Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

State accountability for wife-beating: the indian challenge

1997; Elsevier BV; Volume: 349; Linguagem: Inglês

10.1016/s0140-6736(97)90004-0

1474-547X

Shireen Jejeebhoy, Rebecca J. Cook,

Intimate Partner and Family Violence

The Constitution of India, which every citizen has a duty to uphold, prohibits discrimination on grounds of sex. Moreover, as one of the 154 nations that have ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (the Women's Convention), India is obligated under international law to eliminate violence against women in all its forms, including wife-beating. At the Fourth World Conference on Women, held in Beijing in 1995, the Indian Government, along with 186 other UN member states, adopted the Beijing Platform of Action1United Nations2nd ed. Report of the Fourth World Conference on Women. UN, New York1995Google Scholar that specifies the need to take steps to eliminate violence against women. Nevertheless, in India, as in many other settings, violence against women is pervasive, and wife-beating is a widely accepted form of behaviour, justified by both men and women as a woman's lot. Here we show that factors associated with wife-beating reflect women's powerlessness and deprivation-their lack of education, lack of control over resources, and lack of alternatives to early marriage. Findings of this sort can be used to hold the National Government accountable for its failure to take preventive measures, to punish perpetrators, and to provide effective remedies for victims. In most of India, both north and south, and among both Hindus and Muslims, the family is mainly patriarchal and the region is well-known for unequal gender relations. Women are socially defined as inferior; husbands are assumed to “own” their wives, and think themselves entitled to dominate them by methods including the use of force. A social acceptance of wife-beating is thus deeply embedded in patriarchal norms and attitudes about gender relations. The status quo is reinforced by the lack of government attention to legal obligations to redress gender inequality and women's powerlessness, either by protecting victims of domestic violence and prosecuting violent husbands, or by enforcing laws on minimum age at marriage and laws on equal rights to inheritance. It is also reinforced by the lack of attention to community-based information and to educational activities aimed at preventing violence. This combination of factors serves both to legitimise and to perpetuate domestic violence. This article draws upon data collected in a 1993-94 survey on women's autonomy. A total of 1842 rural women aged 15–39, from two districts each in Tamil Nadu in the south and in Uttar Pradesh in the north, constituted the sample. Both Hindus and Muslims were interviewed in each setting. In the course of the interviews, women were asked not only about their education and their work status, but also about several dimensions of autonomy within their married lives. The questions addressed their decision-making authority, personal freedom of movement, wife-husband power relations including wife-beating, and their attitudes. Specific data on domestic violence in this study are limited. Questions were phrased as follows: “Sometimes men beat their wives. Has your husband ever beaten you?” and “Are you afraid of your husband?” A drawback of the method is that women are liable to under-report actual experience of violence when such questions are asked by a person unfamiliar to them, in a structured interview. Moreover, in some cases, beating might be interpreted to include only very severe abuse, particularly when non-severe violence is endemic and women think it unremarkable. No probes or supplementary questions were introduced. Hence, the results are indicative rather than conclusive and must be interpreted cautiously. In addition to questions on actual experience, data on attitudes were elicited from both women and their husbands, specifically on whether wife-beating can be justified (on various grounds). A final rich source of information was a series of focus group discussions of norms and attitudes related to wife-beating. Wife-beating was found to be widely prevalent in all settings. 40% of all wives reported having been beaten by their husbands and there was no apparent relation to region, religion, or age (table). Focus group discussions in both settings, and among various caste groups, reiterated the point that wife-beating is a widespread phenomenon of married life.TablePrevalence and correlates of domestic violenceAverageUttar Pradesh (n=859)Tamil Nadu (n=983)% respondents beaten by husband40·644·737·0a. Socioeconomic, demographic, and cultural correlatesHindu43·147·738·5Muslim38·341·635·8Age (yr)15-2439·443·334·725·3041·545·838·031·3939·645·035·7Socioeconomic status (odds ratio)†Socioeconomic status assessed from a list of specified consumer durables.0-80*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·80*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·80*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.Low50·252·946·7Middle41·647·638·0*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.High27·1”30,5*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.24·2*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.Dowry (odds ratio)0·57*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·66*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·51”Large amount ofjewellery, goods33·138,930·2Small amounts46·0*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.47·3*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.44·2*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.b. Indicators of women's autonomyEducation (odds ratio)0,88*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·88*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·87*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.None49·450·747,1Primary education32·3*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.34·5*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.31·6*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.Secondary education or more23·9*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.23·9*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.23·9*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.Ago at effective marriage (odds ratio)0·86*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·89*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·83*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.≤1546·646·946·216·1744·247·440·41841·140·441·6≥1926·0*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.34·0*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.23·6*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.Control over economic resources (odds ratio)‡Control over economic resources indicated by woman's ownership of land, jewellery, and other valuables, and whether she has savings to support herself in old age.0·86*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.0·990·77*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.None41·844·039·0Some40·548·136·5Substantial30·2*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.39·224·6*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.Mobility (odds ratio)§Mobility assessed by whether woman can go alone to health centre, community centre, the home of a relative or friend, a fair, and the next village.0·950·87*p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.1·06Cannot go anywhere alone44·248·724·3Has limited freedom38·943·737·2Has considerable freedom36·934·938·3Odds ratios <1.0 signify a positive relation between independent variable and wife- beating.* p<0·05 for odds ratio or for comparison with value in top category.† Socioeconomic status assessed from a list of specified consumer durables.‡ Control over economic resources indicated by woman's ownership of land, jewellery, and other valuables, and whether she has savings to support herself in old age.§ Mobility assessed by whether woman can go alone to health centre, community centre, the home of a relative or friend, a fair, and the next village. Open table in a new tab Odds ratios <1.0 signify a positive relation between independent variable and wife- beating. The most often stated cause of beating, and the one most likely to be justified by women, is “disobedience” to the husband's orders, or failing to meet a husband's expectations. Disobedience ranges from failure to serve a hot meal to quarrelling with the mother-in-law and drinking or behaving improperly with outside men. Some researchers have argued that women's lack of autonomy could be a major determinant of violence against them2Levinson D Violence in cross cultural perspective. Sage, Newbury Park1989Google Scholar The evidence presented in part b of the table offers some support for this notion. Although levels of wife-beating are unacceptably high in all groups, the women who are not beaten tend to be better educated, to have married somewhat later, and to have more control over economic resources than other women. In Uttar Pradesh, where seclusion practices are strongly enforced, women who are less likely to be beaten tend to have greater mobility. And in a culture in which dowry-related harassment is a major cause of domestic violence, there is also evidence that women who bring large dowries to their marriages are less likely to be beaten than those with modest dowries3Rao V Bloch F Wife-beating, its causes and its implications for nutrition allocations to children: an economic and anthropological case study of a rural south Indian community. World Bank, Washington, DC1993Google Scholar It is evident from the survey and focus group discussions that violence against women is widely regarded as a woman's due and her husband's prerogative. Well over three in four women consider wife-beating a justifiable form of behaviour, and focus group discussions underscored the general impression that women who “misbehave” deserve an occasional show of force. The consensus is: “If it is a great mistake, then the husband is justified in beating his wife. Why not? A cow will not be obedient without beatings.’—-Muslim, Ramnathpuram, Tamil Nadu “Beating is for the woman's own good. If she does something wrong, loses something or hits children in anger, the husband must show her [by beating]”—Brahmin, Rajapur, Uttar Pradesh One focus group discussion held with Jat men in Uttar Pradesh makes the male perspective very clear: “You should not beat your wife, but if the food is not ready, if the rotis are not hot, what choice do you have?”—Male, Jar, Uttar Pradesh Severe and frequent beating is rarely viewed as a reason for leaving a husband. No more than 5% of women expressed the view that a woman should leave her husband if she is beaten excessively. Not only is wife-beating seen as a normal part of womanhood but also women are acutely aware of their limited options, and that socioeconomic factors provide them few alternatives to the life of violence. Globally, the physical consequences of violence may be profound but remain hidden. The World Bank estimates that rape and domestic violence account for 5% of the healthy years of life lost to women of reproductive age in developing countries.4World Bank2nd ed. World development report 1993—investing in health. Oxford University Press, New York1993: 50Google Scholar Worldwide, the health burden from gender-based violence on women is similar to that posed by such less hidden conditions as HIV infection and tuberculosis.5Heise L Pitanguay J Germain A Violence against women: the hidden health burden.in: 2nd ed. World Bank Discussion Papers no 255. World Bank, Washington DC1994Google Scholar The investigation reported here did not probe health consequences and there is little published work on this aspect of domestic violence. The observed consequences for physical health range from bodily injury to sexually transmitted diseases, gynaecological disorders, headache, asthma, and miscarriage. Several studies in India have established links between fatal outcomes—suicide and homicide—and ill-treatment of women6Pawar MS Women and family violence: policies and programmes.in: Sood S Violence against women. Arihant Publishers, Jaipur1990Google Scholar Finally, there are mental health consequences, including impairment of women's ability to care for themselves, their children, and their families and impairment of women's capacity to advance their own interests. Denial of women's dignity and equality impoverishes national life, and sacrifices the economic benefits that women's initiatives could achieve. India ratified the Women's Convention in 1993. It thereby accepted the obligation to report to the Convention monitoring body, the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), within 1 year of ratification and every 4 years thereafter, on what it has done to bring its laws, policies, and practices into compliance with its Convention obligations (Article 18). The Indian Government has yet to report, but the coalition Government of Prime Minister Deve Gowda, upon taldng office in June, 1996, promised to review all laws to remove discrimination against women.7Burns JF India's new leader promises ambitious agenda of reform.New York Times. June 6, 1996; Google Scholar States that have ratified the Women's Convention agree to take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women “by any person…” (Article 2e) and “in all matters relating to marriage and family relations…” (Article 16·1). In their private and family lives, individuals as such are not governed by the Convention; however, ratifying countries are legally bound to take action to ensure as far as reasonably possible that provisions of the Convention will be respected by individuals within the country, and that individuals' violations will be subject to action by the legislative, executive, and judicial organs of the state. Accordingly, while an individual man's assault on his wife does not make the state in breach of the Convention, states are legally bound to “organize the governmental apparatus and, in general, all the structures through which public power is exercised, so that they are capable of juridically ensuring the free and full enjoyment of human rights.”8Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Velasquez Rodriguez, Inter-Am. CHR 35, OAS/Ser. L./V./III. 19, doc.13 (1988).Google Scholar CEDAW may issue General Recommendations defining the scope of Convention obligations, including states' obligations to eliminate human rights violations against women in the privacy of their homes. General Recommendation 19 on Violence Against Women requires ratifying states to implement appropriate and effective remedies to eliminate domestic violence and to research the extent, causes, and consequences of violence. Further, they must develop prevention programmes including education and information components, impose criminal penalties, and provide civil remedies, support services, and compensation for victims.9United Nations2nd ed. Report of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women. UN, New York1992: 5Google Scholar When the Indian Government submits its report to CEDAW, it will be expected to explain what aspects of domestic violence are being addressed by state action. For example, the Government is prosecuting dowry deaths.10Jethmalani R Kali's yug: empowerment, law and dowry deaths. Har-Anand Publications, New Delhi1995Google Scholar On receipt of a report, CEDAW may question Indian representatives, perhaps through studies and information received from non-governmental agencies. Evidence from studies on wife-beating places the Indian Government on notice of practices that violate its own Constitution and the Women's Convention. The Government is thus obliged to take effective steps to prevent recurrence of such practices and to ensure victims' access to remedies. Such studies also open the way to CEDAW questioning the Indian Government on matters that its report may not satisfactorily address. The Government will be called to account for matters raised by studies that indicate failure to conform with provisions of the Women's Convention. Research (particularly at the community level) is necessary to identify the nature and causes of domestic violence, to design preventive programmes that address the causes, and to measure the effectiveness of preventive and remedial programmes and policies. Prosecution and punishment cannot be fully effective against routine and socially pervasive conduct; 40% of husbands cannot be imprisoned. Occasional imprisonment can serve to reinforce the attempt to transform social practices by demonstration of their wrongfulness. The Women's Convention (Article 5a) requires ratifying states to “modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women” so as to eliminate “prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on…the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women”. The community study reported in this article shows that information, education, and communication programmes aimed at both men and women are critical instruments in reform of socially tolerated conduct. Further work is needed to find out what kinds of preventive and remedial measures would be effective in changing the social norms that legitimise domestic violence. While the promise of the Prime Minister to remove discriminatory provisions of existing laws is a necessary step, it is not alone sufficient to ensure equality of women. The research findings indicate that protection of wives from beating also requires the enhancement of women's autonomy. Autonomy may be promoted through education of girls, implementation of existing laws on minimum age of marriage and equal rights to inheritance, and related measures to ensure women's control over resources on which their welfare depends. It also requires concerted information and education efforts on the unacceptability of wife-beating. The resounding policy conclusion of the community study is that strategies to combat violence are urgently needed to address the needs of battered women in the short term and to attack the root causes in the long term. Results show the need for services to identify domestic violence, refer victims to effective agencies, achieve national programmes to prevent domestic violence, and bring about the social, economic, and legal equality of the sexes prescribed by the Indian Constitution.