CRRC 23-Nov-05 1

The effects of The effects of men’s labor migration men’s labor migration

on rural women’s on rural women’s socioeconomic conditions, socioeconomic conditions,

social networks, and social networks, and reproductive behavior reproductive behavior

in Armeniain Armenia (preliminary results of a sociological study)(preliminary results of a sociological study)

CRRC 23-Nov-05 2

Prepared by:

Victor Agadjanian, PhDVictor Agadjanian, PhD

Cecilia Menjívar, PhDCecilia Menjívar, PhDArizona State University, USAArizona State University, USA

Gohar Shahnazaryan, PhDGohar Shahnazaryan, PhD

Sociology Master’s studentsSociology Master’s students

Yerevan State UniversityYerevan State University

CRRC 23-Nov-05 3

Conceptual framework and research questions

How does husband’s migration affect…• Household’s material conditions?• Women’s economic activities?• Marriage and family dynamics?• Women’s social ties?• Women’s health, reproductive behavior and

plans?• Women’s gender roles and attitudes?• Psychological issues and religion?

CRRC 23-Nov-05 4

The study design

• Funded by a grant from Arizona State University Institute for Social Science Research and the School of Social and Family Dynamics

• Conducted as part of a Master’s level “Sociological Practicum” course

• Students involved in all stages of the project (including this presentation!)

• It is a pilot study which (hopefully) will lead to a larger study

CRRC 23-Nov-05 5

The Study Design (cont.)The study was conducted in rural areas of two marzes—Tavush

and AraratTavush—a poorer, more economically depressed marz, with a

high level of out-migration.Ararat—a more affluent and economically dynamic marz, closer

to Yerevan, less out-migration

Data collection:• Carried out in late September-October 2005, i.e. just before

most seasonal migrants return home• A probability survey of 1040 married women in 52 villages• A community (village) survey• Qualitative in-depth interviews with 27 women whose

husbands are current migrants or were in migration in 2005• All participants received a symbolic gift (coffee + chocolate)

CRRC 23-Nov-05 6

AraratArarat

CRRC 23-Nov-05 7

TavushTavush

CRRC 23-Nov-05 8

AraratArarat

CRRC 23-Nov-05 9

TavushTavush

CRRC 23-Nov-05 10

The Survey: Sampling• 26 villages in each marz (52 in total) were selected with the probability proportional to estimated population size• Within each village, the goal was to interview 20 married women aged 18-45: 10 whose husbands are current/recent migrants and 10 whose husbands are not current/recent migrants• In each village, 10 interviewers, 2 interviews per interviewer• In each village, 10 first addresses were selected randomly from the village household lists• The remaining 10 (or more if prior non-response) addresses were selected using a random walking algorithm.

Important: the survey was not meant to produce a representative migration profile of the rural population but to compare women whose husbands are migrants and those whose husbands are not migrants.

CRRC 23-Nov-05 11

CRRC 23-Nov-05 12

Sampling (cont.)

Locating second respondent:•If the first respondent is married to a non-migrant, the second should be one married to a migrant (and vice versa)

•If no respondent of desired migration status is found at fifth house, the residents are asked where the nearest woman with a migrant husband lives. That woman is interviewed.

•If in the fifth visited residence no one knows where a woman with desired characteristics lives, the interviewer goes to a next residence following the same algorithm to interview a married woman regardless of her migration status.

CRRC 23-Nov-05 13

Sampling (cont.)

Challenges:Challenges:• Availability of household rosters: if not available, we Availability of household rosters: if not available, we

selected starting points in different parts of the villageselected starting points in different parts of the village• Availability of people (many are busy in the fields, Availability of people (many are busy in the fields,

working, attending events, etc.)working, attending events, etc.)• Availability of “migrants,” especially in Tavush:Availability of “migrants,” especially in Tavush:

– Migration as a family or by unmarried menMigration as a family or by unmarried men– Խոպան Խոպան by married men relatively uncommonby married men relatively uncommon– ““Migrant” households are spatially clusteredMigrant” households are spatially clustered

Resulting sample:Resulting sample:62% Non-migrants; 38% Migrants62% Non-migrants; 38% MigrantsLower percentage of migrants in Tavush than in AraratLower percentage of migrants in Tavush than in AraratWhy? A different pattern of migrationWhy? A different pattern of migration

CRRC 23-Nov-05 14

Survey instrument

Five parts:

A. Respondent’s demographic characteristics

B. Marriage and husband’s characteristics (including husband’s migration)

C. Health and reproduction

D. Social ties and community

E. Gender attitudes

F. Household characteristics and time-use

CRRC 23-Nov-05 15

Fieldwork: Challenges and solutions• Timing of fieldwork: Weekends—to maximize availability

of both respondents and interviewers, but… – In rural areas weekends are no less busy that weekdays,

especially during the harvest time Whenever possible, the selected households were revisited until the respondent is available

– Elections in some villages and related village politics We emphasized that our study had nothing to do with politics

– Unavailability of community leaders on weekends We notified them in advance about our study. In a few cases, no advance contact could be established and no residential lists could be obtained.

• Interviewer-Respondent Age difference: no apparent effect

• Interviewer-Respondent cultural background differences: no apparent effects

• Some respondents thought we represent the health services

CRRC 23-Nov-05 16

Fieldwork: Challenges and solutions (cont.)

• Some thought we represented social assistance agencies and expected assistance (or saw threat to assistance they were already receiving) underreporting of wealth, income?

• Some women suspected that we represented religious organizations: We emphasized that we don’t

• Yet, overall the refusal rate was very low• Questionnaire content:

– Some items were “culturally” difficult:• Abstract questions• Notions of “work” and “working”• Questions dealing with social interactions and ties• Question on sexual violence

– Recall problems: age, year/month of events, number of repeated events

– Underreporting: income, help from/to others, cooperation

CRRC 23-Nov-05 17

CRRC 23-Nov-05 18

Community survey

• Collected by supervisors from գյուղապետ or secretary

• General demographic characteristics

• Economic characteristics

• Living conditions and services

• Assessment of labor out-migration

CRRC 23-Nov-05 19

Survey data processing

CSPro software– Designed by the US Census Bureau and Micro

International– Widely used for survey data processing (including in

Armenia)– Convenient interface, supports Armenian fonts– Elaborate system of filters and checks– Available free of charge on the Internet – Regularly updated– On-line technical support is free and efficient

Double-entry to ensure quality

CRRC 23-Nov-05 20

Qualitative (in-depth) interviews

• 27 women married to migrants in both marzes (two villages in Tavush and one in Ararat)

• The interview guide followed the themes and topics of the survey but explored them in greater depth

• Most interviews were tape-recorded and transcribed verbatim

CRRC 23-Nov-05 21

Qualitative (in-depth) interviews (cont.)

Interview guide – to complement and expand on the survey

Main themes: Marriage Children Work Religion Social networks

CRRC 23-Nov-05 22

Qualitative (in-depth) interviews: Challenges and solutions

• Content issue• Women tend to answer “yes” and “no”• Women want to please the interviewers• Women were afraid of tape-recording of

interviews• Second visit • Cultural differences• Building rapport with respondents

CRRC 23-Nov-05 23

Data analysis: survey• Descriptive and bivariate explorations

“Migrants” vs. “Non-Migrants” comparison“Migrants”: Definitions of migrants:

1. Husband was in migration 3 months or more, or2. Husband is current migrant or return less than a month ago

Ararat vs. Tavush comparison Separate analyses for “migrants” only

• Multivariate analyses—to establish net effect of husband’s migration on outcomes of interest: OLS regression, Poisson regression, and logistic regression

• Analyses are done using SPSS and SAS

CRRC 23-Nov-05 24

Data analysis: survey (cont.)

• Demographics

• Economic conditions

• Health

• Reproduction

• Social ties

• Migration attitudes and prospects

• Decision-making and gender attitudes

CRRC 23-Nov-05 25

Migrants vs. non-Migrants: DemographicsMigrant Non-

Migrant

Woman’s age (mean) 36.6 33.0

Age difference (husband-wife) 4.4 4.6

Age at first marriage (mean) 19.7 20.0

Officially registered marriage (%) 93.1 85.0

Woman’s educational level (%)

Incomplete secondary 5.3 7.3

Complete secondary 42.2 47.4

Secondary special 44.2 35.6

Incomplete or complete higher 8.3 9.8

Educational differences husb-wife (%)

Wife more educated 26.4 30.4

Equally educated 51.4 45.0

Husband more educated 22.1 24.6

CRRC 23-Nov-05 26

Migrants vs. non-Migrants: DemographicsEducational level, by Marz

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Migrant (Tavush)

Non-migrant (Tavush)

Migrant (Ararat)

Non-migrant (Ararat)

Migrant (all)

Non-migrant (all)

Incomp. sec. Complete sec. Sec. spec. Incomp. or comp. higher

CRRC 23-Nov-05 27

Income and economic activitiesMigrant Non-

migrantHH total income (D/month) (mean) 78200 55200

In Ararat 89500 66200In Tavush 58800 46200

HH income per head (mean) 14900 10200In Ararat 17200 12600In Tavush 11200 8230

Woman works for income (%) 14.7 16.6Woman’s monthly earnings (mean) 28500 24000

(n=152)Took loan from a bank(%) 26.1 22.4

CRRC 23-Nov-05 28

HH material characteristicsMigrant Non-

migrant

Rooms used for sleeping (mean) 2.4 2.3

Residents per room (mean) 2.7 2.7

Household owns a car (%) 28.5 41.4

HH owns a refrigerator (%) 74.4 74.9

HH owns a color TV (%) 87.4 78.1

HH owns a video or DVD (%) 46.8 33.7

HH owns gas or elect. stove (%) 76.2 69.6

Woman owns a cell phone (%) 18.7 9.6

Woman ate meat in past wk (%) 50.0 56.3

CRRC 23-Nov-05 29

Agricultural possessionsMigrant Non-

migrant

Household owns agr. land (%) 90.8 87.8

Size of own land, in ha (mean) .54 .74

Household rents agr. land (%) 10.4 13.9

HH sells/exchanges produce (%) 36.9 39.0

Household owns cows (%) 29.9 38.4

CRRC 23-Nov-05 30

Perceptions of economic conditionsMigrant Non-

Migrant

Perceived HH wealth relative to

most HH in village (%)

Most other are wealthier 23.2 21.4

Most other are poorer 15.7 17.0

Most are about the same 61.2 61.6

HH econ. conditions will improve

in a year (%) 45.0 37.5

CRRC 23-Nov-05 31

Migrants vs. Non-migrants: HealthMigrant Non-

MigrantAssessment of own health

Good 16.0 23.2Average 58.9 58.4Bad 25.1 18.4

Has a serious health problem ordisability (%) 47.8 39.6

Health worsened in past yr (%) 41.7 35.4Was sick in bed at least once in

past year (%) 54.3 43.4Had to see doctor in past yr (%) 35.1 33.0Youngest child was sick in past 44.6 45.7

3 months

CRRC 23-Nov-05 32

Migrants vs. non-Migrants: Reproduction

Migrant Non-Migrant

Number of children ever born (mean) 2.7 2.3Explained by differences in age

Wants to have more children (%) 14.5 25.9Explained by differences in age and number of children

Husband wants more children (%) 32.0 40.3Largely explained by differences in age and number of children

Currently uses family planning (%) 18.4 47.8

CRRC 23-Nov-05 33

Migrants vs. non-Migrants: Social Capital

Migrant Non-MigrantKnows half or more villagers

by name (%) 50.0 53.7Has own relatives in village (%) 51.3 57.0Has in-laws in village (%) 83.8 87.0Visited in-laws in past week (%) 60.1 56.8Visited non-relatives in past wk (%)

Never 22.5 30.81-2 times 34.1 30.13 or more times 43.4 38.4

Attended one or more weddingsin village in past year (%) 66.4 72.3

Attended one or more funeralsin village in past year (%) 66.7 58.2

CRRC 23-Nov-05 34

Migrants vs. non-Migrants: Social Capital

Migrant Non-Migrant

Socialized w/others last Wed. (%) 79.6 74.0Socialized w/others last Sun. (%) 78.2 75.9

Cooperated with other women in past 3 months (%):In agricultural work 17.7 16.2In buying and selling 8.1 6.7Making preserves for winter 29.0 26.7In any type of cooperation 41.2 36.5

Participated in community projects (%) 11.1 10.7

CRRC 23-Nov-05 35

Migrants vs. non-Migrants: Social Capital

Migrant Non-Migrant

Got money from relatives as …

Interest-free loan 8.6 10.4

Loan with interest 4.0 4.4

Gift 13.4 11.7

Got money from in-laws as …

Interest-free loan 11.1 13.4

Loan with interest 4.1 3.6

Gift 8.1 11.0

Got money from others as …

Interest-free loan 10.4 15.4

Loan with interest 9.6 7.5

Gift 2.5 3.7

CRRC 23-Nov-05 36

Migration intentions and expectationsMigrant Non-Migrant

Would like to move from village (%) 59.5 53.5

Would like to move abroad (%)7.6 5.6

Husband will likely to work away 54.8 18.0

She is likely to go with husband 30.0 53.1(% of those whose husbandsare likely to go)

Watched Russian-language TVin past week 66.7 58.4

CRRC 23-Nov-05 37

Decision-making and gender attitudes

Migrant Non-migrant

Respondent is head of HH 11.8 3.3

Who made the decision on a major purchase*:

Mainly respondent 34.4 12.9

Mainly husband 33.0 44.7

Respondent and husband 17.6 24.6

Others 15.0 17.8

* Only those who reported having made a major purchase recently

CRRC 23-Nov-05 38

Insights From Qualitative Interviews Marriage and Family

• Marital satisfaction§Ø»Ýù É³í »Ýù, ãÝ³Û³Í íÇ×áõÙ »Ýù, µ³Ûó ¹» É³í »Ýù: ²ÙáõëÇÝë áõñÇß ÏÝÇÏ, »ñ»Ë³ãáõÝÇ, ³ë»Ýù, áõñÇßÝ»ñÇ ÝÙ³Ý ` Ë÷»É µ³Ý ãϳ, Ù»Ýù É³í »Ýù®¦:

• Changes in family responsibilities resulting from migration

• Changes in relationships with husband§ºñµ ݳ í»ñ³¹³éÝáõÙ ¿ ÏÛ³ÝùÁ ß³ï ɳí, ³ßËáõÛÅ, µ³ñÓñ ïñ³Ù³¹ñáõÃÛ³Ùµ,Ù»Í á·¨áñáõÃÛ³Ùµ,³Ù»Ý ÇÝã ³ñ¹»Ý ³ß˳ñÑáõÙ ÷áËíáõÙ¿,³Ù»Ý ÇÝã ÷³ñóٳÝáõÙ, ·»Õ»óϳÝáõÙ, ɳí³ÝáõÙ ¿: ²ÝÏ³Ë ù»½³ÝÇó ³Ù»Ý ³é³íáï ɳí ïñ³Ù³¹ñáõÃÛ³Ùµ ³ñÃݳÝáõÙ »ë, ùá ÁÝï³ÝÇùÇ Ñ»ï, ß³ï ɳí, ³ñï³Ï³ñ· ³ ÙÇ Ëáëùáí, µ³Ûó »ñµ ·ÝáõÙ ³, å³ñ½ ³ ³ñ¹»Ý…. ¦:

• Marital (in)fidelity§¸» ¹³ ÙÇßï ¿É Ñ³Û»ñÇ Ùáï ÁݹÑáõÝí³Í ³, áí ãÇ ¹³í³×³ÝáõÙ: γñ¨áñÁ ùá Ùáï ¿·³ÉÇë, »ñ»Ë»ùǹ, »ëÇÙ, ÙÇßï ¿É ³Û¹å»ë ¿ñ®Ù»Ýù ã¿ áñ åÇïÇ ÙÇ µ³Ý ÷áË»Ýù®¦:

CRRC 23-Nov-05 39

Marriage and Family (cont.)•Wife’s perceptions of husband’s life in migration§¸» ѳ٠ÇÝùÁ ¿ñ»Ë»ùÇó Ñ»éáõ ³ ÁÉÝáõÙ, í»ñçÁ Ù»½³ÝÇó Ñ»éáõ ³ ÁÉÝáõÙ, Ç٠ѳٳñ ³í»ÉÇ ¹Åí³ñ ³: ÆÝùÁ Áݹ»Õ,³ë»Ýù å»ïù ³ Çñ³ ѳٳñ ³ß˳ïáõÙ ³, ѳ٠Çñ³Ý Éí³óù ³ ³ÝáõÙ, ѳ٠Çñ³Ý ×³ß ³ ¿÷áõÙ, µ³Ûó ¹» ³í»ÉÇ Ñ³ñÙ³ñ ÏÉÇÝÇ ÇÝùÁ ëï»Õ ÁÉÝÇ, ÇÝùÁ ³Ù»Ý ÇñÇÏáõÝ ·³ Çñ³ ïáõݦ:

•Communication with husband while he is away§ÆÝùÁ ÑÇÙݳϳÝáõÙ ËáëáõÙ ³ ¿ñ»Ë»ùÇó, áñ ¿ñ»Ë»ùÇë ɳí å³ÑÇ, ÍÝáÕ³óë ɳí å³ÑÇ, ѳñ·Ç: àÝó »ù ·áñÍ»ñÁ ³ÝáõÙ, ³éáÕçáõÃÛáõݹ áÝó ³, ¹áõ ù»½ ɳí ݳÛÇ, »ë ¿É ³ëáõÙ »Ù, ûï³ñ ï»ÕÁ ¹áõ »ë, ¹áõ ɳí ÉÇÝ»ë: Ø»Ýù ëï»Õ É³í »Ýù, ù»½ å³ÑÇ, ËݳÛÇ: » åñáµÉ»Ù ³ ÉÇÝáõÙ, ³ëáõÙ »Ù,ѳñóÝáõÙ »Ù, ËáëáõÙ »Ýù¦:

•Husband’s migration and family decision-making§¸» ·Çï»ë ÇÝã »ë ³é³í»ÉáõÃÛáõÝ»ñ ß³ï áõÝ»Ù, ÇÙ ³ÙáõëÇÝÁ ëÇñáÕ ³ÙáõëÇÝ ³, µ³Ûó Ù»ñ ѳۻñÇ Ù»ç ÁݹáõÝí³Í ¿, áñ ïÕ³Ù³ñ¹Á å»ïù ¿ áñáßáõ٠ϳ۳óÝÇ, ïÕ³Ù³ñ¹Ý ³ ·É˳íáñÁ¦:

•Changes in relationships with kin and in-laws§ÆÝã ÷áËíÇ (ÉéáõÃÛáõÝ), ÙdzÛÝ ÍÝáÕÝ»ñë ³í»ÉÇ ß³ï »Ý ³Ýѳݷëï³ÝáõÙ, »ñµ ݳ ³Ûëï»Õ ãÇ: » ã¿ ³Ù»Ý ÇÝã ¿É ÝáõÛÝÝ ¿ ÙÝáõÙ¦: §â¿ áã ÙÇ ÷á÷áËáõÃÛáõÝ ¿É ãϳ, ÝáõÛÝÝ ³, ÑÁÉÁ ÙÇ µ³Ý ¿É ɳí³ÝáõÙ ³¦:

•Women’s migration intentions§ºÃ» ÙdzݳÝù »ñϳñ ÏÙݳÝù, »Ã» »ë »ÏáÕ ï³ñÇ ·Ý³Ù` ÏÙݳ٦: §²ÙáõëÇÝë ãåÇïÇ ·³, å»ïù ³ ·³ ÇÝÓ ëï»ÕÇó ï³ÝÇ, Ù»Ýù Áݹ»Õ` ØÇÝíá¹ÇÛáõÙ, ïáõÝ áõÝ»Ýù¦:

CRRC 23-Nov-05 40

Childbearing and child-rasing•Children and stability of “migrants” families§´³Ûó, ·Çï»Ù ß³ï»ñÁ Ï³Ý áõñÇß ÁÝï³ÝÇù »Ý Áݹ»Õ ëï»ÕËáõÙ,»ñ»Ë³® ¸» ïÕ³Ù³ñ¹ »Ý, ѳëϳÝáõÙ »Ù, µ³Ûó ·áÝ» »ñ»Ë³ ãå»ïù ¿ áõݻݳÝ, áõ ëï»ÕÇ Ù³ëÇÝ ¿É ãÙáé³Ý³Ý: ºñ»Ë»ùÇÝ å³Ñ»Ý, û·Ý»Ý, Ù»Ï Ù»Ï ·³Ý, ï»ëÝ»Ý, »ñ»Ë»ùÁ Ñáñ ϳñÇùÁ áõÝ»Ý , åÇïÇ Ñ»ñÁ ¹³ëïÇñ³ÏÇ, ·áÝ» ÙÇ ùÇã, ÇÝã áõ½áõÙ »Ý ³Ý»Ý Ù»Ý³Ï »ñ»Ë»ùÇÝ ãÃáÕÝ»Ý, ãÙáé³Ý³Ý: Ø»Ï Ù»Ï ·³Ý »ñ»Ë»ùÇ Ùáﮦ:

•Children’s socialization §Ü³ áÝó áñ ³·ñ»ëÇí ¹³ñÓ³Í ÉÇÝÇ, Ý»ñí³ÛÇÝ ³, ÇÝùÁ ß³ï ѳݷÇëï »ñ»Ë³ ¿, »ñµ ѳÛñÁ ³ëï»Õ ³ ÉÇÝáõÙ, µ³Ûó ÇÝã ѳÛñÁ·ÝáõÙ ³ ¿ë »ñ»Ë³Ý áÝó áñ ³Ù»Ý ÇÝãÇó ß³ï ßáõï Ý»ñí³ÛݳÝáõÙ ³, »Ã» ÷áÕáóáõÙ ÇÝã áñ Ù»ÏÁ Çñ³Ý ÏåÝáõÙ ³ Ñݳñ³íáñ ãÇ áñ ãË÷Ç, ß³ï ßáõï ³ µéÝÏíáõÙ, ÇëÏ áñ ѳÛñÇÏÁ ³Ûëï»Õ ³ Ýñ³ ÏáÕùÇó ï»Õ ãÇ ·ÝáõÙ,Ýñ³Ý ÉëáõÙ ³ , µ³óÇ ³Û¹ Ñáñ ¹³ëïdzñ³ÏáõÃÛáõÝÁ ß³ï ³í»ÉÇ ß³ï ³ ³ÝÑñ³Å»ßï ïÕ³ÛÇÝ, ù³Ý ÙáñÁ¦:

•Children and work§ºñµ ³ÙáõëÇÝÝ»ñÁ ëï»Õ ã»Ý, ß³ï ÁÝï³ÝÇùÝ»ñáõÙ Ñá·ëÁ ÁÝÏ³Í ¿ »ñ»Ë³Ý»ñÇ áõë»ñÇÝ: ÆëÏ ¹³, ³ë»Ýù û, Ýå³ëïáõÙ ¿ »ñ»Ë³Ý»ñÇ ãëáíáñ»ÉáõÝ, Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ã»Ý áõÝ»ÝáõÙ, Çëϳå»ë Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ã»Ý áõÝ»ÝáõÙ Ù»ñ »ñ»Ë³Ý»ñÁ ¹³ë ëáíáñ»Éáõ, áñáíÑ»ï¨ ÙÇ ûñ, ³ë»Ýù, Ëáï ÑÝÓ»Éáõ »Ý ·ÝáõÙ, ÙÇ ûñ ϳñïáßϳ ù³ËѳݻÉáõ… ¾¹ µáÉáñ ï»ë³ÏÇ Ñá·ë»ñÁ ÍÝáÕÝ»ñÇ Ñ»ï »ñ»Ë³Ý»ñÝ »Ý ³ÝáõÙ, ïÕ³Ù³ñ¹Ï³Ýó µ³ó³Ï³ÛáõÃÛ³Ý å³ï׳éáí: ¸³, ³é³çÇÝ Ñ»ñÃÇÝ, ųٳݳÏÇó ßáõï ٻͳÝáõÙ »Ý, Ù³ÝÏáõÃÛáõÝ ùÇã »Ý ï»ëÝáõÙ, ³í»ÉÇ ß³ï ÷áÕáó »Ý ÁÝÏÝáõÙ.:

CRRC 23-Nov-05 41

Women’s Work• Women’s work outside the home: any changes

due to migration?

• Husband’s continuing control over wives’ work outside the home

§ÐÇÙÝ³Ï³Ý áõÕÕáõÃÛáõÝÁ ¹åñáóÝ ³... ÇÝÓ ÃíáõÙ ³, »Ã» áõñÇß ·áñÍ ÉÇÝÇ ³ÙáõëÇÝë ãÇ Ñ³Ù³Ó³ÛÝíÇ: ...ÇÝùÁ ÙÇßï ѳñÝóáõÙ ³, áõ±ñ »ë ·ÝáõÙ, á±ñ ųÙÇÝ »ë ïáõÝ ·³ÉÇë¦:

§ºñ¨Ç ³ß˳ï»ÉÁ ×Çßï ³, áñ óñí»ë ÙÇ ù³ÝÇ Å³Ùáí ³éûñÛ³ ·áñÍ»ñÇó¦

• Women’s work at home§Þ³ï ¹Åí³ñ ³åñáÕÝ»ñ ϳÝ... »ë ½·áõÙ »Ù ÏáÕùÇó, ß³ï- ß³ï »Ý ã³ñã³ñíáõÙ,

ã³ñã³ñ³ÝùÝ»ñ »ë ß³ï ã»Ù ï»ë»É¦:

• Women add husband’s responsibilities to their own

• Women seek help from relatives or hire help

CRRC 23-Nov-05 42

Social NetworksContinuity and change in the relationships with:• Relatives and in-laws§ºñµ ÇÝùÁ ëï»Õ ³, µ³ñ»Ï³ÙÝ»ñÇ Ñ»ï ³í»ÉÇ ß³ï »Ù ß÷íáõÙ, ٻͳٳë³Ùµ ÇÝùÝ ³³é³ç³ñÏáõÙ, û ³ñÇ ·Ý³Ýù, µ³Ûó áñ ÇÝùÁ ëï»Õ ãÇ ³ëáõÙ »ë, ÙÇ ùÇã ùÇã ß÷í»Ù, ÙÇ ùÇã å³ëÇíå³Ñ»Ù¦:

§»ëÇÙ, ¿Ý Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ³í»ÉÇ ³½³ï »ñ¨Ç…, ³ë»Ýù, áõ½áõÙ »ë µ³ñ»Ï³ÙÇ ïáõÝ ³Ûó»É»ë, ¿ÝÅ³Ù³Ý³Ï ³í»ÉÇ ³½³ï »³, ÑÇÙ³ ã¿, áÝó áñ ãáõ½»Ý³ë, áñ ÇÝùÁ ëï»Õ ãÇ…¦:

§Àݹѳϳé³ÏÁ, ³í»ÉÇ ³½³ï »Ý, ïÕ³Ù³ñ¹áõ Ý»ñϳÛáõÃÛáõÝÁ ãϳ, ѳñ¨³ÝÝ»ñÇ Ñ»ï ß÷áõÙÁ³í»ÉÇ ³½³ï ³, ³Ýϳßϳݹ ³, ï³ÝÁ ëå³ëáÕ ãáõÝÇ, ËáëáÕ ãáõÝÇ, ٳݳí³Ý¹, áñ Ù»ÍÇ ï»Õ ãÇ,µ³Ûó ¹» áñ ïÕ³Ù³ñ¹Á ï³ÝÝ ³ ÁÉÝÁÙ, ïÕ³Ù³ñ¹áõó åÇïÇ ù³ßí»Ý¦:

• Neighbors§¸» ³ë»ÉÁ… ³ë»ë ϳñáÕ ³ Ù»ÏÁ áõñ³Ë³Ý³, Ù»ÏÁ ïËñÇ, ϳ٠¿É »ë ÇÙ ëÏ»ëáõñÇó ÇÝã-áñ Ù»ÏÇóµáÕáù»óÇ, ÇÝã å»ïù ³ ³ÝÇ, Ù»ÏÁ ÙÇ áõñÇß ï»Õ ³ëÇ, Ù»ÏÁ ÙÇ áõñÇß ï»Õ ³ñ¹»Ý ³ë»ÏáëÝ»ñÁß³ï³ÝáõÙ ³¦:

• Friends§ÀÝÏ»ñáõÑÇÝ»ñ ¿É áõݻ٠¹åñáó³Ï³Ý: ´³Ûó Çñ³Ýó Ñ»ï ÑÇÙ³ ß³ï ã»Ù ß÷íáõÙ, áõß-áõß »Ýù

ß÷íáõÙ,¿Ý ¿É ÑÇÙݳϳÝáõÙ Ñ»é³Ëáëáí: Æñ³Ýù ¿É »Ý ÑÇÙ³ ³Ùáõëݳó³Í, Å³Ù³Ý³Ï ãáõÝ»Ý, ï³ÝÑá·ë»ñáí »Ý ½µ³Õí³Í, »ñ»Ë³ áõÝ»Ý: ºë ÑÁÉÁ Áï»Ýó ͳÝñ³µ»éÝí³Í ã»Ù Å³Ù³Ý³Ï áõÝ»Ù, µ³ÛóÇñ³Ýù µ³ÕáõÙ ¿É »Ý ³ß˳ïáõÙ, ã»Ý ѳëóÝáõÙ¦:

CRRC 23-Nov-05 43

Religion and psychological issues• The meaning of faith and religion

before and after husband’s migration– Worries about husband’s health and safety– Religion as a source of emotional support

§Ð³í³ïÁ ϳñ¨áñ ¿, áñáíÑ»ï¨ »ñµ ï»ÕÝ»ñë ÙÇ ùÇã Ý»Õ ³ ÉÇÝáõÙ, ³ëáõÙ »Ù í³Û ²ëïí³Í ç³Ý, ÃáÕ ³ÙáõëÇÝë ßáõï í»ñ³¹³éݳ¦:

§ÆÝãå»ë »ñ»Ë³ÛÇ Ñ³Ù³ñ Ù³ÛñÁ ï³ÝÁ ãÇ ÉÇÝáõÙ, ÇÝÓ Ñ³Ù³ñ ¿É ÇÝùÁ ï³ÝÁ ãÇ. ݳ ¿ ÇÙ ÙÇ³Ï Ñ³ñ³½³ïÁ¦:

• Psychological problems: loneliness, sense of insecurity, uncertainty about the future, “nerves”

§Ü³ÛÇ, í³É»ñdzݳÛÇ ¹»ÕÇÝ Ïá׳ÏÝ»ñÁ ¹ñ³Í »Ý ¿Ýï»Õ, »ë ³Ù»Ý ·Çß»ñ åÇïÇ ËÙ»Ù, áñ ùÝ»Ù, ÇëÏ áñ ÇÝùÁ ëï»Õ ³ ÉÇÝáõÙ ¿¹ ¹»ÕÇ Ù³ëÇÝ ã»Ù ¿É Ùï³ÍáõÙ¦:

CRRC 23-Nov-05 44

Future steps

• Further analyses, including multivariate analyses of survey data

• Cross-sectional survey data limited causal inferences

• Data and results through the Internet

• Based on results and lessons learned, designing and implementing a larger new study (pending funding)