Domestic violence and socioeconomic factors
Domestic violence has been identified as a complex health issue that affects almost all countries. The effects of such violence on the health of a victim is often severe and in addition to immediate wounds and injuries, the victims often suffer from chronic health problems as well. This commonly refers to abuse or violence against a person by another, in a domestic or home setting (Abramsky et al., 2011). This is commonly exhibited in cohabitation and/or marriages. The term is interchangeably used with intimate partner violence as well that is generally committed by a partner or spouse, towards the other member with whom an intimate relationship is shared. 1in 6 women and 9 men, respectively are subjected to physical and sexual abuse before they reach 15 years of age. Further statistical reports state that 1 female was often killed by a former spouse or partner in a week, during 2012-2014. Domestic and family violence have been found to repeatedly target more than 54% women in Australia (Aihw.gov.au, 2018). Furthermore, the major factors that make domestic violence an issue of global concern is that the documented evidences for the long term impacts on mental health and wellbeing of the victims (Root & Brown, 2014). This essay will explore the role of psychological and socioeconomic factors that govern the rates of domestic violence.
Domestic violence and socioeconomic factors- The socioeconomic status of women has been associated with domestic violence based on three different views. The first view is that although these forms of violence and abuse are found to occur across a range of socioeconomic classes, women belonging to poor household report an increased likelihood of being the survivors of such violence and abuse, when compared to their wealthy and affluent counterparts (Pearlman et al., 2016). Further evidences have also established the fact that women who are found to demonstrate economic dependence on their perpetrators show a reduced tendency of leaving or going away from an abusive intimate partnership, thereby increasing their chances of suffering. In addition, those belonging to poor economic backgrounds are also more likely to return to their abusive partners due to lack of financial stability (Pallitto et al., 2013). Besides, economic abuse has also been recognised as a major kind of domestic abuse, owing to the fact that abusive partners often act in a way that creates financial harm on vulnerable women and undermine their capability to become monetarily independent (James, Brody & Hamilton, 2013). Certain examples of domestic abuse related to socioeconomic factors are restricting the ability of women to secure employment and attend school.
Domestic violence and psychological factors
Taking into consideration the financial status of a woman, domestic abuse creates a major impact on the fiscal security of the victims in the short and long run, thereby affecting the health status, employment, and fiscal debts. In other word, there is mounting evidence for the correlation between poor socioeconomic background and increases risks of domestic abuse (Tippett & Wolke, 2014). Poor socioeconomic status has been identified as a recurring factor in the prevalence and incidence of crime in a domestic setting, and also acts as a determining factor in the extent of abuse caused. Low socioeconomic status of households often place a strain on the communities and relationships in domestic households, thus leading to an impaired functionality. There are other aspects of disadvantage in socioeconomic factors as well that create an impact on the likelihood of the propensity of an individual to violence (Golden, Perreira & Durrance, 2013). Hence, socioeconomic status acts as a critical indicator of connectedness between families, individuals and the community (Aizer, 2011). Further evidences also state that in terms of partners or spouses of injured women and children, intermittent employment, unemployment, less educational attainment are the key socioeconomic factors that are positively related to domestic violence (Devries et al., 2011).
Besides, data from scholarly papers also elaborate on the fact that poor economic condition most often prevent partners or spouses from proper acquisition of resources, thus impeding and/or restricting their ability to gain proper employment, and maintaining or advancing their profession and career (Berhane, 2017). Owing to the role of poor socioeconomic conditions in preventing victims from securing high education and spending the assets and finances of the victim, without consent, the victims, usually females and children get exploited more by the perpetrators.
Domestic violence and psychological factors- According to the psychological model, there are a range of psychological factors that directly contribute to a range of difficulties and interfere with domestic life (Dalal & Lindqvist, 2012). Psychological problems such as, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, substance abuse and depression have often been found to act as major influencing factors. Presence of past trauma often increases the risks of development of psychological issues. Children living in homes where they are subjected to domestic abuse or are a witness to incidents where their mothers are abused by their partners often grow up in a setting that is quite unpredictable and filled with anxiety and tension, besides being dominated by a sense of fear (Straus, Gelles & Steinmetz, 2017). This results in the onset of psychological trauma. Thus, in place of growing up in a physically and emotionally secure, safe, predictable and nurturing environment, these children start worrying about their future. All of these changes in the children can be attributed to the fact that they have observed their mothers being demeaned and assaulted (Selic, Pesjak & Kersnik, 2011).
Evaluation of the factors
Thus, being a witness to such incidents or directly being assaulted by family members increases the likelihood of such children to act as perpetrators in future. Concerns related to placing a blame on, or considering battered women accountable for the violent act of their partners discourage a focus on the major psychological difficulties that are related with domestic abuse. Another crucial factor that is related to domestic abuse is alcoholism (Livingston, 2011). Furthermore, reports also suggest that an estimated two-third victims of domestic violence made by spouses report a drinking habit in the perpetrators. Other psychological factors that are directly responsible for an increase in the rates of domestic violence are negative schemas, and perceptions of relationship. Negative schemas have been identified to create a negative world view among the perpetrators (Dutton, 2011). Furthermore, the tendency of the perpetrators to react with anger to events that are related to their life circumstances are found to hinder their recovery from childhood traumatic experiences (Yamawaki et al., 2012). Feelings of guilt also keep the victims, especially women from leaving abusive relationships.
Evaluation of the factors- An analysis of the aforementioned factors helped in examination of the impacts that different psychological triggers and economic stress exert on the incidence of family violence. There exists a major inverse relationship between the financial status of a woman and children (since they are dependent on elders), and their risks of victimisation. With an increase in social class, the likelihood and vulnerability of domestic violence also increases. Although this does not necessarily mean that women belonging to middle-class and wealthy socioeconomic conditions display an immunity from domestic violence, they are better able to keep the rates of domestic violence hidden from others (Peek-Asa et al., 2011). Employment is considered as a major indicator of stability and financial health. Studies have often examined the relation between employment statuses of women with rates of domestic violence victimisation and have established the fact that females and adolescents who have been subjected to violence do not usually display a lack of desire to seek employment opportunities (Garcia-Moreno & Watts, 2011).
However, depending on the severity and recency of the attacks, the victim most commonly face greater employment problems such as, increased absenteeism and difficulty in work maintenance, when compared to those who are not survivors of domestic abuse (Lila, Gracia & Murgui, 2013). Abusive partners and/or elders have been found to sabotage the efforts of the victims to seek and sustain work. However, studies also elaborate on the fact that the partner or the perpetrator’s employment status and economic condition must also be taken into account, in order to determine the risks of domestic violence in a home setting. An analysis of the different causative factors also suggest that social support networks play a major role in influencing domestic violence victimization and perpetration (Moyer, 2013). Women survivors of domestic abuse have been found to usually turn to their friends and family for obtaining tangible and emotional support, such as, food, security, and temporary housing (Sylaska & Edwards, 2014).
Their present economic conditions often restricts the capacity of the concerned friends and family members to assist the victims and/or survivors, thus resulting in an amplified strain on the battered adolescent and women’s shelter. This increases their potential for experiencing homelessness, thereby making them return to their abusive perpetrators. Not having any such confidant at the disposal of the victims also make it difficult for them to take necessary steps for ending the abuse. Thus, a weak support network directly leads to a situation that involves relative social isolation, which in turn acts as a probable risk factor for victimization. Women who are in an intimate relationship with alcoholic partners or those under substance abuse are more prone to situations that comprise of violence.
Thus, it can be concluded that violence against females and children is a matter of global concern and cuts across different economic and social classes. Most victims subjected to domestic violence get trapped in a cycle of abuse that is followed by an increase in tension and an act of violence. This tendency of domestic violence is often passed down over several generations. Socioeconomic condition and psychological functioning have been found to play a great role in controlling the cycle of abuse in domestic violence that comprises of normal behaviour, fantasy, set-up, abuse, guilt and excuses. Abusive behaviour and domestic violence is most often a deliberate choice that is made by a perpetrator towards the victim, in order to control the latter. Some of the primary tactics that are adopted by the perpetrators include humiliation, threats, isolation, dominance, blame, denial, and intimidation. Thus, in order to reduce the rates of domestic violence, there is a need to address the socioeconomic disparities and psychological functioning of both the perpetrators and the victims. This will greatly help in eliminating or lowering the severity of the negative impacts of domestic abuse on the minds of the victims.
References
Abramsky, T., Watts, C. H., Garcia-Moreno, C., Devries, K., Kiss, L., Ellsberg, M., … & Heise, L. (2011). What factors are associated with recent intimate partner violence? Findings from the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence. BMC public health, 11(1), 109.
Aihw.gov.au. (2018). Family, domestic and sexual violence in Australia, 2018, Summary – Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Retrieved from https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/domestic-violence/family-domestic-sexual-violence-in-australia-2018/contents/summary
Aizer, A. (2011). Poverty, violence, and health the impact of domestic violence during pregnancy on newborn health. Journal of Human resources, 46(3), 518-538.
Berhane, Y. (2017). Ending Domestic violence against women in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian Journal of Health Development (EJHD), 18(3), 131-132.
Dalal, K., & Lindqvist, K. (2012). A national study of the prevalence and correlates of domestic violence among women in India. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, 24(2), 265-277.
Devries, K., Watts, C., Yoshihama, M., Kiss, L., Schraiber, L. B., Deyessa, N., … & Berhane, Y. (2011). Violence against women is strongly associated with suicide attempts: evidence from the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence against women. Social science & medicine, 73(1), 79-86.
Dutton, D. G. (2011). The domestic assault of women: Psychological and criminal justice perspectives. UBC press.
Garcia-Moreno, C., & Watts, C. (2011). Violence against women: an urgent public health priority. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 89, 2-2.
Golden, S. D., Perreira, K. M., & Durrance, C. P. (2013). Troubled times, troubled relationships: how economic resources, gender beliefs, and neighborhood disadvantage influence intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(10), 2134-2155.
James, L., Brody, D., & Hamilton, Z. (2013). Risk factors for domestic violence during pregnancy: a meta-analytic review. Violence Vict, 28(3), 359-80.
Lila, M., Gracia, E., & Murgui, S. (2013). Psychological adjustment and victim-blaming among intimate partner violence offenders: The role of social support and stressful life events. The European journal of psychology applied to legal context, 5(2), 147-153.
Livingston, M. (2011). A longitudinal analysis of alcohol outlet density and domestic violence. Addiction, 106(5), 919-925.
Moyer, V. A. (2013). Screening for intimate partner violence and abuse of elderly and vulnerable adults: US preventive services task force recommendation statement. Annals of internal medicine, 158(6), 478-486.
Pallitto, C. C., García?Moreno, C., Jansen, H. A., Heise, L., Ellsberg, M., & Watts, C. (2013). Intimate partner violence, abortion, and unintended pregnancy: Results from the WHO Multi?country Study on Women’s Health and Domestic Violence. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 120(1), 3-9.
Pearlman, D. N., Zierler, S., Gjelsvik, A., & Verhoek-Oftedahl, W. (2016). Neighborhood environment, racial position, and risk of police-reported domestic violence: a contextual analysis. Public health reports.
Peek-Asa, C., Wallis, A., Harland, K., Beyer, K., Dickey, P., & Saftlas, A. (2011). Rural disparity in domestic violence prevalence and access to resources. Journal of Women’s Health, 20(11), 1743-1749.
Root, M. P., & Brown, L. (2014). An analysis of domestic violence in Asian American communities: A multicultural approach to counseling. In Diversity and complexity in feminist therapy (pp. 143-164). Routledge.
Selic, P., Pesjak, K., & Kersnik, J. (2011). The prevalence of exposure to domestic violence and the factors associated with co-occurrence of psychological and physical violence exposure: a sample from primary care patients. BMC public health, 11(1), 621.
Straus, M. A., Gelles, R. J., & Steinmetz, S. K. (2017). Behind closed doors: Violence in the American family. Routledge.
Sylaska, K. M., & Edwards, K. M. (2014). Disclosure of intimate partner violence to informal social support network members: A review of the literature. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 15(1), 3-21.
Tippett, N., & Wolke, D. (2014). Socioeconomic status and bullying: a meta-analysis. American journal of public health, 104(6), e48-e59.
Yamawaki, N., Ochoa-Shipp, M., Pulsipher, C., Harlos, A., & Swindler, S. (2012). Perceptions of domestic violence: The effects of domestic violence myths, victim’s relationship with her abuser, and the decision to return to her abuser. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(16), 3195-3212.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
