|
African Journal of Reproductive Health
Women's Health and Action Research Centre
ISSN: 1118-4841
Vol. 15, Num. 4, 2011, pp. 87-97
|
African Journal of Reproductive Health, Vol. 15, No. 4, Dec, 2011, pp. 87-97
Original Research Article
Prevalence
of forced sex and associated factors among women and men in Kisumu, Kenya
Prévalence du sexe forcé et facteurs qui y sont liés
chez les femmes et les hommes à Kisumu, Kenya
Maureen K Adudans1,
Michele Montandon2, Zachary Kwena1, Elizabeth
A Bukusi1, 2, 3 and Craig R Cohen2
1Center
for Microbiology Research, Kenya Medical Research Institute;
2Department
of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of California, San Francisco;
3Departments
of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Global Health, University of Washington,
Seattle
*For correspondence: Email: maureenadudans@gmail.com Tel: +254-713-957529
Code Number: rh11055
Abstract
Sexual
violence is a well-recognized global health problem, albeit with limited
population-based data available from sub-Saharan Africa. We sought to measure
the prevalence of forced sex in Kisumu, Kenya, and identify its associated
factors. The data were drawn from a population-based cross-sectional survey. A
two-stage sampling design was used: 40 clusters within Kisumu municipality
were enumerated and households within each cluster selected by systematic
random sampling. Demographic and sexual histories, including questions on
forced sex, were collected privately using a structured questionnaire. The
prevalence of forced sex was 13% (women) and 4.5% (men). After adjusting for
age and cluster, forced sex among women was associated with transactional sex
(OR 2.33; 95%CI 1.38-3.95), having more than two lifetime partners (OR 1.9;
95%CI 1.20-3.30), having post-primary education (OR 1.49; 95%CI 1.04-2.14) and
a high economic status (OR 1.87; 95%CI 1.2-2.9). No factors were significantly
associated with forced sex among the male respondents. Intimate partners were
the most common perpetrators of forced sex among both women (50%) and men
(62.1%). Forced sex prevention programs need to target the identified
associated factors, and educate the public on the high rate of forced sex
perpetrated by intimate partners (Afr J Reprod Health 2011; 15[4]: 87-97).
Résumé
La violence sexuelle est un problème de santé qui est
bien reconnu partout dans le monde, bien que les données basées sur la
population et disponible de lAfrique subsaharienne soient limitées. Nous
avons cherché à mesurer la prévalence du sexe forcé à Kisumu, Kenya et à identifier
ses facteurs associés. Nous avons recueilli les données à partir dune enquête
transversale basée sur la population. Nous nous sommes servis dun modèle
déchantillon à deux étapes : Nous avons énuméré 40 petits groupes au sein
de la municipalité de Kisumu et les ménages au sein de chaque groupe choisi au
hasard à partir dun échantillon systématique. Des histoires démographiques et
sexuelles y compris des questions sur le sexe forcé, ont été recueillies en
privé à laide dun questionnaire structuré. La prévalence du sexe forcé était
13%(femmes) et 4,5% (hommes). Après avoir ajusté selon lâge et le groupe, le
sexe forcé chez les femmes a été lié au sexe transactionnel (OR2,33 ;
95%CI 1,38-3,95% CI 1,20-3,30), ayant plus de deux partenaires de toute une
vie(OR 1,9 ; 95% CI 1,20-3,30), ayant reçu une éducation post primaire (OR
1,49 ; 95%CI 1,04-214) et une haute situation économique (OR1, 87 ;
95%CI 1,2-2,9). Il ny avait pas de facteur qui a été significativement lié au
sexe forcé chez les interviewés mâles. Des partenaires intimes étaient les
auteurs les plus communs du sexe forcé parmi les femmes (50%) et les hommes
(62,1%). Les programmes destinés à la prévention du sexe forcé doivent viser
les facteurs qui y sont liés et qui ont été identifiés et il faut sensibiliser
le public à légard du taux élevé du sexe forcé qui est perpétré par des
partenaires intimes (Afr J
Reprod Health 2011; 15[4]: 87-97).
Keywords:
Forced sex, Intimate partner violence,
Sexual violence, Kenya
Introduction
Sexual
violence is a global public health problem1. Similar
prevalences of forced sex by intimate partners are reported in various parts of
the world, in North London, England (23%), Guadalajara, Mexico (23%), Lima,
Peru (22.5%) and the Midlands Province in Zimbabwe (25%) 1. Rape has
been well studied in South Africa, where a particularly high rate of 194 per
100,000 female population has been reported 2. In
Ghana, 25% of females in a recent study reported that their first sexual
intercourse had been forced 3. In
Rwanda, 33% of women indicated that they had experienced sexual coercion 4 and in
Tanzania, nearly half of the girls attending primary and secondary schools in
Mwanza reported having experienced forced sex at some point in their lifetime 5. Sexual
violence against boys and men though significant, has been less well studied
and limited data are available. In developing countries, the proportion of men
who report a history of sexual abuse ranges from 3.6% in Namibia and 13.4% in Tanzania to 20% in Peru. It is believed that these figures underestimate the
true prevalence of male sexual assault 1.
Quantitative data on forced sex in Kenya are limited. One early survey conducted in 1993 among girls in secondary schools in
Kenya, revealed that 24% had been forced into their first sexual encounter 6. In 2001
a survey among young people aged 10-24 in Nyeri, Kenya, revealed that more than
one in five sexually-experienced young women and one in ten
sexually-experienced young men had had non-consensual sex, and the perpetrators
were often the young peoples intimate partners 7. These
limited data cannot be generalized to the overall population.
Sexual violence is associated with an
increased risk of a range of sexual and reproductive health problems, with
immediate and long-term consequences. It also has a profound impact on mental
health 1,8. Physical consequences include but are not limited to
undesired pregnancy, vaginal bleeding, sexually transmitted infections (STI)
including HIV, decreased sexual desire, pain during intercourse, chronic pelvic
pain and urinary tract infections. In addition, victims of sexual violence are
more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior, such as engaging in unprotected
sex, having multiple partners, participating in sex work 9, and
substance abuse, all of which increase the risk of HIV and other STI
acquisition 10. The
role of forced sex in transmission of HIV infection and other STIs is
undoubtedly significant and it emphasizes the need to address broader issues
surrounding forced sex in order to attain success in prevention of HIV and STI
transmission in vulnerable populations.
To date, there have been no
population-based studies documenting the burden of forced sex among both women
and men in Kisumu, the third largest city in Kenya, with an HIV prevalence of
10.8% in 2006 according to the National AIDS Control Council (NACC). It is in
this context that we studied the prevalence of forced sex and factors
associated with forced sex in the general adult population in Kisumu, Kenya.
Methods
Data for this study were drawn from a large
population-based cross-sectional study assessing knowledge, attitudes and
beliefs concerning antiretroviral therapy (ART), the impact of ART on
self-reported sexual risk behaviors, and the prevalence of HIV and the
prevalence of other STIs. A multi-stage sampling design was used in which 40
clusters within Kisumu municipality were enumerated and households within each
cluster were selected by systematic random sampling. All men and women aged
15-49 years who slept in the house the night before were eligible for
inclusion. Between July and October 2006, 1050 households were visited, of
which 864 (82.3%) had eligible participants. Of the 2794 eligible participants
in the households, 1833 (65.6%) were contacted and asked to enroll; 1655 people
(90% of those contacted) consented including 749 men and 906 women.
We used a pre-tested structured
questionnaire translated to the local languages and administered through
face-to-face interviews by well-trained study staff. Our outcome measure was
forced sex, as by the measured response to the question: Have you ever been
forced to have sex against your will? As recommended by the WHO guidelines 1, this
question was asked with the respondent alone. As far as was possible,
gender-matched interviews were carried out in a private area to facilitate
disclosure. Sex was defined to the respondent as that involving the penis being
inserted into the vagina. Participants had the option of responding either
yes, no or not sure, or opting not to answer the question altogether.
The questionnaire also collected social and demographic factors (age,
education, employment status, place of birth, marital status) and economic
status as assessed by ownership of household goods (television and radio) and
electricity in the house. Current alcohol use, substance abuse, number of
lifetime partners, concurrent sexual partnerships, and condom use measured
risky sexual behavior. Information on past treatment for STIs and knowledge of
partner treatment for STIs was also obtained. Screening for the following STIs
was conducted among participants who gave consent: Trichomonas vaginalis
based on culture of a self-collected vaginal swab (InPouch TV; Biomed
Diagnostics, San Jose, CA, USA); HIV using two parallel rapid assays
Rapid Uni-GoldTM (Trinity Biotech, Ireland) and DetermineTM (Inverness
Medical Innovations, Delaware, USA) with HIV ELISA (Vironostika HIV Uni-Form II
Ag/Ab ) for resolving discrepancies between the first assays; and Herpes
Simplex Virus II based on serological assays based on an ELISA (Kalon HSV-2 IgG
test, Kalon Ltd, City, Country).
Statistical Analysis
Factors associated with forced sex for women are well
studied and defined in other populations; however risk factors for sexual
violence among men are not so well defined. In addition, there are numerous
existing gender disparities within the Kenyan population that are potential
confounders for forced sex. Therefore, all analyses and corresponding results
were stratified by gender.
All procedures used in the data analysis
took into account the possibility of intra-class correlation within the
clusters. The Huber and White robust sandwich variance estimator for
cluster-correlated data 11,12 was applied to all the analyses using Stata
Statistical Software Release 10 (StataCorp, College Station, Texas, USA).
Previous studies show that young age is a risk factor for sexual
violence 13;
however, it is also a potential confounder for a number of associations. Thus,
descriptive analyses were carried out adjusting for age in five year
categories. All potential explanatory variables were summarized by whether or
not the participant reported forced sex. Continuous variables were summarized
by calculating means with 95% confidence intervals, while binary and
categorical variables were summarized by odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence
intervals (CI).
To investigate potential risk factors
associated with forced sex, we used the following procedure: initially, the
variables were divided into five blocks (socio-demographic, economic status,
sexual history, STI history and current STI status) with each containing
conceptually related variables. Multiple logistic regression analysis was applied
to each block with forced sex as the primary outcome and age was included in
each model. To avoid multi-collinearity, which would give unreliable
coefficient estimates with high standard errors, variables were selected from
each block and modeled. Variables with p-values of less than 0.1 were obtained
from each of the block models and used to fit an overall model. Wald tests were
applied to determine the exclusion of non-significant variables in the overall
model so as to achieve a final parsimonious model.
Results
Women
Of
the 794 (88%) women who reported ever having had sex, 106 (13%) reported a
positive history of forced sex. Table 1 summarizes the associations of
descriptive characteristics of the female study participants with forced sex,
after adjusting for age and cluster. Women with a history of forced sex were
more likely to have more years of education, use electricity in their home and
have a history of illicit drug use, but not a history of alcohol use. Other
sociodemographic factors such as age, employment status, ethnicity, marital
status and place of birth were similar in the two groups. Women who had
experienced forced sex had significantly higher odds of having had two or more
sexual partners in their lifetime, and having ever exchanged sex for gifts as
compared to women with no history of forced sex. A higher prevalence of
lifetime condom use was reported among women who had experienced forced sex
even though these same women were less likely to report condom use with their
current partner and women whose partners had been treated for STIs in the past
12 months were more likely to report a history of forced sex. Age at sexual
debut, history of anal sex, current genital-ulcer symptomatology, trichomonas
infection and HSV-2 serostatus were not found to have statistically significant
associations with a history of forced sex. However, HIV prevalence varied
significantly between the two groups, with HIV seropositive women having a
lower odds (OR 0.6, 95% CI 0.37 - 0.99) of reporting forced sex compared to HIV
seronegative women.
Table 2 depicts the multivariate models. In the
sociodemographic model which included drug use and alcohol intake, education
level and history of drug use were the only factors found to have a significant
association with forced sex. Adjusting for the place of birth and ownership of
a television and radio ownership within the economic status model, women with
electricity in their houses had a 1.8-fold increased odds of forced sex than
women without electricity. The strength of this association increased after
controlling for the other economic factors. In the sexual history model, as
previously observed in the descriptive analysis, transactional sex and the
number of sexual partners were both significantly associated with a history of
forced sex, after adjusting for age at sexual debut, condom use and anal sex in
the model. Although a history of STI treatment was not found to be
independently associated with forced sex, after adjusting for partner treatment
and genital-ulcer symptoms women previously treated for an STI were 2.3
times more likely to report forced sex than women with no history of STI
treatment. However, in the current STI model, none of the current infections,
including HIV status was significantly associated with forced sex.
Table
1: Women participating in the ART impact cross-sectional
study, in Kisumu, Kenya, stratified by forced sex (n=794)a
|
|
|
|
Adjusted ORb
|
Forced
sex
|
No
Forced Sex
|
OR,
95% Confidence level
|
n=106
|
n=688
|
OR
|
(Lower,
Upper)
|
Mean age (yrs)
|
27.2
|
26.3
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Age < 18 years
|
7
|
47
|
0.96
|
0.45 2.05
|
Age < 25 years
|
57
|
366
|
1.02
|
0.70 1.49
|
Ever attended school
|
103 (95.6%)
|
658 (97.2%)
|
1.71
|
0.56 5.16
|
Number of school years, mean (n=771)
|
4.92
|
5.40
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Post primary (> Primary level) (n=761)
|
48 (46.6%)
|
238 (36.2%)
|
1.57
|
1.09 2.26
|
Currently employed
|
43 (40.6%)
|
261 (37.9%)
|
1.07
|
0.78 1.47
|
Luo
|
82 (77.4%)
|
524 (76.2%)
|
1.07
|
0.60 1.93
|
Ever been married
|
80 (75.5%)
|
532 (77.3%)
|
0.81
|
0.53 1.22
|
Current marital status (n=613)
|
59 (73.8%)
|
437 (82.0%)
|
0.65
|
0.39 1.08
|
Married > 7yrs (n=128)
|
8 (36.4%)
|
45 (42.5%)
|
0.92
|
0.21 4.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electricity in house
|
40 (37.7%)
|
175 (25.4%)
|
1.78
|
1.17 2.71
|
Radio in house
|
92 (86.8%)
|
584 (84.9%)
|
1.19
|
0.58 2.42
|
Television in house
|
46 (43.4%)
|
245 (35.6%)
|
1.38
|
0.85 2.25
|
Urban place of birth (n= 770)
|
53 (53.0%)
|
396 (59.1%)
|
0.74
|
0.47 1.18
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taken alcohol in last 4 weeks
|
19 (17.9%)
|
86 (12.5%)
|
1.50
|
0.80 2.82
|
Ever used drugs
|
20 (18.9%)
|
67 (9.7%)
|
2.15
|
1.15 4.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
< 16 yrs at first intercourse (n=780)
|
51 (48.1%)
|
294 (43.6%)
|
0.83
|
0.51 1.37
|
Lifetime partners (mean, n=778)
|
4.89
|
3.26
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Partners in lifetime ≥ 3 (n=778)
|
73 (69.5%)
|
362 (53.8%)
|
1.94
|
1.23 3.07
|
Sex with non spousal partner in last 12 m
|
22 (22.5%)
|
120 (18.4%)
|
1.29
|
0.70 2.38
|
Number of sex partners in last 12 m (mean, n=791)
|
0.21
|
0.07
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ever used a condom
|
66 (62.3%)
|
351 (51.0%)
|
1.70
|
1.06 2.70
|
Ever used a condom with current partner (n=122)
|
10 (50.0%)
|
77 (75.5%)
|
0.34
|
0.15 0.76
|
Anal sex (n=780)
|
3 (2.9%)
|
13 (1.9%)
|
1.54
|
0.43 5.60
|
Ever exchanged sex for gifts (n=787)
|
31 (29.5%)
|
111 (16.3%)
|
2.21
|
1.30 3.74
|
Ever exchanged sex for gifts in last 12 m (n=143)
|
15 (48.4%)
|
40 (35.7%)
|
1.67
|
0.76 3.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ever treated for STI (n=789)
|
22 (21.0%)
|
90 (13.2%)
|
1.72
|
0.97 3.04
|
Last 12m treated for STI (n=112)
|
6 (27.3%)
|
24 (26.7%)
|
1.10
|
0.41 2.93
|
Last 12m partner treated for STI (n=599)
|
9 (12.7%)
|
25 (4.7%)
|
2.98
|
1.05 8.47
|
Current genital ulcers/sores (n=767)
|
11 (10.7%)
|
43 (6.5%)
|
1.71
|
0.86 3.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trichomonas positive (n=708)
|
12 (13.0%)
|
102 (16.6%)
|
0.77
|
0.38 1.53
|
HSV-II positive (n=735)
|
70 (70.0%)
|
435 (68.5%)
|
1.05
|
0.66 1.67
|
HIV positive (n=738)
|
19 (19.0%)
|
174 (27.3%)
|
0.60
|
0.37 0.99
|
a n=
794 unless otherwise indicated; sample size less than 794 indicates missing
values
b
Adjustment for within cluster dependence was done using the Huber and White
sandwich estimator of variance (the robust estimate of variance) and
adjusted for age by category (15-19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-45)
|
Table
2: Factors associated with forced
sex among women taking part in the ART impact study in Kisumu, Kenya(multiple logistic regression)
|
Modelsa
|
OR
|
95%
CI
|
Model 1: Socio-demographic factors (n=761)
|
|
|
Post primary education (> primary vs. ≤
primary)
|
1.57
|
1.09,
2.28
|
Currently employed (yes vs. no)
|
0.91
|
0.66,
1.26
|
Ever been married (yes vs. no)
|
0.9
|
0.57,
1.44
|
Luo
|
1.08
|
0.59,
1.99
|
History of drug use
|
2.04
|
1.02,
4.10
|
Taken alcohol in last 4 weeks
|
1.29
|
0.63,
2.67
|
Model 2: Economic status factors (n=791)
|
|
|
Electricity
|
1.81
|
1.17,
2.82
|
Television
|
0.96
|
0.56,
1.65
|
Radio
|
1.04
|
0.51,
2.13
|
Place of birth (urban vs. rural)
|
0.74
|
0.47,
1.18
|
Model 3: Sexual history factors (n=756)
|
|
|
Age at first intercourse (< 16 vs. ≥ 16
|
1.18
|
0.72,
1.94
|
Ever used condom (yes vs. no)
|
1.48
|
0.87,
2.54
|
Anal sex
|
1.37
|
0.37,
5.14
|
Exchanged sex for gifts (yes vs. no)
|
1.81
|
1.04,
3.17
|
Number of lifetime sex partners (> 2 vs. ≤
2)
|
1.6
|
1.03,
2.48
|
Model 4: STI history factors (n=585))
|
|
|
Ever treated for STI (yes vs. no)
|
2.29
|
1.13,
4.63
|
Partner treated for STI in past 12 m (yes vs. no)
|
2.18
|
0.65,
7.28
|
Genital ulcers or sores
|
1.48
|
0.59,
3.76
|
Model 5: Current STI factors (n=705)
|
|
|
HSV-2 (positive vs. negative)
|
1.15
|
0.71,
1.89
|
Trichomonas vaginalis (positive vs. negative)
|
0.80
|
0.39,
1.63
|
HIV (positive vs. negative)
|
0.66
|
0.41,
1.06
|
Model 6: Overall (n=686)
|
|
|
Post primary education (>primary vs. < primary)
|
1.52
|
1.06,
2.17
|
History of drug use
|
1.67
|
0.80,
3.51
|
Electricity
|
1.79
|
1.13,
2.83
|
Exchanged sex for gifts (yes vs. no)
|
2.14
|
1.25,
3.67
|
Number of lifetime sex partners (> 2 vs. ≤
2)
|
1.76
|
1.10,
2.82
|
Ever treated for STI (yes vs. no)
|
1.35
|
0.75,
2.44
|
HIV (positive vs. negative)
|
0.61
|
0.38,
1.00
|
Model 7: Final (n=691)
|
|
|
Post primary education (> primary vs. <
primary)
|
1.49
|
1.04,
2.14
|
Electricity
|
1.87
|
1.20,
2.90
|
Exchanged sex for gifts (yes vs. no)
|
2.33
|
1.38,
3.95
|
Number of lifetime sex partners (> 2 vs. ≤
2)
|
1.9
|
1.20,
3.03
|
HIV (positive vs. negative)
|
0.61
|
0.37,
1.01
|
a All models include
age adjustment by 5 year categories
|
Table
3: Men participating in the
ART impact cross-sectional study, in Kisumu, Kenya, stratified by forced sex
(n=648)a
|
|
|
|
Adjusted ORb
|
Forced
sex
|
No
Forced Sex
|
OR,
95% Confidence Interval
|
n=29
|
n
= 619
|
OR
|
Lower,
Upper
|
Mean age (years)
|
25.31
|
26.68
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Age < 18 years
|
6 (20.7%)
|
40 (6.5%)
|
3.78
|
1.46 9.77
|
Age < 25 years
|
17 (58.6%)
|
308 (49.8%)
|
1.43
|
0.66
3.08
|
Ever attended school
|
29 (100%)
|
615 (99.4%)
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Number of school years, mean (n=616)
|
4.97
|
4.95
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Post secondary education (> Secondary level)
(n=644)
|
8 (27.6%)
|
64 (10.4%)
|
3.35
|
1.48 7.58
|
Currently employed
|
12 (41.4%)
|
341 (55.1%)
|
0.60
|
0.30 1.21
|
Luo
|
26 (89.7%)
|
483 (78.0%)
|
2.36
|
0.73 7.68
|
Ever been married
|
10 (34.5%)
|
317 (51.2%)
|
0.39
|
0.14 1.05
|
Current marital status (n=328)
|
8 (80.0%)
|
278 (87.4%)
|
0.56
|
0.12 2.62
|
Electricity in house
|
10 (34.5%)
|
153 (24.7%)
|
1.60
|
0.72 3.58
|
Radio in house
|
26 (89.7%)
|
534 (86.3%)
|
1.39
|
0.41 4.78
|
Television in house
|
9 (31.0%)
|
210 (33.9%)
|
0.88
|
0.33 2.35
|
Urban place of birth(n= 644)
|
18 (64.3%)
|
384 (62.3%)
|
1.08
|
0.53 2.19
|
Taken alcohol in last 4 weeks
|
14 (48.3%)
|
289 (46.7%)
|
1.11
|
0.62 2.00
|
Ever used drugs
|
14 (48.3%)
|
276 (44.6%)
|
1.18
|
0.58 2.41
|
<16 yrs at first intercourse (n=636)
|
17 (58.6%)
|
328 (54.0%)
|
0.78
|
0.34 1.79
|
Lifetime partners (mean, n=637)
|
6.93
|
7.90
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Lifetime partners > 2 (n=637)
|
25 (86.2%)
|
480 (79.0%)
|
1.89
|
0.63 5.62
|
Sex with non spousal partner in last 12m (n=620)
|
10 (37.0%)
|
208 (35.1%)
|
1.05
|
0.44 2.48
|
Ever used a condom
|
17 (58.6%)
|
428 (69.1%)
|
0.61
|
0.28 1.32
|
Anal sex (n=643)
|
0 (0.0%)
|
21 (3.4%)
|
n/a
|
n/a
|
Ever exchanged sex for gifts (n=647)
|
14 (48.3%)
|
164 (26.5%)
|
2.56
|
1.04 6.29
|
Ever exchanged sex for gifts in last 12m (n=174)
|
4 (28.6%)
|
88 (55.0%)
|
0.28
|
0.081 1.00
|
Ever treated for STI (n=645)
|
10 (34.5%)
|
175 (28.4%)
|
1.51
|
0.80 2.87
|
Last 12 m treated for STI (n=186)
|
3 (30.0%)
|
37 (21.0%)
|
1.96
|
0.62 6.15
|
Last 12 m partner treated for STI (n=497)
|
3 (15.8%)
|
29 (6.1%)
|
2.94
|
0.77 11.23
|
Current genital ulcers/sores (n=767)
|
1 (3.6%)
|
48 (7.9%)
|
0.43
|
0.07 2.77
|
Present dysuria (n=641)
|
2 (6.9%)
|
42 (6.9%)
|
1.02
|
0.25 4.13
|
Urethral discharge in past 12 m (n=632)
|
2 (7.7%)
|
26 (4.3%)
|
1.78
|
0.40 7.99
|
HSV-II postive (n=594)
|
9 (36.0%)
|
234 (41.1%)
|
0.86
|
0.34 2.19
|
HIV positive (n=596)
|
4 (15.4%)
|
103 (18.1%)
|
0.88
|
0.25 3.04
|
a
Adjustment for within cluster dependence was done using the Huber and White
sandwich estimator of variance (the robust estimate of variance)
b
Adjusted for age category (15-19, 20-24, 25-29, 30-34, 35-39, 40-45)
|
In
the overall model, a history of illicit drug use and prior STI treatment had
insignificant coefficients and were dropped to produce the final model. Based
on this final model, women with a history of forced sex had: a higher level of
education and economic status, more often had engaged in transactional sex, and
had more than two sexual partners in their lifetime. Current HIV status was not
influenced by a history of forced sex after adjusting for confounding
variables.
Men
Of
the 648 (87%) men who reported ever having had sex, 29 (4.5%) reported a
positive history of forced sex. In the descriptive analysis, the association of
each of the explanatory variables with history of forced sex was assessed, and
few variables were found to be significantly associated with forced sex (Table
3). This was expected due to the small proportion of men with a history
of forced sex; hence, the increased variance and widened confidence intervals.
Men reporting forced sex tended to be below 18 years of age, have a higher
level of education and report a history of transactional sex. A higher percent
(21%) of the men reporting forced sex were aged less than 18 years as compared
to those with no history of forced sex (7%). None of the men who reported
forced sex had a history of anal sex which was reported only among 3% of those
who had not experienced forced sex reported a positive history of anal sex. As
was for the women, a history of transactional sex was found to be associated
with a positive history of forced sex. Among men the prevalences of HIV and
HSV-2 were not different among men with and without a history of forced sex.
Table
4: Factors associated with forced
sex among men taking part in the ART impact study in Kisumu, Kenya (multiple logistic regression)
|
Modelsa
|
OR
|
95%
CI
|
Model 1: Socio-demographic factors (n=644)
|
|
|
Post secondary education (> secondary vs. ≤
secondary)
|
3.07
|
1.37,
7.05
|
Currently employed (yes vs. no)
|
0.72
|
0.34,
1.51
|
Ever been married (yes vs. no)
|
0.53
|
0.20,
1.42
|
Luo
|
2.27
|
0.69,
7.54
|
History of drug use
|
1.08
|
0.48,
2.44
|
Taken alcohol in last 4 weeks
|
1.04
|
0.54,
1.99
|
Model 2: Economic status factors (n=644)
|
|
|
Electricity
|
2.55
|
1.03,
6.33
|
Television
|
0.45
|
0.14,
1.47
|
Radio
|
1.31
|
0.39,
4.45
|
Place of birth (urban vs. rural)
|
1.14
|
0.58,
2.25
|
Model 3: Sexual history factors (n=628)
|
|
|
Age at first intercourse (<16 vs. ≥ 16
|
1.56
|
0.65,
3.76
|
Ever used condom (yes vs. no)
|
0.51
|
0.24,
1.07
|
Exchanged sex for gifts (yes vs. no)
|
2.57
|
1.02,
6.53
|
Number of lifetime sex partners (> 2 vs. ≤
2)
|
1.94
|
0.62,
6.13
|
Model 4: STI history factors (n=130))
|
|
|
Treated for STI in past 12m (yes vs. no)
|
5.14
|
1.05,
25.02
|
Partner treated for STI in past 12m (yes vs. no)
|
1.15
|
0.16,
8.18
|
Genital ulcers or sores
|
0.7
|
0.05,
10.59
|
Dysuria
|
1.36
|
0.06,
28.89
|
Model 5: Current STI factors (n=594)
|
|
|
HSV-2 (positive vs. negative)
|
0.87
|
0.33,
2.31
|
HIV (positive vs. negative)
|
0.95
|
0.26,
3.50
|
Model 6: Combined (n=183)
|
|
|
Post secondary education (> secondary vs. ≤
secondary)
|
8.66
|
1.66,
45.21
|
Electricity
|
0.88
|
0.19,
4.22
|
Ever used condom (yes vs. no)
|
0.67
|
0.10,
4.31
|
Exchanged sex for gifts (yes vs. no)
|
1.47
|
0.33,
6.57
|
Treated for STI in past 12 m (yes vs. no)
|
2.85
|
0.91,
8.93
|
a All models include
age adjustment by 5 year categories
|
|
|
In
the sociodemographic model, men who had higher than secondary school level
education had 3-times the odds of reporting forced sex than men with a lower
level of education (Table 4). Transactional sex remained significantly
associated with forced sex after adjustment for other factors in the sexual
history model. In the STI history model, previous treatment for STI in the past
12 months was found to associated with forced sex, although the confidence
interval was very wide (OR 5.14 95% 1.05, 25.02). Neither HSV-2 nor HIV
serostatus was found to be significantly associated with a
history of forced sex. In the overall model that fit variables with p-values
less than 0.1, only having a higher level of education was found to be
associated with forced sex; however, the confidence interval was wide,
suggesting a lack of precision in the measure (OR 8.66 95% CI 1.66, 45.21).
Table
5: Distribution of forced sex by
perpetrator and by gender in the ART impact cross-sectional study, in Kisumu, Kenya
|
Perpetrator
|
Females, n = 106
|
Males, n = 29
|
Relative living in the same house
|
8 (7.5%)
|
1 (3.4%)
|
Relative living in the same house
|
9 (7.5%)
|
3 (10.3%)
|
Neighbor
|
15 (14.2%)
|
4 (13.8%)
|
Friend
|
16 (15.1%)
|
10 (34.5%)
|
Husband
|
27 (25.5%)
|
0
|
Partner/boyfriend/girlfriend/fiancée
|
10 (9.4%)
|
8 (27.6%)
|
Somebody with authority in the community
|
4 (3.8%)
|
0
|
Somebody known to you (but none of the above)
|
13 (12.3%)
|
6 (20.7%)
|
Stranger
|
11 (10.4%)
|
0
|
Other
|
1 (0.94%)
|
1 (3.4%)
|
Other
findings
Data
on the perpetrator of the forced sex act(s) were available for 106 of the 109
women reporting a history of forced sex (Table 5). Most of the perpetrators
were reported to be intimate partners; 50% of the females reported forced sex
by their friends or partners. Among the 29 cases of men reporting forced sex,
62.1% of them reported that the perpetrator was a partner or friend. None of
the men reported forced sex by a stranger, as compared to 10% of the women who
reported having forced sex. None of the men had reported the cases to
authorities, whereas 15% of the women had done so. No factors were found to be
significantly associated with reporting of forced sex to authorities.
Similarly, a small percentage of women (20%) sought any medical care after
forced sex and only two men (7%) reported having sought medical attention.
Discussion
In
this cross-sectional study among women and men aged 15 and 49 in Kisumu, Kenya, women (13%) and men (4.5%) reported a history of forced sex which was
associated with a higher level of education, high economic status, history of
transactional sex and more than two sexual partners among women and having a
higher level of education among men.
The prevalence of forced sex among women was low in
comparison to prevalences reported elsewhere in the region. However, the true
prevalence of forced sex is likely to be even higher, because our question on
forced sex did not make a distinction between rape by a stranger and that by an
intimate partner 14. As
anticipated, a majority of the women reported that the perpetrators of forced
sex were their intimate partners or someone known to them; strangers accounted
for only 10% of the perpetrators. Similarly, a majority of the men reported
friends and partners as the perpetrators: while, we did not ascertain the
gender of the perpetrators none of the men with a history of forced sex
reported ever having engaged in anal sex.
Among the participants of this survey, forced sex is
influenced by both individual and societal level factors related to gender
inequality and socioeconomic vulnerability. The reported relationship between
poverty and forced sex is a complex one. In our study, a higher level of
education and economic status were both found to be correlated with forced sex
among women. Borrowing from the World Health Organization report on violence, a
tenable explanation for this finding is that greater empowerment brings with it
more resistance from women to patriarchal norms, so that men resort to violence
in an attempt to regain control 1,15. In Zimbabwe, for example, womens lack of economic
security and opportunity creates dependencies that make women unable to
exercise choice within their sexual relationships. Findings from Watts et al.
suggest that women who feel that they have the right to choose not to have sex
are most at risk of forced sex (and potentially physical violence)16.
However, our findings appear to contradict other reports that less empowered
(socioeconomic and education) women are at increased risk of physical and
sexual violence 17,18. It is probable that the relationship between sexual
violence and empowerment is similar to that between physical violence and
empowerment, is an inverted U-shape- whereas greater empowerment confers
greater risk up to a certain level, beyond which it starts to become protective
19,20.
However, we did not define how the womans material wealth was acquired (e.g.,
through transactional sex or otherwise) and whether it is co-owned or owned by
the woman herself as these are other factors that could possibly influence the
sexual relationship. It is also possible that electricity in the home is not a
good proxy measure of economic status in Kenya.
Adjusting for level of education and economic status,
forced sex was found to be associated with risky sexual behavior, specifically
transactional sex and a higher lifetime number of sexual partners, findings
consistent with other studies. For example, Kalichman and others study in Cape
Town, South Africa found that women with a history of sexual assault were among
others, significantly more likely to: have exchanged sex to meet survival
needs, have multiple male sexual partners and have higher rates of unprotected
sex 21.
Although we are unable to establish causality due to the cross-sectional nature
of our study, it could be that sexual assault, especially that occurring during
childhood, led to risky sexual behavior 22.
Alternatively, it is also plausible that due to poverty, women are forced to
engage in sex work or more subtle forms of transactional sex, which put them at
risk for forced sex 13,14.
A history of drug use, mainly cannabis,
khat (miraa) and kuber, was found to be associated with forced sex, a finding
consistent with that in other studies 23,24 . However, it is not possible from our study to
determine if the forced sex reported in this study occurred while the
participants were using drugs. The causal relationship between drug use and
sexual violence is not yet fully understood; however, some theories have been
explored. Women who use drugs are likely to have partners who also use drugs25, and are
more at risk of being sexually victimized, reflecting the tendency for
drug-using men to victimize their partners26. Because
drug dependent women are disinhibited, they may find themselves in high risk
situations or may be viewed by their partners as sexually promiscuous, making
their partners feel justified in perpetrating violence against them27.
Another plausible explanation for this association is that victims of sexual
violence are likely to engage in substance abuse as a coping mechanism to help
them get over the trauma28.
Contrary to our hypothesis HIV
seropositivity among women was found to have a negative association with forced
sex, but this relationship did not hold after adjusting for confounding
variables. Intimate partner violence, including sexual violence and gender
inequity have been demonstrated independently as risk factors for HIV infection
29.
Conceptually, several pathways explain this relationship, including the fact
that women can be exposed to HIV through genital trauma in the course of rape
by HIV infected men. In addition, women who have experienced sexual assault
tend to have more HIV risk behaviors30.
In keeping with other findings, there
were low rates of reporting of forced sex to relevant authorities by both men
and women31.
Commonly cited barriers to reporting sexual assault to authorities among both
women and men include shame, guilt, embarrassment, concerns about
confidentiality and fear of not being believed31.
Furthermore, limited physical access to relevant authorities such as the
police, and fear of the legal processes, including experiencing rudeness and
poor treatment by the police may also reduce reporting rates. These reasons can
be extrapolated to explain the low reporting rates of sexual violence
incidences across both genders.
Our findings should be interpreted with
the following limitations since it was cross-sectional and therefore, it is not
possible to make causal inferences on the relationships between risk factors
and forced sex. Another important limitation is that participants responded to
the question on whether they had ever had forced sex whilst the predictor
variables assessed the participants current situation. It is possible that
their past history of forced sex is unrelated to their current circumstances.
In addition, self-reported data, as collected in our study through face-to-face
interviews are prone to bias due to under or over reporting. Participants seek
to give socially desirable responses, whether or not they are true, especially
if they are concerned about stigma or retaliation. Furthermore, collection of
data on sexual behavior has several methodological challenges, including
problems of recall, ambiguous terminology and the sensitive nature of sexual
information32. This
could account for an overall underestimation of the results in our study,
particularly among men, due to an attempt to conform to the sociocultural norms
of this region. Data from self-completed questionnaires have been demonstrated
to have better validity when compared to face-to-face interviews, as the former
reduces the social desirability bias33.
However, self-completed questionnaires have the disadvantage of lower response
rates and missing data, especially in the setting of low literacy. Perhaps
assisted self-completed questionnaire (ASCQ) may yield better results and would
be worth exploring in future studies. Finally, although our sample was large
and appeared to represent the local population, participants were drawn from a
single geographical location, generalizability outside of Kisumu is limited.
In conclusion, however, and importantly,
forced sex is not uncommon and is related to a higher socioeconomic status,
higher education level, transactional sex, and multiple sexual partners among
women. Among men forced sex was found to be uncommon and related to having a
higher level of education. Accordingly, programs need to be established that
aim at prevention of forced sex by addressing the underlying potential risk
factors. Because of the high rate of forced sex perpetrated by intimate
partners among both men and women reporting forced sex, there is a need for
sexual violence prevention programs to educate the public about intimate
partner sexual abuse.
Acknowledgements
This
study was funded by Doris Duke Charitable Foundation Operations Research on
AIDS Care and Treatment in Africa (ORACTA) grant. The main author was supported
by the AIDS International Training and Research Program at University of
California, Berkeley, grant 1 D43 TW00003. We acknowledge the field research
team, laboratory team, data team, administrative office and reviewers,
as well as the strong support from the community leaders and residents of
Kisumu. Most of all we would
like to thank the study participants who gave their time to answer our
questions and share these intimate details of their lives with us.
References
- World Health Organization. World
report on violence and health: Geneva: World Health Organization, 2002.
- Jewkes R, Dunkle K, Koss MP,
Levin JB, Nduna M, Jama N, et al. Rape perpetration by young, rural South
African men: Prevalence, patterns and risk factors. Soc Sci Med
2006;63(11):2949-61.
- Glover EK, Bannerman A, Pence
BW, Heidi Jones RM, Weiss E, Nerquaye-Tetteh J. Sexual health experiences of
adolescents in three Ghanian towns. International Family Planning
Perspectives 2003;29(1):32-40.
- van der Straten A, King R,
Grinstead O, Vittinghoff E, Serufilira A, Allen S. Sexual coercion, physical
violence, and HIV infection among women in steady relationships in Kigali,
Rwanda. AIDS and Behavior 1995;2(1):61-73.
- Matasha E, Ntembelea T,
Mayaudi P, Saidi W, Todd J, Mujaya B, et al. Sexual and reproductive health
among primary and secondary school pupils in Mwanza, Tanzania: need for
intervention. AIDS Care 1998;10(5):571-82.
- Youri P. Female adolescent
health and sexuality in Kenyan secondary schools: a survey report. African
Medical Research Foundation, Nairobi, Kenya 1994.
- Erulkar AS. The experience of
sexual coercion among young people in Kenya. International Family Planning
Perspectives 2004;30(4):182-89.
- Tjaden P, Thoennes N. Extent,
nature and consequences of rape victimization: Findings from the National
Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice,
2006.
- Ishoy T, Ishoy PL, Olsen LR.
[Street prostitution and drug addiction]. Ugeskr Laeger
2005;167(39):3692-6.
- Mekonnen Y, Sanders E,
Messele T, Wolday D, Dorigo-Zestma W, Schaap A, et al. Prevalence and incidence
of, and risk factors for, HIV-1 infection among factory workers in Ethiopia,
1997-2001. J Health Popul Nutr 2005;23(4):358-68.
- . Foster A, Jolliffe D, Over
AM. Huber correction for two-stage least squares estimates. Stata Technical
Bulletin 1996;5(29):24-25.
- Williams RL. A note on
robust variance estimator fot cluster-correlated data. Biometrics
2000;56:645-46.
- Fawzi MCS, Lambert W,
Singler JM, Tanagho Y, Le´andre F, Nevil P, et al. Factors associated with
forced sex among women accessing health services in rural Haiti: implications
for the prevention of HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases. Soc
Sci Med 2004;60(2005):679-89.
- Jewkes R, Abrahams N. The
epidemiology of rape and sexual coercion in South Africa: an overview. Soc
Sci Med 2002;55:1231-44.
- Schuler SR, Hashemi SM,
Riley AP, Akhter S. Credit Programs, Patriarchy and Men's Violence against
Women in Rural Bangladesh. Soc Sci Med 1996;43(12):1729-42.
- Watts C, Keogh E, Ndlovu M,
Kwaramba R. Withholding of Sex and Forced Sex: Dimensions of Violence against
Zimbabwean Women. Reproductive Health Matters 1998;6(12):57-65.
- Jewkes R, Levin J,
Penn-Kekana L. Risk factors for domestic violence: findings from a South
African cross-sectional study. Soc Sci Med 2002;55(9):1603-17.
- WHO. 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, 2005.
- Hindina MJ, Adair LS. Whos
at risk? Factors associated with intimate partner violence in the Philippines. Soc
Sci Med 2002;55:1385-99.
- Karamagi CA, Tumwine JK,
Tylleskar T, Heggenhougen K. Intimate partner violence against women in eastern
Uganda: implications for HIV prevention. BMC Public Health 2006;6:284.
- Kalichman S, Simbayi L.
Sexual assault history and risks for sexually transmitted infections among
women in an African township in Capetown, South Africa. AIDS Care
2004;16(6):681-89.
- Zierler S, Feingold L,
Laufer D, Velentgas P, Kantrowitz-Gordon I, Mayer K. Adult survivors of
childhood sexual abuse and subsequent risk of HIV Infection. Am J Public
Health 1991;81(5):572-75.
- Upchurch D, Kusunoki Y.
Associations between forced sex, sexual and protective practices, and sexually
transmitted diseases among a national sample of adolescent girls. Women
Health 2003;14(3):75-84.
- Molitor F, Ruiz J, Klausner
J, McFarland W. History of Forced Sex in Association With Drug Use and Sexual
HIV Risk Behaviors, Infection With STDs, and Diagnostic Medical Care J
Interpers Violence 2000;15(3):262-78.
- Yamaguchi K, Kandel DB. The
influence of spouses' behavior and marital dissolution on marijuana use:
Causation or selection. Journal of Marriage and the Family
1997;59(1):22-36.
- Testa M, VanZile-Tamsen C,
Livingston JA. Prospective prediction of women's sexual victimization by
intimate and nonintimate male perpetrators. J Consult Clin Psychol
2007;75(1):52-60.
- El-Bassel N, Gilbert L, Wu
E, Go H, Hill J. Relationship between drug abuse and intimate partner violence:
A longitudinal study among women receiving methadone Am J Public Health 2005;95(3):465-70.
- Liebschutz J, Savetsky JB,
Saitz R, Horton NJ, Lloyd-Travaglini C, Samet JH. The relationship between
sexual and physical abuse and substance abuse consequences. Journal of
Substance Abuse Treatment 2002;22:121-28.
- Zierler S, Witbeck B, Mayer
K. Sexual violence against women living with or at risk for HIV infection. Am
J Prev Med 1996;12(5):304-10.
- Kalichman SC, Williams EA,
Cherry C, Belcher L, Nachimson D. Sexual coercion, domestic violence, and
negotiating condom use among low-income African American women. J Womens
Health 1998;7(3):371-78.
- Sable M, Danis F, Mauzy D,
Gallagher S. Barriers to reporting sexual assault for women and men: perspectives
of college students. J Am Coll Health 2006;55(3):157-62.
- Plummer ML, Wight D, Ross
DA, Balira R, Anemona A, Todd J, et al. Asking semi-literate adolescents about
sexual behaviour: the validity of assisted self-completion questionnaire (ASCQ)
data in rural Tanzania. Tropical Medicine and International Health
2004;9(6):737-54.
- Catania JA, McDermott LJ,
Pollack LM. Questionnaire response bias and face-to-face interview sample bias
in sexuality research. Journal of sex research 1986;22:52-72.
Copyright 2011 - Women's Health and Action Research Centre, Benin City, Nigeria
|