
|
African Journal of Reproductive Health
Women's Health and Action Research Centre
ISSN: 1118-4841
Vol. 15, Num. 4, 2011, pp. 78-86
|
African Journal of Reproductive Health, Vol. 15, No. 4, Dec, 2011, pp. 78-86
Original Research Article
Factors
influencing gender based violence among men and women in selected states in Nigeria
Facteurs qui influent sur la violence basée sur les
sexes chez les hommes et les femmes dans les états choisis au Nigéria Oladepo O1, Yusuf
OB*2 and Arulogun OS1
1Dept of Health Promotion and
Education, College of Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria;
2Dept
of Epidemiology, Medical Statistics & Environmental Health, College of
Medicine, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria
*For correspondence: Email:
bidemi_yusuf@yahoo.com Tel: 234 805 505 9818
Code Number: rh11054
Abstract
This
study determined the factors associated with gender based violence among 3000
men and women in selected states in Nigeria. Respondents who had experienced
physical violence were 806(26.9%), comprising 353(11.8%) males and 453(15.1%)
females (p<0.001). Respondents who had experienced sexual violence were 364
(12.1%) of which 221 (7.4%) were males and 143(4.8%) were females
(p<0.0001). Married female respondents were more likely to experience
physical violence than single respondents (OR= 1.71, 95%CI: 1.15-2.53 p=0.008).
In addition, lower risk of experiencing sexual violence among males was
observed among those who do not drink alcohol. The study has shown that gender based violence still constitutes a
problem in Nigeria, affecting women more than men. However, efforts should be
geared towards addressing the factors that promote violence among both sexes
through increased awareness and education (Afr
J Reprod Health 2011; 15[4]: 78-86).
Résumé
Cette étude a déterminé les facteurs liés à la
violence basée sur les sexes chez 3000 hommes et femmes dans les états choisis
au Nigéria. Les interviewés qui ont vécu la violence physique comptaient
806(26,9%) y compris 353 (11,8%) mâles et 453 (15,1%) femelles (p<0,001).
Les interviewés qui ont vécu la violence sexuelles comptaient 364 (12,1%) dont
221 (7,4%) étaient des mâles et 143 (4,8%) étaient des femelles (p<,0001).
Les interviewés femelles mariées avaient plus la possibilité de subir la
violence physique que les interviewées célibataires (0R=1,71, 95%CI :
1,15-2,53 p=0,008). De plus, le risque plus élevé chez les hommes de subir la
violence sexuelle a été lié significativement à létat de fumeur des
partenaires, létat professionnel et la consommation dalcool chez les mâles.
Létude a montré que la violence basée basée sur les sexes constitue encore un
problème au Nigéria et touche plus les femmes que les hommes. Néanmoins, il
faut faire des efforts pour soccuper des facteurs qui encouragent la violence
chez les deux sexes à travers lintensification de la sensibilisation et
léducation (Afr J Reprod Health 2011;
15[4]: 78-86).
Keywords: Physical
violence, Sexual violence, Nigeria
Introduction
Gender
Based Violence (GBV) is a major public health and human rights problem
involving all ages and sexes. Although the term gender based violence is
widely used as a synonym for violence against women, GBV also occurs among men 1.
The UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women (DEVW), defines
the term 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.
Physical abuse is a pattern of physical assaults and threats used to control
another person. It includes punching, hitting, choking, biting, and throwing
objects at a person, kicking, pushing and using a weapon such as a gun or a
knife. Sexual violence has been defined as any sexual act, unwanted sexual
comments or advances or acts to traffic womens sexuality, using coercion,
threats of harm or physical force by any person regardless of relationship to
the survivor in any setting 3. The scope of this definition has
been expanded to include forced sex, sexual coercion, rape and child abuse 4.
In this study, sexual violence is defined as any unwanted sexual act, such as
forced sex.
Current estimates of gender based
violence indicate that between 8-70% of women worldwide have been physically
and sexually assaulted by a male partner at least once in their lives 5.
In Zambia, DHS data indicate that 27% of ever-married women reported being
beaten by their spouse or partner in the past year and about 13% of 15-19 year
olds were sexually coerced in the past 12 months.6 In rural
Ethiopia, 49% of ever partnered women have ever experienced physical violence
by an intimate partner, while 59% had ever experienced sexual violence 7.
All these variations may be a consequence of underreporting, stigma, shame or
other social and cultural factors that deter women from discussing episodes of
violence 3. In another hospital based study in Nairobi, the
prevalence of sexual violence was 61.5%, while the proportion of physical
assault was 38.5% 8. This study also reported that majority of the
perpetrators of gender based violence were married (72.3%) and alcohol was a
significant contributor in 10.1% of determinant cases. In a study of Igbo
communities in Nigeria, 58.9% of women reported battery during pregnancy while
21.3% have been forced to have sexual intercourse 9.
Most investigations of domestic violence
have centered on men as the perpetrators of violence; however, this is not to
deny that cases of men being victims of domestic violence do not exist. It has
been reported that men have their share of adverse consequences of domestic
violence.
In the study by Fawole 10 on
violence among young female hawkers, 19.7% of women had experienced physical
assault, 36.3% had received sexual harassment, while only 7.2% had emotional or
psychological violence. Prevalence of wife beating among civil servants in
another study was 31.3%; 42.5% of the men had been perpetrators, while 23.5% of
the women had been victims. 11 In this study, alcohol consumption
and growing up in an environment where parents fight publicly were
significantly associated with men beating their wives, while being young,
unmarried and domestic violence between parents of the respondents were
significantly associated with women being beaten.
In spite of all the studies on violence
against women, documentation of violence against
men is almost non-existent. This may largely be due to the wide spread
tolerance of such acts and lack of appropriate legal framework that protects
women and men from domestic gender based violence in Nigeria.
Therefore, this study sets out to investigate the factors associated with gender
based violence among both men and women in Nigeria.
Methods
A
descriptive cross sectional study was carried out among men and women in three
states (Kaduna, Enugu and Oyo) of Nigeria. Oyo State is a state in
south-western Nigeria with its capital at Ibadan. Enugu state is inland in
south-eastern Nigeria with its capital at Enugu, while Kaduna state is located
at the northern end of Nigerias high plains which has its capital in Kaduna. Variations exist in these states on certain characteristics (socio demographic,
violence and behavioural) especially age at marriage. For example, in northern Nigeria, age at marriage is lower compared to other communities 12.
A Multi stage cluster random sampling procedure was
employed. The 6 geo-political zones of Nigeria were identified as clusters.
Stage 1 involved the random selection of 3 geo-political zones from a list of
the 6 geo-political zones in the country. This resulted in the selection of
south west, north central and south east zones. Stage 2 involved the random
selection of one state in each of the selected zones with the selection of Oyo,
Enugu and Kaduna states. These three states were selected using a simple
random sample from a list of all states in the zones, after which local
governments were randomly selected and then communities within the local
government areas. In the selected communities, a landmark was identified (e.g.
a church, mosque or market place) and a coin was tossed. If it showed a head,
the research assistant proceeded in the right direction; if it showed a tail,
the left direction was followed. Every consecutive household was visited and
respondents who were of reproductive age were selected. One eligible
respondent was recruited per household. If there were more than one, they were
asked to ballot. To be eligible for interview, the adult man or woman (whether
married or single) must have been (previously or currently) in an intimate
relationship.
The minimum sample size required to
determine level of domestic violence at a 5% level of significance with a 90%
power and a 5% error tolerable was calculated and a minimum sample size of 989
was arrived at which was increased to 1000 per state. Structured
questionnaires were administered by research assistants who had previous experience
in data collection with a minimum of a diploma or post high school experience.
They participated with field supervisors in a 1-day training session that
focused on the basic skills of data collection and contents of the
questionnaire. The objective and rationale of the study was explained to each
respondent and their consent was sought before administration of the
questionnaire. Information concerning social characteristics, demographic
characteristics, alcohol and smoking status, attitudes and perceptions towards
gender and relationships of each participant were collected. Questions were
derived from a thorough literature review including the WHO Multi-Country Study
of Violence against Women 13. Two principal domestic violence
outcome variables, following conventional definitions, were considered in this
analysis: Physical and sexual violence. Physical violence was assessed from
the response to questions asking whether the respondents had experienced at
least one of the 17 subtypes of physical violence (i.e., slap on the face,
throwing something at you, pushing, biting, tying up, pulling your hair, beaten
up, hit with an object, burning or acid attack, choking, stabbing, thrown out,
kicks on the body, shoving, dragging, knife threat and gun threat) on which
information related to physical violence was collected. Sexual violence was
assessed from the response to questions asking whether the respondent had
experienced at least one of the two subtypes of violence related to sex (i.e.,
denial of sex and forced sexual intercourse) in the present or past
relationship. The choice of variables for the identification of risk factors
was based on previous published studies and literature reviews on gender-based
violence 14, 15, 16, 17.
Statistical Analysis
Frequency tables were generated for all relevant
variables. Descriptive statistics such as means, and standard deviations were
used to summarize quantitative variables while qualitative variables were
summarized by percentages. The chi squared test was used to compare two
proportions and also to investigate associations between two qualitative
variables. Variables that were significant in the bivariate analysis were then
entered into a logistic regression model to investigate the strength of these
associations. The goodness of fit of the binary logistic model was assessed
using the Hosmer Lemeshow test 18. Odds ratios and 95% confidence
intervals were presented. Prevalence estimates of physical and sexual violence
were defined separately. The life time prevalence of physical and sexual
violence was defined as the experience of one or more acts of physical or
sexual violence (mentioned above) from a current or former male or female
partner at any time. Relationships between the two outcome variables (physical
and sexual violence) and explanatory variables were evaluated by sex of
respondents. Ninety-five percent confidence intervals (CIs) for prevalence
estimates were determined using previously described methods 19.
All analysis was performed using the SPSS at 5% level of significance.
Results
Demographic Characteristics of Respondents
The study consisted of 3000 survey respondents; 1496
(49.9%) males and 1504 (50.1%) females. The mean age of the respondents was
34.1years (S.D = 12.1years). About a third of the respondents were Igbos
(1052, 35.1%), Yorubas were 1030 (34.3%) while Hausas were 418(13.9%) A total
of 1739 (58%) were married, 1057 (35.2%) single, 82(2.7%) widowed, 53 (1.8%)
separated and 43 (1.4%) divorced. About one-third of survey respondents (939,
31.3%) had high school or secondary education, while 380 (12.7%) had primary
education. A larger percentage of survey respondents were artisans or traders
(1026, 34.2%), 530 (17.7%) were students, professionals were 458 (15.3%) and
civil servants were 244 (8.1%) (Table 1).
Prevalence of different types of Gender Based Violence
Gender based violence was defined by different
variables such as verbal abuse, slap on the face, throwing something at one,
and pushing among others. Verbal abuse had the highest prevalence (53.4%),
followed by slap on the face (12.7%). Three hundred (10.0%) respondents
mentioned denial of sex while only 92 (3.1%) reported forced sexual
intercourse. Significantly more females than males had experienced verbal
abuse - 56.6% vs 50.2% (p<0.001). However, more males than females had
experienced denial of sex - 13.1% Vs 7.0% (p<0.001). Also, forced sex was
more common among females than males (4.1% Vs 2.0%, p<0.001). Table 2 shows
the frequency distribution of the different types of violence experienced by
gender.
Physical and sexual Violence
Respondents who had experienced physical violence were
806 (26.9%) comprising 353(11.8%) males and 453(15.1%) females (p<0.001).
Respondents who had experienced sexual violence were 92 (3.1%) of which 30
(2.0%) were males and 62(4.1%) were females (p<0.001).
Table 1: Socio-demographic
characteristics of respondents
Characteristic |
Male |
Female |
Total |
Age(yrs) |
|
|
|
<29 |
601(40.2) |
695(46.2) |
1296(43.2) |
30-39 |
406(27.1) |
415(27.6) |
821(27.4) |
40-49 |
248(16.6) |
256(17.0) |
504(16.8) |
50-59 |
145(9.7) |
85(5.7) |
230(7.7) |
60-69 |
53(3.5) |
24(1.6) |
77(2.6) |
>70 |
28(1.9) |
13(0.9) |
41(1.4) |
Missing |
15(1.0) |
16(1.1) |
31(1.0) |
Total |
1496(100.0) |
1504(100.0) |
3000 |
Tribe |
|
|
|
Igbo |
520(34.8) |
532(35.4) |
1052(35.1) |
Yoruba |
511(34.2) |
519(34.5) |
1030(34.3) |
Hausa |
190(12.7) |
228(15.2) |
418(13.9) |
Other Tribes |
263(17.6) |
202(13.4) |
465(15.5) |
Foreigners |
4(0.27) |
17(1.1) |
21(0.7) |
Missing |
8(0.5) |
6(0.4) |
14(0.5) |
Total |
1496(100.0) |
1504(100.0) |
3000(100.0) |
Religion |
|
|
|
Christianity |
1058(70.7) |
1135(75.5) |
2193(73.1) |
Islam |
421(28.1) |
355(23.6) |
776(25.9) |
Traditional/Others |
14(0.96) |
7(0.5) |
21(0.7) |
Missing |
3(0.2) |
7(0.5) |
10(0.3) |
Total |
1496(100.0) |
1504(100.0) |
3000(100.0 |
Marital Status |
|
|
|
Married |
817(54.6) |
922(61.3) |
1739(58.0) |
Single |
614(41.0) |
443(29.5) |
1057(35.2) |
Widowed |
12(0.8) |
70(4.7) |
82(2.7) |
Divorced |
16(1.1) |
27(1.8) |
43(1.4) |
Separated |
24(1.6) |
29(1.9) |
53(1.8) |
Missing |
13(0.9) |
13(0.9) |
26(0.9) |
Total |
1496(100.0) |
1504(100.0) |
3000(100.0) |
Level of Education |
|
|
|
No formal education |
42(2.8) |
99(6.6) |
141(4.7) |
Adult/Quranic |
10(0.7) |
20(1.3) |
30(1.0) |
Primary |
170(11.4) |
210(13.9) |
380(12.7) |
Secondary/High |
459(30.7) |
480(31.9) |
939(31.3) |
College/Tertiary |
664(44.4) |
648(43.1) |
1312(43.7) |
Others |
7(0.5) |
21(1.4) |
28(0.9) |
Missing |
144(9.6) |
35(2.3) |
179(6.0) |
Total |
1496(100.0) |
1504(100.0) |
3000(100.0) |
Occupation |
|
|
|
Artisans |
406(27.1) |
620(41.2) |
1026(34.2) |
Business/trading/Self employed |
336(22.5) |
158(10.5) |
494(16.5) |
Professionals |
280(17.4) |
178(11.8) |
458(15.3) |
Students |
261(17.4) |
269(17.9) |
530(17.7) |
Civil Servants |
123(8.2) |
121(8.0) |
244(8.1) |
Applicants |
43(2.9) |
33(2.2) |
76(2.5) |
Retiree |
5(0.3) |
9(0.6) |
14(0.5) |
Politicians |
11(0.7) |
1(0.07) |
12(0.4) |
Missing |
31(2.1) |
115(7.6) |
146(4.9) |
Total |
1496(100.0) |
1504(100.0) |
3000(100.0) |
Table 2: Frequency distribution of the types of violence and the
proportion of positive respondenders
Types of Violence |
Female to Male |
Male to Female |
Total |
Frequency |
% |
Frequency |
% |
Frequency |
% |
Verbal
abuse |
751 |
50.2 |
851 |
56.6 |
1602 |
53.4 |
Slap
on the face or ear |
126 |
8.4 |
254 |
16.9 |
380 |
12.7 |
Throwing
something at you |
38 |
2.5 |
79 |
5.3 |
139 |
4.6 |
Pushing
or shoving |
116 |
7.8 |
127 |
8.4 |
243 |
8.1 |
No |
1380 |
92.2 |
1376 |
91.6 |
2756 |
91.9 |
Biting |
46 |
3.1 |
28 |
1.9 |
74 |
2.5 |
Tying
Up |
10
|
0.7 |
7 |
0.5 |
17 |
0.6 |
Pulling
your hair |
18 |
1.2 |
41 |
2.7 |
59 |
2.0 |
Beaten
Up |
63 |
4.2 |
217 |
14.4 |
280 |
9.4 |
Hitting
with an object |
34 |
2.3 |
47 |
3.1 |
81 |
2.7 |
Burning/Acid
Attack |
1 |
0.1 |
1 |
0.1 |
2 |
0.1 |
Choking |
16 |
1.1 |
12 |
0.8 |
28 |
0.9 |
Stabbing |
8 |
0.5 |
1 |
0.1 |
9 |
0.3 |
Thrown
out of the house |
38 |
2.5 |
78 |
5.2 |
116 |
3.9 |
Kicks/Blows
on parts of the body |
35 |
2.3 |
66 |
4.4 |
101 |
3.4 |
Denial
of sex |
195 |
13.1 |
105 |
7.0 |
300 |
10.0 |
Denial
of house keeping allowance |
31 |
2.1 |
153 |
10.2 |
184 |
6.1 |
Shoving |
63 |
4.2 |
24 |
1.6 |
87 |
2.9 |
Dragging |
57 |
3.8 |
157 |
10.5 |
112 |
3.7 |
Verbal
Threat |
174 |
11.6 |
157 |
10.5 |
331 |
11.0 |
Knife
Threat |
20 |
1.3 |
12 |
0.8 |
32 |
1.1 |
Gun
Threat |
4 |
0.3 |
2 |
0.1 |
6 |
0.2 |
Forced
Sexual intercourse |
30 |
2.0 |
62 |
4.1 |
92 |
3.1 |
Table 3: Logistic
regression results of physical violence against male respondents
Variable |
Odds
ratio |
Standard
error |
95% CI |
P
value |
Place
of residence
South west
South east
*North west |
1.79
1.61 |
0.212
0.215 |
1.18-2.72
1.05-2.45 |
0.006
0.028 |
Marital
status
Married
Separated
Divorced
Widowed
*Single |
1.82
1.17
2.241
1.26 |
0.222
0.53
0.64
0.721 |
1.18-2.80
0.41-3.37
0.64-7.87
0.31-5.16 |
0.007
0.77
0.21
0.76 |
Partners
educational level
No formal Education
Primary Education
Secondary Education
*Tertiary |
2.681
1.13
1.19 |
0.49
0.29
0.18 |
1.00-7.14
0.64-1.99
0.83-1.70 |
0.048
0.67
0.34 |
*Reference category
Logistic Regression Models of Physical and Sexual Violence
Physical Violence against Male Respondents
Males
who reside in the south west were more likely to experience physical violence
than males who reside in the North West (OR = 1.8, 95%Cl: 1.18-2.72, p=0.006).
Males who reside in the south east were also likely to experience physical
violence than males who reside in the North West (OR = 1.61, 95%CI: 1.05-2.45,
p=0.028). In addition, more married males experienced physical violence
compared with single males. (OR=1.82, 95%CI: 1.18-1.80, p=0.007). Male
respondents who have partners with no formal education were also more likely to
experience physical violence than males whose partners attained college or
tertiary education (OR=2.7, 95%CI: 1.00-7.14, p=0.048) (Table 3).
Table 4: Logistic regression of
physical violence against female respondents
Variable |
Odds
ratio |
Standard
error |
95%
CI |
P-value |
Partner
smokes cigarette
Yes vs. No |
2.05 |
0.183 |
1.44-2.94 |
P<0.001 |
Marital
status
Married
Separated
Divorced
Widowed
*Single |
1.71
9.71
12.92
1.645 |
0.200
0.519
0.692
0.367 |
1.15-2.53
3.51-26.86
3.325-50.17
0.801-3.378 |
0.008
P<0.001
P<0.001
0.175 |
Partner
drinks alcohol
Yes vs. No |
1.521 |
0.419 |
1.110-2.084 |
0.009 |
Age
of respondents in years
10-30
31-50
51-70
*>70 |
3.58
7.09
5.41 |
0.547
0.549
0.589 |
1.23-10.42
2.42-20.83
1.71-17.24 |
0.02
P<0.001
0.004 |
Place
of residence
South west vs. North west
South east vs. North west |
1.97
1.19 |
0.193
0.339 |
1.35-2.88
0.830-1.715 |
P<0.001 |
*Reference category
Table 5: Logistic regression analysis
of sexual violence against male respondents
Variable |
Odds
ratio |
Standard
Error |
95%
CI |
p-value |
Occupational
status
Business
Professional
Artisans
Civil servants
Students/NYSC
*Unemployed |
0.192
1.106
0.381
0.563
1.022 |
0.239
1.183
0.425
0.700
1.124 |
0.017-2.198
0.136-9.00
0.043-3.383
0.049-
6.449
0.985-
0.118 |
0.185
0925
0.387
0.644
0.085 |
Do
you drink alcohol
No
*Yes |
0.472 |
0.206 |
0.085-
0.201 |
0.085 |
*Reference category
Physical Violence against Female Respondents
Female
respondents who have partners that smoke cigarettes were 2 times more likely to
experience physical violence from such partners than female respondents who
have partners that do not smoke (OR=2.05, 95%CI: 1.44-2.94, p<0.001).
Married female respondents were about 1.71 times more likely to experience
physical violence than single respondents (OR=1.71, 95%CI: 1.15-2.53
p=0.0008). Female respondents who have partners that drink alcohol were 1.52
times more likely to experience physical violence (OR =1.52, 95%CI: 1.11-2.08,
p=0.009) than female respondents, who have partners who do not drink. Also,
female respondents in the age group 31-50 years were about 7 times more likely
to experience physical violence (OR= 7.09, 95%CI: 2.42-20.83, p<0.001) than
females above 70 years. Female respondents who reside in the south west were
about 2 times more likely to experience physical violence (OR= 1.97, 95%CI:
1.35-2.88, p<0.001) than females who reside in the North West (Table 4).
Sexual violence against male respondents
Male
respondents who are civil servants were about 2 times less likely to experience
sexual violence than unemployed males (OR= 0.562, 95%CI: 0.049- 6.45, p=0.64).
However, male students were more likely to experience sexual violence than
unemployed males (OR= 1.02, 95%CI: 0.985- 0.118, p=0.99). Male respondents who
do not drink alcohol were 2 times less likely to experience sexual violence
(OR=0.472, 95%CI: 0.085- 0.201, p=0.085) than male respondents who drink (Table
5).
Table 6: Logistic regression of sexual
violence against female respondents
Variable |
Odds
ratio |
Standard
Error |
95%
CI |
p-value |
Place
of residence
*South west
South east
South south
North west
North central |
3.92
5.94
3.71
4.58 |
1.79
4.15
2.74
2.04 |
1.596-
9.61
1.51-23.35
0.87-
15.76
1.92-
10.94 |
0.003
0.011
0.76
0.001 |
Age
of Respondents(yrs)
*10-30
31-50
51-70
>70 |
0.075
1.58
8.88 |
0.046
0.568
4.58 |
0.023-
0.246
0.784-3.198
3.22-24.45 |
>0.001
0.200
>0.001 |
Income
*Income not stated/No income
<5,000
5,000-10,000
10,001-15,000
15,000-20,001
20,001-25,000
>25,000 |
0.64
0.62
1.22
1.49
0.39
1.33 |
0.296
0.259
0.591
0.718
0.411
0.627 |
0.256-
1.589
0.276-1.407
0.468-315
0.579-
3.83
0.049-3.09
0.528-3.35 |
0.331
0.255
0.689
0.407
0.371
0.546 |
*Reference category
Sexual violence against female respondents
Female
respondents who are from the south-south region were about 6 times more likely
to experience sexual violence (OR= 5.94, 95%CI: 1.51- 23.35, p=0.011) than
females from the south west. Females who have income between 15000 and 20,000
were about 2 times more likely to experience sexual violence (OR= 1.49, 95%CI:
0.579-3.83, p=0.407) than female respondents with no income. Females in the
age group >29years were 4 times more likely to experience sexual violence
(OR=4.08, 95%CI: 1.39-12.05, p=0.003) compared with females above 70years
(Table 6). However, other variables (respondents education level, respondents
occupation, partners educational level, marital status and alcohol consumption
of partner) entered into the logistic regression did not achieve statistical
significance.
Discussion
Prevalence of Physical and Sexual Violence
Violence
remains a major public health problem all over the world. The prevalence of
physical violence in this study was higher than that reported by Anderson20
but lower than the ones reported by Wijma,21 Arulogun et al 22
and Fawole et al 10, 11. The prevalence of sexual violence in this
study was much lower than the Wijma and Arulogun studies 21, 22.
These findings are also consistent with those from the WHO multi-country study
in which the prevalence of physical and sexual violence was between 4% and 54% 23
among respondents.
Our findings revealed that more females experienced
physical violence than males. This might be due to cultural permissiveness
that justifies mens physical aggression against women. These findings also
support the results of the study conducted by Tjaden and Thoennes 24
which indicated that women are more likely to experience violence than men. The
rates of physical and sexual violence varied across the geopolitical zones with
south east having the highest prevalence. This fairly supports the early
studies conducted in Igbo communities in Nigeria which indicated a high
prevalence of physical violence 9. However, the rates in the
southwest study site were much lower than those reported in other studies on
violence in south west Nigeria 10,11.
Factors Associated with Physical and Sexual Violence
Relatively
young age, income, being divorced or separated, and prior victimization have
been identified as characteristics that are associated with an increased risk
for domestic violence from studies conducted by Hotaling 25.
However, considering the peculiarity of this study in exploring the factors for
domestic violence against males and females, factors identified for male
respondents include informal education of partners of male respondents as a
strong correlate for physical violence. This is similar to the findings of
Ghazizadeh26 in Iran who reported a significant association between
husbands education level and violence against their wives. However, this is
not consistent with the report from Zambia where those with lesser education
were less likely to report physical violence. 20. This difference
may be due to the different cultures and populations. Also, male respondents
who were married had a higher risk of experiencing physical violence than
single males. This is similar to the work of Anderson (2007) who reported that
having partners is a risk factor for domestic physical violence. In addition,
Anderson et al also showed that partner physical violence increased
progressively with number of partners. The study by Ghazizadeh in Iran also reported that married men experienced physical violence. Higher risk of
experiencing sexual violence was observed among professional male respondents
compared to those that were unemployed. However, this did not achieve
statistical significance. In addition, males who did not drink alcohol, had a
lower risk of experiencing sexual violence compared to males who drank alcohol
even though this also did not reach statistical significance. Even though the
exact relationship between alcohol and violence remains unclear, researches
have consistently found drinking patterns to be related to intimate partner and
sexual violence. These findings are similar to those reported by Saidi 8
and Fawole 30 in which there was an association between alcohol
intake, young age and violence. These findings reflect that factors which
influence physical violence differ from those that influence sexual violence
against men.
Females who had partners who smoke were at a higher
risk of physical violence. An additional finding of interest is that physical
and sexual violence was more common in young people particularly those less
than 30yrs. This is consistent with findings of Hotaling 25. This
may not be unconnected with their active life which may not go well with their
partners. Female respondents with low income experienced sexual and physical
violence more than those with higher income. Several authors have found results
similar to these ones10, 9. This is not unexpected as lack of
resources can facilitate stressful situation which is a precursor to violence.
Behavioural factors of partners were found to greatly influence domestic
violence against females which corroborates the findings by Coker 27
. Females who had partners that smoke had a higher risk of experiencing
physical violence. In the same vein, females who had partners that drink
alcohol experienced sexual violence more than those whose partners do not drink
alcohol. In order to determine any real evidence between alcohol and gender
based violence, case control and cohort studies are needed. This is cross
sectional study based on face- to- face interviews and limits conclusions about
causality. More research is clearly needed to explore determinants of domestic
violence against men and women in Nigeria. In addition, the prevalence rates
of gender based violence reported in this study could have been underestimated
because of beliefs that issues concerning families and intimate relationships
should not be discussed flippantly as they are seen as a private matter.
Furthermore, there is the need to explore in-depth gender based violence as it
relates to men as the victims.
Conclusion
High
prevalence of gender based violence has been reported by this study. Both men
and women have been documented to be victims of this act. This has great
implications for the general well being as it affects all spheres of lives.
Intervention strategies such public enlightenment on the effects of gender
based violence on both women and men in all relationships should be carried
out. In addition, pre-marital counseling and conflict resolution strategies
especially among couples should be strongly intensified to ameliorate the
situation.
References
- Cascardi, M.,
Langhinrichsen, J., Vivian, D. (1992).
Marital Aggression; Impact, injury and health correlates for husbands and
wives. Archives of internal medicine, 152, 1178-1184.
- United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization. Violence
- Krug, E., Dahlberg, L., &
Mercy, J. (2002): World Report on Violence and health. WHO Geneva, Switzerland 372.
- Saltzman LE, Fanslow JL, McMahon
PM, Shelley GA. Intimate partner violence surveillance: uniform definitions and
recommended data elements, Version 1.0. Atlanta: National Center for Injury
Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1999
-
Heise, L, Ellsberg, M.,
Guttemoeller, M. (1999). Ending Violence against women. Popul Rep, L. 11,
1-43.
-
Zambia Demographic and Health Survey. 2001-2002.
- World Health Organization 2005.
WHO Multi-Country study on womens health and domestic violence against women.
Summary report of initial results on prevalence, health outcomes and womens
responses. Geneva, World Health Organization.
- Saidi, H, Awori, K.O, Odula P.
(2008). Gender associated violence at a womans hospital in Nairobi. East
African Medical Journal, Vol. 85 No. 7, 347-354:
- Okemgbo, C.N., Omideyi, A.K.,
Odimegwu, C.O., (2002). Prevalence, patterns and correlates of domestic
violence in selected Igbo communities of Imo State. Nig. Afr. J. Reprod
Health, 6 (2), 101-114.
-
Fawole, O.I., Ajuwon, A.J,
Osungbade, K.O. & Fawega, C.O. (2002). Prevalence and nature of violence
to young female hawkers in Motor parks in South Western Nigeria. Health Edu
Res, 102:230-238.
- Fawole, O.I, Ajuwon, A.J.,
Osungbade, K.O, (2005). Evaluation of Interventions to prevent gender-based
violence among young female apprentices in Ibadan, Nigeria. Health Education,
vol 105 No. 3, pg 186-203.
- National
Population Commission (NPC) (Nigeria) and ICF Macro 2009: Nigerian Demographic
and Health Survey (NDHS). Abuja, Nigeria: National Population Commission and
ICF Macro 2003..
- World Health
Organization. Violence, Injuries and Disabilities. Biennial 2006 Reports. WHO. Geneva.
- Heise. L.L,
(1998). Violence against women. An integral Ecological Framework. Violence
Against Women, Vol 4. No. 3. 262-290.
- Hindin, M.J.,
Adair, L.S. (2002). Whos at risk? Factors associated with intimate partner
violence in the Philippines. Social Science and Medicine, 55(8), 1385-1399.
- Jewekes, R.
Levin, J., Penn-Kakana, C. (2002). Risk factors for domestic violence:
findings from a South African cross-sectional study. Social Science and
Medicine, 55(9), 1603-1617.
- Karamagi, C.A., Tumwine, J.K.,
Tylleskar, T., Heggenhougen, K. (2006). Intimate partner violence against women
in eastern Uganda: implication for HIV prevention. BMC Public Health, 6:284.
- Shah, B.V., and
Barnwell, B.G. (2003). Joint Statistics Meetings - Section on Survey Research
Methods, 3778-3781.
- Colton T. (1974).
Statistical inference. In Statistics in Medicine. 1sted. pp. 99-252. Boston: Little, Brown and Company.
- Anderson, N, Ho-foster, A., Mitchell, S., Scheepers, E.,
& Goldstien, S. (2007). Risk factors for domestic physical violence:
national cross-sectional household surveys in eight southern African countries;
British Medical Journal on Womens Health, 7, 11.
- Wijma, B., Schei,
B. and Swahnberg (2003). Emotional, physical and sexual abuse in patients
visiting gynecology clinics: a Nordic cross-sectional study. The Lancet. 361
(375), 2107-2113.
- Arulogun O.S. and
Jidda K.A. (2011). Experiences of Violence among Pregnant Women Attending
Ante Natal Clinics in Selected Hospitals in Abuja, Nigeria. Sierra Leone Journal of Biomedical Research 3(1), 43 - 48
- Moreno, C.J., Jasen,
J., Ellsberg, M., Heise L., and Watts, C. (2006). Prevalence of intimate
partner violence: findings from the W.H.O multi-country study on womens
health and domestic violence; The Lancet 368, 1260-1269.
- Tjaden, P.
(2000). Full report of the prevalence, incidence and consequences of violence
against women survey. Washington DC. Department of justice, publication
number NCJ 183781.
- Hotaling, G.T,
Sugarman, D.B. (1990). At risk marker analysis of assaulted wives. Journal of
Family Violence, 5, 1-14.
- Ghazizadeh A.
Domestic violence: a cross sectional study in an Iranain city. East
Mediterranean Health Journal/ vol 11. (5 -6): 880-7
- Coker, D. (1999).
Enhancing autonomy for battered women: Lessons from Navajo peacemaking. UCLA Law
Review, 47, 1-111.
Copyright 2011 - Women's Health and Action Research Centre, Benin City, Nigeria
|