41.FullA study of domestic violence against academic working wives in Medan

7/29/2019 41.FullA study of domestic violence against academic working wives in Medan

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/41fulla-study-of-domestic-violence-against-academic-working-wives-in-medan 1/12

http://isw.sagepub.com/ International Social Work

http://isw.sagepub.com/content/49/1/41The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0020872806059400

2006 49: 41International Social Work

William S. Rowe, Nurasiah FakihSutan and Iryna M. DulkaMedan

A study of domestic violence against academic working wives in

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

International Association of Schools of Social Work

International Council of Social Welfare

International Federation of Social Workers

can be found at:International Social Work Additional services and information for

http://isw.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://isw.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://isw.sagepub.com/content/49/1/41.refs.htmlCitations:

by RAVI BABU BUNGA on October 23, 2011isw.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://isw.sagepub.com/


http://isw.sagepub.com/content/49/1/41



http://www.sagepublications.com/


http://www.iassw-aiets.org/


http://www.icsw.org/


http://www.ifsw.org/

http://isw.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts


http://isw.sagepub.com/subscriptions



http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav


http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav



http://isw.sagepub.com/content/49/1/41.refs.html












http://www.ifsw.org/








What is This?

- Feb 2, 2006Version of Record>>


http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml


http://isw.sagepub.com/content/49/1/41.full.pdf





http://isw.sagepub.com/content/49/1/41.full.pdf



International Social Work 49(1): 41–50

Sage Publications: London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi

DOI: 10.1177/0020872806059400

A study of domestic violence against

academic working wives in Medan

* William S. Rowe, Nurasiah FakihSutan and Iryna M. Dulka

This article studies domestic violence experienced by women work-

ing in different roles in academic sectors of Medan, the capital of

North Sumatra in Indonesia. Although the majority of Indonesians

are Muslim, Medan is heterogeneous in terms of ethnicity, culture,socioeconomic status and religious beliefs. Not only is it situated

in a developing country plagued by the stresses of modernization,

civil disorder and ethnic conflict, but local newspapers in Medan

and other Indonesian cities continue to document ongoing human

rights violations, including the disregard of women’s rights

(Kalingga, 2001). It is commonly thought that the more traditional

cultural norms in developing countries like Indonesia may be

linked to high rates of conjugal violence (Campbell, 1999).It is normally difficult to gather reliable data in such settings, but

the opportunity to interview working wives allowed for a glimpse

into the situation. Given the limited demography, one of the key

questions is whether or not the experience of women with indepen-

dent economic resources would be representative.

Background

Wife beating is frequently identified as a common and universal

occurrence (Brinkerhoff and Lupri, 1988). Cross-cultural studies

*i s w

Key words * developing country * domestic violence * Islamic society *

working wives








have revealed that wife abuse is common in patriarchal societies (Bui

and Morash, 1999; Gallin, 1992; Levinson, 1988).

McWilliams (1998) and others have questioned whether the social

and economic ramifications of women in the workforce contributeto domestic violence. As more women enjoy higher socioeconomic

status, tensions that result from the demands of traditional gender

roles may increase.

Other studies point to structural determinants within a marriage

as precipitators of conjugal violence. Walsh (1989) found equit-

ability and shared power between spouses to be characteristics of a

happy and successful marriage. Asymmetrical relationship patterns

distinguished by male dominance were associated with conflict anda heightened risk of family violence (Coleman and Strauss, 1986;

Yllo, 1984, 1993). In a Korean study of domestic violence, Kim

and Sung (2000) identified a strong tendency towards violence

among male-dominated couples.

Barnett et al. (1997) provide a review of studies on wife abuse,

which focus on personality and psychological profiles of battered

women and their abusers. Studies reveal that women tend to

blame themselves for their failed relationships, and develop lowself-esteem and a fear of loneliness (Kaner et al., 1993; Turner and

Shapiro, 1986). Women living in what Walker (1979) described as

a ‘cycle of violence’ experience anger exacerbated by an escalation

of violent behavior, then respite and a renewed sense of hope

(Barnett and Lopez-Real, 1985; Graham et al., 1988). Women

exposed to prolonged stress associated with abuse learn to accom-

modate the violence through psychological defense mechanisms

such as denial and believing in myths.The stress experienced by abused women produces an array of

physical symptoms, including confusion, poor judgement, anxiety,

anger, depression and illness. Women find themselves experiencing

‘learned helplessness’ (Walker, 1977) and cease trying to escape.

Despite feeling psychologically trapped, women may form a

traumatic bond with their abuser, thwarting any possibility to leave

the relationship (Aguirre, 1985; Barnett et al., 1996; Graham et al.,

1995).

Research has explored traditional sex-role socialization as a pre-

cursor to cultural determinants of conjugal violence. Such a perspec-

tive posits that children may be socialized to expect that women will

obey their husbands (Birns et al., 1994; Watts and Courtois, 1981).

Social analysts caution that cultural explanations must take into

42 International Social Work volume 49(1)








account that not all men who are socialized to be dominant abuse

their wives (Breines and Gordon, 1983; Maertz, 1990).

This article presents findings from a study of abused professional

women working in Medan and sought to identify the causes and out-comes of reported family violence, physical, mental, financial and

sexual.

Methodology

This qualitative, multi-method study involved an interpretive and

naturalistic approach. It builds on other studies (Frye and D’Avanzo,

1994; Keenan et al., 1998), which show that the often neglected

anthropological and qualitative evidence provides insight into the

causes, impact and outcomes of abuse.

The study used purposive and snowball sampling techniques

based on the principles of non-probability theory. Snowball

sampling, as suggested by Russell (1995), facilitates the recruitment

of key individuals for participation in studies that deal with matters

considered to be very private, such as family violence.

Two focus groups, each consisting of 12 women and led by twofemale researchers, took place. The tape-recorded discussions lasted

about three hours each. In-depth interviews with individual subjects

followed. These were carried out in the language the respondent

preferred (Bahasa Indonesian, English or Sumatran) and formed

the basis of the data collection. Following appropriate ethical guide-

lines for research, each informant was interviewed for approxi-

mately two and a half hours by a principal investigator and a

co-researcher. In contrast to typical anthropological studies, semi-structured interviewing techniques were applied.

Findings

Forms of abuse

The intensity and frequency of incidents of conjugal violence varied

among the informants. Some reported being beaten, having dishes

thrown at them, having their hair pulled and getting kicked.

Women also experienced psychological abuse, including insults,

ridicule and unfounded accusations. Their husbands would threaten

to have extramarital affairs and to divorce, beat and even murder

them.

Rowe et al.: Domestic violence against working wives 43








Financially independent women experienced financial abuse,

including dishonesty, unfairness and in some instances their hus-

bands’ outright refusal to support the family. Some husbands refused

to share in household chores and women had to bear a double burden.Another factor associated with domestic violence included hus-

bands having extramarital affairs and even marrying other women.

Some husbands left their wives, while others remained married to

them. Spousal abuse often followed a wife’s complaint about her

husband’s affair.

Context of violence

An analysis of the context in which violence occurs can be dividedinto two situations: those with and those without family conflict.

In situations of family conflict, abuse occurred with previously exist-

ing problems, such as difficulties in communication or conditions

that had given rise to chronic stress. On the other hand, wife

abuse as a normal feature of conflict-free family life occurred in

the apparent absence of other family problems. Women interviewed

usually did not perceive this as violence. Conversely, aggression that

took place during fights and arguments was identified as violence byabused women.

Occurrence

Physical violence took place mostly in the informants’ own homes,

both in and out of the presence of other family members. The

screaming that usually accompanied physical violence also drew

the neighbors’ attention, since the informants tended to live in

crowded sections of town that afforded them little privacy.Instances of conjugal violence were a source of deep embarrass-

ment and shame for the battered women. Women subsequently

became socially alienated as they avoided involvement in neighbor-

hood interactions and were simultaneously shunned by neighbors.

Some informants reported that their husbands subjected them to

obscenities and threats of abuse and divorce. The presence of contin-

uous underlying tension in the marriage – even with regard to trivial

matters – reportedly exacerbated the frequency of abuse.

Financial abuse committed against the informants included hus-

bands concealing portions of their salaries or stealing money and

property from their wives. Some husbands did not provide enough

money for basic daily needs, while others did not provide any

money at all. Many of them demanded that their wives earn more,

while paradoxically forbidding them to advance in their careers.









The interviewees reacted to abuse by fighting back, being accept-

ing and quiet, or displaying a combination of the two reactions.

When faced with physical force, the wives tended to counter violent

behavior only when they felt that they were not in any physicaldanger. When they knew that they might suffer more physical

harm, they chose to accept and remain silent.

Most informants attempted to react when their husbands belittled

or degraded them. Others simply forgave their husbands and con-

sidered these outbursts as mistakes committed in anger because of

stress.

The wives’ reactions to being financially abused varied greatly.

Some did not seem to mind that their husbands failed to contributefinancially. Some women brought legal charges against their hus-

bands or quarreled with them. It became obvious that in addition

to extramarital love affairs, financial exploitation was the second

most important factor that contributed to divorce. Ironically, finan-

cial independence was identified by many wives as the reason they

were able to endure their marriages and not seek divorce.

Quality of marriages

Only three of the abused wives took action to end their marriages,

citing the importance of family support. Other women were denied

divorce, necessitating an acceptance of their abuse. Some made

efforts to change their husbands’ abusive behavior within the

marriage.

The context and nature of abuse seemed to determine whether

marriages remained intact. Women who ended their marriagesreported more severe and more prevalent acts of violence over

longer periods of time. They stated their decisions to divorce were

supported by their relatives and were beneficial to their children.

The economic independence of the informants also clearly influ-

enced their decisions to end their abusive relationships. However,

divorce did not guarantee that they would be safe, as some con-

tinued to be terrorized by ex-husbands.

Those who remained married made efforts to change their

husbands’ abusive behavior and focused their attention on their

children and other activities. They had been in abusive marriages

for between two and five years, and had neither experienced an esca-

lation of violence nor been abused on a regular basis. In one situa-

tion of typical denial, the informant kept making excuses for her

husband’s battering and tried to calm him down when he was









angry. Her husband was a drug user, and she believed that he beat

her because of this.

Discussion

We arrive at two central theoretical points: first, that domestic vio-

lence is at least as much as, if not more than, the product of patri-

archy in the culture than material dependence of the wives on the

husbands; and second, that the material wellbeing and presumed

independence of wives actually contributes to the violence because

it challenges cultural patriarchy and makes it financially and socially

easier for the man to engage in some forms of violence.

Women’s economic independence

A study by Meiyanti (1999) suggests the financial dependence of

women contributes to situations of conjugal violence. In this study

it was found that women’s economic independence also contributes

to the incidence of conjugal violence. Husbands’ decreased financial

contribution to their households provided them with the money

needed to have extramarital affairs and to support new wives and

families. This elucidates the tremendous complexity and multi-

faceted nature of domestic violence.

Shared characteristics

Many informants contended that the causes of their husbands’

violent behavior were unrelated to the marriage. This notion is sup-

ported by a number of studies, which have determined that abusersare themselves unaware of what triggers their abusive behavior

(Barnett et al., 1995). Other research found that battering is actually

a stress reducer for some men (Jacobson and Gottman, 1993).

Some male abusers exhibit characteristics similar to their female

victims. Many have low self-esteem and are more depressed com-

pared with men who are violent in other contexts (Goldstein and

Rosenbaum, 1985; Hamberger and Hastings, 1988; Neidig et al.,

1986). Heightened dependency needs are prevalent among men who

abuse their wives (Dutton and Painter, 1993; Margolin et al., 1988).

Men reported feeling powerless (Petrik et al., 1994) and highly sen-

sitive to feelings of abandonment by women (Dutton and Strachan,

1987; Holtzworth-Munroe and Hutchinson, 1993). While this does

not justify verbal or physical aggression, it indicates that men and

women may have different ways of expressing themselves.









The situations of violence described here reflect the need of hus-

bands to exert power over their wives. This corroborates the fact

that men still saw themselves as the heads of their families, notwith-

standing the economic independence of their wives. While studies of conjugal violence demonstrate that women attempt to keep their

marriages intact (Bauserman and Arias, 1992; Ferraro and Johnson,

1984), future studies could explore the extent to which the prevailing

cultural, social and religious values determine how abusers and

victims perceive and respond to conjugal violence.

Implications for social work

The use of focus groups in this study demonstrates that group dis-

cussion is quite valuable and provided the study subjects with the

opportunity to discuss their abusive experiences and to help them

bring the issue of marital abuse into the open. As was found by

Bhatia et al. (1992), Iraqi women had great difficulty speaking

openly about the conjugal violence they experienced upon their

husbands’ return from war.

Koval et al. (1982) found certain interventions helpful in miti-

gating the male dominant structure, such as stress management tech-niques. Focusing the treatment on the perpetrator is not usually very

effective, because such treatments are involuntary and must be

court-ordered. The process is further impeded by high drop-out

rates (Barnett et al., 1995). This research suggests the need to

ensure that the problem of conjugal violence is brought to the atten-

tion of the public as well as the helping professions.

Conclusion

A startling finding of this study is that a woman’s financial inde-

pendence from her husband does not protect her from conjugal

violence. Although this study did not compare the experiences of

wives employed in the academic sector with those at home or in

other professions, the reported abuses were comparable with those

experienced by women in other countries. This provides strong evi-

dence that conjugal violence occurs across all socioeconomic strata,

challenging assumptions that only less educated and financially

dependent women are vulnerable.

This was a small study and to our knowledge the first of its kind in

Medan. After completion the findings were shared at a large public

meeting and a women’s helpline was established at the Institute.









Future studies must face the challenge of investigating the experi-

ences of a wider range of women who are traditionally less accessible

for social and cultural reasons. Meanwhile, this is an area that

requires increased attention from social and community develop-ment workers in Indonesia, as in many other countries.

Acknowledgements

Co-investigators who assisted with interviewing and leading focus

groups were from IAIN Sumatera/Utara-Medan, as follows: Rustam

Pakpaham, MA; Musganti Sitorus, MA; Chuzaemah Batubara, MA;

and Fathul Djannah, MA.

References

Aguirre, B.E. (1985) ‘Why Do They Return? Abused Wives in Shelters’, Social Work

30: 350–4.

Barnett, O.W., C.Y. Lee and R.E. Thelen (1995) ‘Gender Differences in Forms,

Outcomes and Attributions for Interpartner Aggression’. Paper presented at the

4th International Family Violence Research Conference, Durham, NH (July).Barnett, O.W. and D.I. Lopez-Real (1985) ‘Women’s Reactions to Battering and Why

They Stay’. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of

Criminology, San Diego, CA (November).

Barnett, O.W., T.E. Martinez and M. Keyson (1996) ‘The Relationship between Vio-

lence, Social Support, and Self-blame in Battered Women’, Journal of Interpersonal

Violence 11: 221–33.

Barnett, O.W., C.L. Miller-Perrin and R.D. Perrin (1997) Family Violence across the

Lifespan. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Bauserman, S.A.K. and I. Arias (1992) ‘Relationships among Marital Investment,

Marital Satisfactions, and Marital Commitment in Domestically Victimized andNonvictimized Wives’, Violence and Victims 7: 287–96.

Bhatia, B., M. Kawar and M. Shahin (1992) Unheard Voices: Iraqi Women on War and

Sanctions. London: Change.

Birns, B., M. Cascardi and S. Meyer (1994) ‘Sex-role Socialization: Developmental

Influences on Wife Abuse’, American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 64: 50–9.

Breines, G. and L. Gordon (1983) ‘The New Scholarship on Family Violence’, Signs:

Journals of Women in Culture and Society 8: 490–531.

Brinkerhoff, M.B. and E. Lupri (1988) ‘Interpersonal Violence’, Canadian Journal of

Sociology 13: 407–34.

Bui, H.N. and M. Morash (1999) ‘Domestic Violence in the Vietnamese Immigrant

Community: An Exploratory Study’, Violence Against Women 5: 769–95.

Campbell, J.C. (1999) ‘Sanctions and Sanctuary: Wife Battering Within Cultural Con-

texts’, in D.A. Counts, J.K. Brown and J.C. Campbell (eds) To Have and to Hit:

Cultural Perspectives on Wife Beating, 2nd edn, pp. 261–85. Urbana and Chicago,

IL: University of Illinois Press.









Coleman, D.H. and M.A. Strauss (1986) ‘Marital Power, Conflict, and Violence in a

Nationally Representative Sample of American Couples’, Violence and Victims: 1:

141–57.

Dutton, D.G. and S.L. Painter (1993) ‘Emotional Attachments in Abusive Relation-

ships: A Test of Traumatic Bonding Theory’, Violence and Victims 8: 105–20.

Dutton, D.G. and C.E. Strachan (1987) ‘Motivational Needs for Power and Spouse-

specific Assertiveness in Assaultive and Nonassaultive Men’, Violence and Victims

2: 145–56.

Ferraro, K.J. and J.M. Johnson (1984) ‘The Meanings of Courtship Violence’ . Paper

presented at the Second National Conference of Family Violence Researchers,

Durham, NH (August).

Frye, B.A. and C.B. D’Avanzo (1994) ‘Cultural Themes in Family Stress and Violence

Among Cambodian Refugee Women in the Inner City’, Advances in Nursing

Science 16(3): 64–77.Gallin, R.S. (1992) ‘Wife Abuse in the Context of Development and Change: A

Chinese (Taiwanese) Case’, in B.A. Counts, J.K. Brown and J.C. Campbell (eds)

Sanctions and Sanctuary: Cultural Perspectives on the Beating of Wives, pp. 219–

27. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Goldstein, B. and A. Rosenbaum (1985) ‘An Evaluation of Self-esteem of Maritally

Violent Men’, Family Relations 34: 425–8.

Graham, B.L.R., E.I. Rawlings, K. Dims, B. Latimer, J. Foliano, A. Thompson,

K. Suttman, M. Farrington and R. Hacker (1995) ‘A Scale for Identifying ‘‘Stock-

holm Syndrome’’ Reactions in Young Dating Women: Factor Structure, Reliabil-

ity, and Validity’, Violence and Victims 10: 3–22.Graham, B.L.R., E. Rawlings and E. Rimini (1988) ‘Survivors of Terror: Battered

Women, Hostages, and the Stockholm Syndrome’, in K. Yllo and M. Bograd

(eds) Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, pp. 217–33. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Hamberger, L.K. and J.E. Hastings (1988) ‘Characteristics of Male Spouse Abusers

Consistent with Personality Disorders’, Hospital and Community Psychiatry 39:

763–70.

Holtzworth-Munroe, A. and G. Hutchinson (1993) ‘Attributing Negative Intent to

Wife Behavior: The Attributions of Maritally Violent Versus Nonviolent Men’,

Journal of Abnormal Psychology 102: 206–11.

Jacobson, N.S. and J.M. Gottman (1993) ‘New Picture of Violent Couples Emergesfrom UW (University of Washington) Study’. Paper presented at the annual meet-

ing of the American Psychological Association, Toronto (August).

Kalingga (2001) ‘Pusat Kajian dan Perlindungan Anak’. Center for the Study and

Child Protection for the Rights of All Children and Women 3.

Kaner, A., C.M. Bulik and P.F. Sullivan (1993) ‘Abuse in Adult Relationships of

Bulimic Women’, Journal of Interpersonal Violence 8: 52–63.

Keenan, C.K., A. El-Hadad and S.A. Balain (1998) ‘Factors Associated with Domes-

tic Violence in Low-income Lebanese Families’, Image: The Journal of Nursing

Scholarship 30(4): 357–62.

Kim, J.Y. and K.T. Sung (2000) ‘Conjugal Violence in Korean American Families:A Residue of the Cultural Tradition’, Journal of Family Violence 15(4): 331–45.

Koval, J., J. Ponzetti and R. Gate (1982) ‘Programmatic Intervention for Men

Involved in Conjugal Violence’, Family Therapy 9: 147–54.

Levinson, D. (1988) ‘Family Violence in a Cross-cultural Perspective’, in V.B. Van

Hasselt, R.L. Morrison, A.S. Bellack and M. Hersen (eds) Handbook of Family

Violence, pp. 435–56. New York: Plenum.









McWilliams, M. (1998) ‘Violence Against Women in Societies under Stress’, in

R.E. Dobash and R.P. Dobash (eds) Rethinking Violence Against Women,

pp. 111–40. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Maertz, K.F. (1990) ‘Self-defeating Beliefs of Battered Women’. Doctoral disserta-

tion, University of Alberta, Canada. Dissertation Abstracts International 51, 5580B.

Margolin, G., R.S. John and L. Gleberman (1988) ‘Affective Responses to Conflictual

Discussions in Violent and Nonviolent Couples’, Journal of Consulting and Clinical

Psychology 56: 24–33.

Meiyanti, S. (1999) ‘Kekerasan Terhadap Perempuan Dalam Rumah Tangga’

(‘Violence against Women in the Household’). Centre of Academic Research,

Ford Foundation.

Neidig, P., D. Friedman and B. Collins (1986) ‘Attitudinal Family Violence Charac-

teristics of Men Who Have Engaged in Spouse Abuse’, Journal of Family Violence

1: 223–33.Petrik, N.D., R.E. Petrik and L.S. Subotnik (1994) ‘Powerlessness and the Need to

Control’, Journal of Interpersonal Violence 9: 278–85.

Russell, B.H. (1995) Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative

Approaches, 2nd edn. New Delhi: AltaMira Press.

Turner, S.F. and C.H. Shapiro (1986) ‘Battered Women: Mourning the Death of a

Relationship’, Social Work 31: 372–6.

Walker, L.E. (1977) ‘Battered Women and Learned Helplessness’, Victimology: An

International Journal 2: 525–34.

Walker, L.E. (1979) The Battered Woman. New York: Harper and Row.

Walsh, F. (1989) Reconsidering Gender in the Marital Quid Pro Quo: Women inFamilies. New York: Norton.

Watts, D.L. and C.A. Courtois (1981) ‘Trends in the Treatment of Men Who Commit

Violence Against Women’, Personnel and Guidance Journal 60: 245–9.

Yllo, K.A. (1984) ‘Patriarchy and Violence Against Wives: The Impact of Structural

and Normative Factors’, Journal of International Comparative Social Welfare 1:

16–29.

Yllo, K.A. (1993) ‘Through a Feminist Lens: Gender, Power, and Violence’, in

R. Gelles and M. Bograd (eds) Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, pp. 28–62.

Newbury Park, CA: Sage.


William S. Rowe is Professor and Director, School of Social Work, University of

South Florida, 4202, East Fowler Ave., MGY 132 Tampa, Florida, FL 33620–6600,USA. [email: [email protected]]

Nurasiah FakihSutan is Project Coordinator at IAIN Sumatera/Utara-Medan,

Indonesia.

Iryna M. Dulka is a research coordinator at the Centre for Applied Family Studiesat the School of Social Work, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.






Documents

41.FullA study of domestic violence against academic working wives in Medan