavior: Mechanisms and therapeutic potential. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, 817, 373–403. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-0897-4_17
Butoi, T. (2012). Psihologie judiciară. Editura Pro Universitaria.
Davidson, R. J., & McEwen, B. S. (2012). Social influences on neuroplasticity: Stress and interventions to promote well‑being. Nature Neuroscience, 15(5), 689–695. https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.3093
Garbarino, S., Lanteri, P., Bragazzi, N. L., Magnavita, N., & Scoditti, E. (2021). Role of sleep deprivation in immune‑related disease risk. Communications Biology, 4(1), 1304. https://doi.org/10.1038/s42003-021-02825-4
Gerber, A. N., et al. (2021). Repression of transcription by the glucocorticoid receptor: A parsimonious model for the genomics era. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 296, 100068. Https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2021.100068
Ishikawa, Y., & Furuyashiki, T. (2022). The impact of stress on immune systems and its relevance to mental illness. Neuroscience Research, 175, 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neures.2021.09.005
Jan, Z., Gostečnik, C., & Kralj‑Iglič, V. (2022). Adverse human health outcomes associated with psychological trauma: A review. In Proceedings of the 7th Socratic Lectures (pp. 47–55).
Knezevic, E., et al. (2023). The role of cortisol in chronic stress and neurodegeneration. Cells, 12(23), 272. Https://doi.org/10.3390/cells1223272
Komoltsev, I. G., & Gulyaeva, N. V. (2022). Brain trauma, glucocorticoids and neuroinflammation: Dangerous liaisons for the hippocampus. Biomedicines, 10(5), 1139. https://doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10051139
Liu, X., Lin, L., Lu, L., Li, X., Han, Y., Qiu, Z., Li, Y., Song, X., Cao, W., & Li, T. (2022). Comparative transcriptional analysis identified characteristic genes and patterns in HIV‑infected immunological non‑responders. Frontiers in Immunology, 13, 807890. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2022.807890
McEwen, B. S. (1998). Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators. The New England Journal of Medicine, 338(3), 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM199801153380307
Nedelcu, D. (2025). Aspecte psihoneuroimunologice și epigenetice în analiza comportamentului infracțional – între reabilitare și recidivă. Juridice.ro. https://www.juridice.ro/775625/aspecte-psihoneuroimunologice-si-epigenetice-in-analiza-comportamentului-infractional-intre-reabilitare-si-recidiva.html
Ravi, M., et al. (2021). The immunology of stress and the impact of inflammation on the brain and behavior. BJPsych Advances, 27(S3), 158–165. Https://doi.org/10.1192/bja.2020.83
Rossbach, B., & Lenz, C. (2025). Fehlregulationen der neuroendokrinen Stressachse (Material educațional intern / suport de curs nepublicat). IMD Berlin MVZ.
Schubert, C. (2018). Was uns krank macht, was uns heilt: Aufbruch in eine neue Medizin. Kailash Verlag.
Schubert, C. (2020). Psychoneuroimmunology: A personal view of the development of a new interdisciplinary field. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity.
Song, H., Fang, F., Tomasson, G., Arnberg, F. K., Mataix‑Cols, D., Fernández de la Cruz, L., Almqvist, C., Fall, K., & Valdimarsdóttir, U. A. (2018). Stress‑related disorders and risk of autoimmune disease. JAMA, 319(23), 2388–2400. Https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.7028
Vashist, S., & Schneider, E. M. (2014). Depression: An insight and need for personalized psychological stress monitoring and management. Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 10, 177–182.
Legal sources
Bălșan v. Romania, App. No. 49645/09, Eur. Ct. H.R. (May 23, 2017). HUDOC. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch [BGB]. (n.d.). §§ 1565 Abs. 2, 1568. https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de
Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018, asp 5. (2018). https://www.legislation.gov.uk
Gewaltschutzgesetz [GewSchG]. (2001). Gesetz zum zivilrechtlichen Schutz vor Gewalttaten und Nachstellungen (BGBl. I S. 3513; in force since 01.01.2002). https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de
Law 217/2003 on the prevention and combat of domestic violence, republished with later amendments. (2003). Monitorul Oficial al României.
Opuz v. Turkey, App. No. 33401/02, Eur. Ct. H.R. (June 9, 2009). HUDOC. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
Serious Crime Act 2015. (2015). https://www.legislation.gov.uk
Talpis v. Italy, App. No. 41237/14, Eur. Ct. H.R. (March 2, 2017). HUDOC. https://hudoc.echr.coe.int
Dr. drd. Diana Nedelcu
