Intimate partner violence among immigrants in The United States
Gender-Based Violence
and Intimate Partner Violence: Its Underlying Cause
Gender-based
violence is violence against a person because of his or her gender.
Intimate-partner violence (also called domestic violence) is a form of
gender-based violence because the majority of the victims are women and the
perpetrators are men who are known to or have intimate relationships with their
female victims. Although women can be violent, most intra family violence
acts that cause injuries are perpetrated by men against women.[1] In the United States, domestic
violence has been recognized a social problem since the 1970s. The
Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women adopted by the United
Nations in 1993 defines violence against women as “any act of gender-based
violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or
psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts,
coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in
private life.” [2] The World Health Organization (WHO)
also recognized violence against women a serious human rights abuse and an
important public health problem.[3]
Feminist
perspective considers patriarchy, which emphasizes the domination of men and
the subordination of women to men’s authority, as the root cause of
intimate-partner violence.[4] Under this view, there are two
aspects of patriarchy that lead to the inferior status of women. First,
hierarchies in the organization of the family, economy, politics and social
relationships give men dominant positions in families and society (e.g., men
are heads of household, hold more important economic and political positions
than women and are paid more than women at work). Secondly, the cultural aspect
of patriarchy defines men’s and women’s expected characteristics (masculinity
and femininity) as well as various gender-based practices (e.g., women are
expected to maintain sexual purity for their husband, while men are allowed, or
even encouraged, to engage in sexual promiscuity; women’s place is in the home
while men are expected to work outside the home and hold social positions).
This cultural aspect is used to reinforce and rationalize the inferior status
of women, making women’s subordination to men appear to be natural and
essential. Feminist perspective on intimate partner violence has been supported
by many studies, which show that men who believe in women’s subordination often
use violence against their female partners (Bui, 2004; Smith, 1990; Yllo, 1984) [5]
Intimate-Partner Violence among Immigrants in the United States
Surveys
in the US general population has indicated that about 25% of women (over 18)
experience intimate-partner violence at least once in their life time.[6] No systematic survey among
immigrants in the United States has been conducted, but news from the media and
empirical studies in specific immigrant groups (e.g., Asian Indian, Chinese,
Japanese, Mexican and Vietnamese Americans) suggest that intimate partner
violence is a common problem in immigrant communities.[7] Although intimate partner violence
is a universal phenomenon that persists in all countries, violence against
women in different parts of the world takes on special characteristics related
to cultural and historical conditions. For many immigrants, moving to and
settlement in the United States reduce the likelihood of intimate-partner
violence, perhaps as a result of acculturation and the acceptance of gender
equality norms, or awareness of the prohibition of domestic violence in the
United States as well as the penalty for its violation. On the other hand, for
many other immigrants, intimate partner violence increases or only occurs after
moving to the United States. Several aspects of immigrant life can facilitate
intimate partner violence, including changing family dynamics, differences in
acculturation between men and women, and the legal dependency of sponsored
wives or brides.
Changing Family Dynamics and Men’s Downward Mobility. For many immigrants from Asia and
Latin America, life in the United States provides many economic opportunities
for women, thus increasing their power and status in the family and society,
while upward mobility opportunities for many immigrant men decrease. In
fact, immigrant men who had high levels of education and social positions in
their country of origin but did not update their education and professional
skills after moving to the United States could not find jobs commensurable to
the social positions they used to hold in their countries of origin.
Men’s downward mobility is often accompanied by a role reversal and a shift of
power in many immigrant families where women become the main contributor to the
family economy. Men who loss family and social status often feel the need
to express their power and authority of the household head. When family
conflicts occur, these men can use violence against their female partners to
show their right to control of women in consistence with the gender practice in
their countries of origin.
Differences between Men and Women in Adaptation to American
Culture and the Norms of Gender Equality. Most immigrant women embrace gender equality and do not want
to be controlled by their husbands or partners. On the contrary, many immigrant
men still maintain their old way of thinking about women’s subordination. Some
men become jealous and increase their control of wives or partners because they
perceive that women in the United States have too much freedom, including the
freedom to socialize with men. In case of family conflicts
resulting from differences between men and women in gender norms, these men
tend to use violence against their female partners to maintain their right to
control of women.
Legal
Dependency of Sponsored Wives and Brides. Women from foreign
countries who are married to American citizens are most vulnerable to
intimate-partner violence because they are totally dependent on the sponsorship
of their husbands or fiancés for their legal status in the United States. Many
men take this opportunity to force their sponsored wives or fiancées to obey
their demands, particularly when these women do not have any support system in
the United States and cannot leave the relationships for fear of being returned
to their countries of origin.
Intimate-Partner Violence Interventions and Preventions in the
United States
The Criminalization of Intimate Partner Violence. The first step of domestic
violence intervention was the creation of domestic violence law. Prior to the
1970s, domestic violence was not a separate crime in the United States but
often viewed as a private family matter. The police often refused to intervene
if there was no serious injury, and prosecutors often discouraged women from
filing complaints against their husbands or partners. One of the reasons was
the tendency of many abused women to stop working with the court and decline to
testify against their abusive husbands or partners at the trial, leading to
conviction failure. In the midst of the civil rights movement in the 1970s,
feminist groups began asking for government’s protection of women’s
safety. While women’s advocates lobbied with Congress members for a new
law, feminist scholars conducted research to show the widespread problem of
violence against women as well as its serious personal and social consequences.
In 1984, the first empirical study showed deterrent effects of the criminal
justice approach to domestic violence: those who committed domestic violence
and were arrested were less likely to recidivate than those who were not
arrested.[8] To pressure the police to change
their practice regarding domestic violence interventions, feminist groups helped
domestic violence victims file lawsuits against police departments that failed
to protect victims of domestic violence for discriminatory treatment because
victims of domestic violence did not receive the same protection offered to
victims of violence by strangers. In 1985, the court, in Thurman
v. City of Torrington (1985), ordered City of Torrington (Connecticut)
to pay the victim (Thurman) 2.5 million dollars for compensation damage because
Torrington Police Department had failed to protect the victim from violent acts
by her former husband who set fire on her house, causing her to be severely
burned. Various fighting strategies initiated by feminist groups finally
resulted in the criminalization of domestic violence in the United States, and
since 1985 states have made intimate partner violence a separate crime.
Intervention Approaches for Offenders. Various approaches have been
used to deal with domestic violence offenders. The first is the criminal
justice approach with three related policies: 1) mandatory arrest or pro-arrest
policy (the police must arrest the suspect if there is evidence that violence
has occurred); 2) mandatory prosecution policy (prosecutors must prosecute the
suspect); 3) enhanced penalty for those convicted of domestic violence.
In addition, domestic violence offenders are required to attend rehabilitation
programs called batterers’ programs. Generally, these programs teach anger
management, appropriate attitudes and behaviors toward family members, and
appropriate ways to solve family conflicts without resorting to violence.
Participation in substance abuse treatment programs is also required for those
who committed domestic violence while under the influence of alcohol and/or
drugs.
Intervention Approaches for Victims. Different intervention
approaches have been used to assist victims of intimate-partner violence.
First, these victims can request a restraining order (also called personal
protection order), which is issued by the court and aimed at preventing the
offenders from approaching and attacking their victims again. As many
victims of intimate-partner violence are reluctant to report their
victimization, thus fail to receive appropriate health care services, domestic
violence screening programs have been established at health care facilities to
detect victims of domestic violence and refer them to appropriate victim
assistance programs. The court’s victim assistance program is aimed at
facilitating the cooperation of domestic violence victims with the court process,
particularly the prosecution of the offenders, with the expectation that a
conviction and subsequent penalty would deter future violence. In
addition, many victim assistance programs have been established to help abused
women become self-sufficient and can live independently if they wish to leave
the abusive relationships or help increase women’s status in the family if they
wish to stay with their husbands or partners. These programs include women’s
shelters (for temporary housing), various services that assist women complete
paperwork for restraining order, divorce or separation, child custody and
support, as well as public assistance, help domestic violence victims find jobs
or job training programs, or provide these women with financial assistance
(e.g., small loans for business). Psychological counseling programs
assist abused women who experience psychological and mental health problems as
a result of violence; family counseling programs provides counseling for women
who feel confused about the situation of their family lives, helping them make
appropriate decisions about family relationships.
Intervention Programs for Children of Abused Women. Because witnessing family violence can
negatively affect children’s mental health, learning ability, and behavior,
children should be counseled after witnessing family violence. Counseling
programs for children are often created along with intervention programs for
victims.
Intervention Programs for the Whole Family. A small number of programs
include the participation of both abusive husbands, abused wives and even their
children. The goal of these programs is to maintain family life without
violence. The objectives of these programs include explaining common reasons of
family conflicts, providing opportunities for husbands and wives to express
their views about family matters, hoping they could understand each other’s
thinking and emotion, and explaining different ways to solve family conflicts
without resorting to violence.
Prevention of Domestic Violence through Public Education. Preventing domestic violence from happening
is the goal of public education programs. Prevention programs are often
implemented in October, which is Domestic Violence Awareness Month when women’s
advocates organize public talks, or distribute flyers and brochures, about
gender equality as well as negative consequences of domestic violence in
neighborhoods, public libraries, workplace, universities and schools. TV
advertisements about the problems of domestic violence are also often
broadcasted in October. Domestic violence provention is also included in school
curricula for children grades 1 to 12.
Immigrant Women’s Responses to Intimate- Partner Violence
Despites
numerous intervention programs, immigrant women are often reluctant to talk
with people from outside families about their victimization and do not often
reach out to intervention programs for help. Traditional gender practices
are a common reason for not responding to domestic abuse. In fact,
immigrants who grew up in Asian and Latin American countries before moving to
the United States are still influenced by their traditional gender norms. These
immigrants tend to believe that domestic violence is a private family matter
that should not be known by outsiders, or they may think that women are beaten
because of their fault (e.g., failure to meet their husbands’ expectations).
Many women are also afraid that reporting abuse incidents would make their
husbands or partners angry, thus causing more family problems. Cultural
isolation (e.g., a lack of English proficiency, knowledge about US laws and
one’s legal rights) and social isolation (e.g., a lack of contacts with people
in the mainstream society) often prevent abused women from being aware of
and/or using available victim services in the mainstream society. Women who
experience economic isolation (e.g., a lack of employment) also do not want to
report their victimization because they often depend on their abusers’
financial support. Women who are sponsored to the United States by their
husbands or fiancés also do not often report abuse incidents because they are
afraid that their husbands or fiancés would retaliate and stop the sponsorship.
Although the Immigration Marriage Fraud Act of 1986 allows abused women to file
petition for their legal residency in the United States, complicated paperwork
and legal procedure would deter many immigrant women from leaving their
husbands or relinquish their husbands’ sponsorship.
Effective Interventions for Immigrant Women
Victim
services have an important impact on women’s decisions to use the criminal
justice system and other supportive services to deal with abuse. Because
abused women’s needs are diverse and cannot be served by a single agency, a
combination of different victim services is necessary for addressing abused
women’s various needs. In the United States, the coordination of community
responses is considered best practices for addressing the problem of domestic
violence, and the more domestic violence victims have access to community
resources, the safer they are in the long run.[9] Among Vietnamese immigrants, women
who could enjoy long-term safety were those who had left the abusive
relationships, or those who stayed in the relationship but used many victim
services in their community.[10] Research has documented several
service-related factors that can facilitate women’s actions to protect their
safety, including:
1. Helping women realize
the need to change their lives, either by leaving the relationship, or by
changing family dynamics, to avoid future victimization.
2.
Providing women with
services that help them become economically and emotionally
independent.
3.
Coordinating victim
services from different agencies to address women’s various needs.
4.
The importance of law
enforcement referrals (law enforcement is often the first agency that victims
contact when they need help)
5. The importance of knowing victims’ language and culture to facilitate victims’ trust and mutual understanding between victims and service providers.[11]
By Bui Ngoc Hoan
University of Tennessee at Knoxville
Notes
1.
Tjaden, P. &
Thoennes. N. (2000). Extent, Nature, and Consequence of
intimate partner violence. Washington, DC: Office of Justice Program, US
Department of Justice.
2.
Heise, L. L, Pitanguy,
J. & Germain, A. (1994). Violence Against Women: The Hidden Health
Burden. Washington, DC: Washington, DC: The World Bank.
3.
WHO. (2005). Multi-country
study on women’s health and domestic violence against women. URL:http://www.who.int/gender/violence/who_multicountry_study/en/.
4.
Dobash, R. E. &
Dobash, R. P. (1979). Violence against Wives: A Case against Patriarchy.
New York, NY: Free Press.
5.
Bui, H. N.
(2004). In the adopted land: Abused immigrant women and the criminal
justice system. Westport, CT: Greenwood; Smith, M. D. (1990). Patriarchal
ideology and wife beating: A test of feminist hypothesis.Violence and
Victims, 5, 257-273; Yllo, K. A & Straus, M. A. (1984). Patriarchy and
violence against wives: The impact of structural and normative factors. Journal
of International and Comparative Social Welfares, 1, 1-13.
6.
Tjaden, P. &
Thoennes. N. (1998). Prevalence, Incidence, and
Consequences of Violence Against Women: Findings From the National Violence
Against Women Survey. Washington, DC: Office of Justice Program, US
Department of Justice.
7.
Abrahm, M.
(2000). Speaking the Unspeakable: Marital Violence among South Asian
Immigrants in the United States. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University
Press; Bui, H.N. & Morash, M. (2008). Immigration, Masculinity, and
Intimate-Partner Violence. Feminist Criminology, 3, 191-225;
Lee, M. & Au, P. (1998). Chinese battered women in North America: The
experience and treatment. In A. Roberts (Ed.), Battered Women and their
Families: Interventions and Treatment Programs (pp. 448-482). New
York, NY: Springer; Morash, M., Bui, H. N. & Santiago, A. (2000). Cultural
specific gender ideology and wife abuse in Mexican-decent families.International
Review of Victimology, 7 (Special Issue), 67-91. Rimonte, N. (1989).
Domestic Violence among Pacific Asians. In Asian Women United of California
(Ed.), Making Waves: An Anthology of Writings by and about Asian
American Women (pp. 327-337). Boston: Beacon Press; Yoshihama,
N. (1999). Domestic violence against women of Japanese decent in Los Angeles:
Two methods of estimating prevalence.Violence Against Women, 5,
869-897.
8.
Sherman, L & Berk,
R. (1984). The specific deterrent effects of arrests for domestic
assault. American Sociological Review, 27, 487-519.
9.
Clark, S.. J., Burt,
M. R., Schulte, M. M. & Maguire, K. (1996). Coordinated Community
Responses to Domestic Violence in Six Communities: Beyond the Justice System.
Washington, DC: The Urban Institute; Pence, E. and Shepard. M. (1999). An
introduction: Developing a coordinated community response. In M. Shepard &
E. Pence (Eds.), Coordinating Community Response to Domestic Violence:
Lessons from Duluth and Beyond (pp. 3-23). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage;
Sullian, C. M. (2000). The community advocate project: A model for effectively
advocating for women with abusive partners. In J. P. Vincent & E. N. Jouriles
(Eds), Domestic Violence: Guidelines for Research-informed
Practice (pp. 43-53). London and Philadelphia: Jessica Kinsley
Publishers.
10.
Morash, M. & Bui,
H. N. (2008). The connection of U.S. best practices to outcomes for abused Vietnamese-American
women. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal
Justice, 32, 221-243.
11.
Morash, M., Bui,
H. N, Steven, T. & Zhang, Y (2008). Getting out of harm’s way: One year
outcomes for abused women in a Vietnamese immigrant enclave. Violence
Against Women, 14, 1413-1430.
http://gas.hoasen.edu.vn/en/gas-page/intimate-partner-violence-among-immigrants-united-states-0
