Intimate partner violence and intimate partner violence–related homicide disproportionately affect immigrant women.1–6 South Asian women residing in the United States appear to be at particularly high risk for intimate partner violence, with 40% reporting intimate partner violence in their current relationship in a recent study.3 Other research indicates that immigration-related social isolation, often resulting from the absence of both family in the United States and community support for intimate partner violence victims, and lack of awareness of intimate partner violence services prevent battered South Asian women from seeking help.3,7–13 These findings suggest that factors related to immigration may place South Asian immigrant women at increased risk for intimate partner violence. The purpose of the current study was to assess the relations between immigration-related factors and intimate partner violence among a sample of South Asian women residing in the United States.
METHODS
South Asian women in greater Boston, Mass, who were involved with a male partner were invited via community outreach (e.g., flyers, “snowball sampling”, referrals) to participate in a word of mouth or a women’s health study. Data were collected through 30-minute self-administered, anonymous surveys. Participants provided written informed consent immediately before survey administration and were given a $20 incentive and a listing of referrals after survey completion.
Participants (N = 160) were aged 18 to 62 years (mean age = 31.6 years; SD = 9.5 years). The majority (83.1%) were Indian; the remaining 16.9% were Bangladeshi, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, or Nepalese. Half (49.4%) had postgraduate training, and 71.9% reported a family income of $2100 or more per month. The majority (74.3%) were married; 83.6% had a South Asian partner.
Survey items included assessments of demographics (e.g., age, education, income), immigrant status (nativity, recency of immigration), and social isolation (no family in the United States, no social support if abused). A 12-item general social support scale10 also was included, as was a 10-item South Asian acculturation scale created for use in this study3 to assess language, food, and community affiliation. Scales were quartiled because of lack of normal distribution. Outcome measures included an item that assessed participants’ knowledge of intimate partner violence services and 3 dichotomized Conflict Tactics Scales14 violence subscales to assess prevalence of physical, sexual, and injuryrelated intimate partner violence in the current relationship.
Logistic regression analyses controlling for demographics significantly related to outcome variables were conducted to assess the relations between immigration-related predictor variables and intimate partner violence. Odds ratios (ORs) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to assess the magnitude and significance of relations.
RESULTS
Table 1 ▶ shows high prevalence of intimate partner violence (40.8%) and low awareness of intimate partner violence services (50.6%); 28.1% of this largely immigrant sample reported no family in the United States, and 10.0% indicated that they would have no social support if abused.
TABLE 1—
Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence, Knowledge of Intimate Partner Violence Services, and Immigration-Related Factors Among South Asian Immigrant Women (N = 160): Greater Boston, August 1998–June 1999
| Percentage | |
| Abuse prevalence | |
| Physical abuse | 30.6 |
| Sexual abuse | 18.8 |
| Injury/need for medical services due to abuse | 15.7 |
| Any abuse | 40.8 |
| No knowledge of available intimate partner violence services | 50.6 |
| US citizens | 38.6 |
| Immigrant status | |
| Immigrant (non–US born)a | 87.5 |
| Among immigrants | |
| Immigrated within past 2 y | 22.3 |
| Immigrated between 2 and 10 y ago | 38.1 |
| Immigrated ≥11 y ago | 39.6 |
| Immigrant context | |
| No family in United States | 28.1 |
| No social support if abused | 10.0 |
aResults did not alter when immigrant status was configured as a nondichotomized variable.
As seen in Table 2 ▶, no variables were significantly related to physical abuse. Lower general social support was significantly related to sexual abuse (OR = 1.51; 90% CI = 1.02, 2.23). Participants reporting lower acculturation (OR = 2.06; 90% CI = 1.28, 3.33), no family in the United States (OR = 2.83; 90% CI = 1.35, 5.90), lower general social support (OR = 1.50; 90% CI = 1.05, 2.15), and no social support if abused (OR = 5.40; 90% CI = 2.14, 13.65) were significantly more likely to report injury from intimate partner violence. Participants who immigrated in the past 2 years were significantly more likely to report no knowledge of intimate partner violence services (OR = 3.10; 90% CI = 1.47, 6.54). Although nonsignificant, analyses also indicated that non–US born participants were 3.5 times as likely to report physical abuse, almost 4 times as likely to report intimate partner violence–related injury, and two times as likely to report no knowledge of intimate partner violence services.
TABLE 2—
Logistic Regression Analyses to Assess the Relations Between Immigration-Related Factors, Intimate Partner Violence, and Awareness of Intimate Partner Violence–Related Services Among South Asian Immigrant Women (N = 160): Greater Boston, August 1998–June 1999
| Physical Abusea (n = 49) OR (90% CI) | Sexual Abuse (n = 30) OR (90% CI) | Intimate Partner Violence–Related Injury (n = 25) OR (90% CI) | No Knowledge of Intimate Partner Violence Servicesb (n = 81) OR (90% CI) | |
| Not born in United States | 3.53 (0.96, 13.07) | 1.35 (0.46, 4.02) | 3.96 (0.70, 22.5) | 2.01 (0.88, 4.61) |
| Immigrated in past 2 y | 0.79 (0.36, 1.77) | 0.55 (0.21, 1.43) | 0.64 (0.24, 1.70) | 3.10 (1.47, 6.54) |
| Lower acculturation | 0.97 (0.68, 1.37) | 0.87 (0.60, 1.26) | 2.06 (1.28, 3.33) | 1.03 (0.76, 1.39) |
| No family in United States | 1.23 (0.65, 2.34) | 1.35 (0.41, 4.02) | 2.83 (1.35, 5.90) | 0.80 (0.44, 1.45) |
| Low general social support | 1.31 (0.99, 1.72) | 1.51 (1.02, 2.23) | 1.50 (1.05, 2.15) | 0.94 (0.73, 1.21) |
| No social support if abused | 1.62 (0.63, 4.18) | 1.05 (0.26, 4.26) | 5.40 (2.14, 13.65) | 2.14 (0.83, 5.51) |
Note. OR = odds ratio; CI = confidence interval.
aAnalyses controlled for age and relationship length.
bAnalyses controlled for ethnicity.
CONCLUSIONS
Findings from the current study indicate that immigrant-related factors may be predictive of more severe intimate partner violence for South Asian women residing in the United States. Social isolation, in particular, was associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing severe intimate partner violence; women reporting no family in the United States were 3 times more likely than those with family in the United States to have been physically injured by their current partner.
Trends also suggest that non–US born participants were more likely to report physical abuse, intimate partner violence–related injury, and no knowledge of intimate partner violence services. Lack of significant findings related to immigrant status may be attributable to the small numbers of US-born women included in the study. However, women reporting more recent immigration were significantly more likely to report no knowledge of intimate partner violence services.
Study limitations included reliance on measures (e.g., Conflict Tactics Scales14) not previously validated for South Asians and reliance on self-report from a self-selected sample. Generalizability of findings was limited by the sample being predominantly Asian Indian and of higher socioeconomic status. Although limitations may have yielded biased data, the affluence of the sample would likely have biased estimates downward.6 Finally, the English-based survey was translated as necessary by proctors and conducted as an interview, subjecting the data to interviewer biases.
Further research with larger, representative samples is needed to clarify these relations. Nonetheless, findings from this study indicate the need to increase efforts to provide intimate partner violence–related intervention and prevention services for South Asian immigrants. Culturally tailored efforts should include community education to promote awareness of available intimate partner violence services, victim services, and batterers’ intervention.
Acknowledgments
The current study was conducted under a grant (1 R03 MH 59614–010) funded by the National Institutes of Health, “HIV Risk and Domestic Violence Among South Asian Women Residing in the United States.”
The authors wish to thank Asian Task Force Against Domestic Violence, Saheli: South Asian Women’s Support Network; Sitara Naheed; Melindah Sharma; Nanda Shewmangal; and Usha Tummala-Narra for their support of this work.
Human Participant Protection
This study was approved by Boston University Medical Center/Boston Medical Center’s institutional review board.
A. Raj planned the study, analyzed the data, and wrote the brief. J. G. Silverman assisted Dr Raj in identification of domestic violence measures for the study and with conceptualization of the study and writing of the brief.
Peer Reviewed
References
- 1.Dutton M, Orloff LE, Hass GA. Characteristics of help-seeking behaviors, resources, and service needs of battered immigrant Latinas: legal and policy implications. Georgetown J Poverty Law Policy. 2000;7(2):245–305. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Frye V, Wilt S, Schomberg D. Female Homicide in New York City: 1990–1997. New York, NY: New York City Department of Health, Office of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, Domestic Violence Research and Surveillance Unit; 2000. Available at: http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/doh/pdf/ip/female97.pdf. Accessed July 8, 2002.
- 3.Raj A, Silverman J. Intimate partner violence against South Asian women residing in greater Boston. J Am Med Womens Assoc. 2002;57:111–114. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Rodriguez R. Evaluation of the MCN domestic violence assessment form and pilot prevalence study. Clin Suppl Migrant Clinicians Network. 1995;1–2.
- 5.Schafer J, Caetano R, Clark CL. Rates of intimate partner violence in the United States. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:1702–1704. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Tjaden P, Thoennes N. Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: Findings From the National Violence Against Women Survey. Washington, DC: US Dept of Justice Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice;2000.
- 7.Patel SP, Gaw AC. Suicide among immigrants from the Indian subcontinent: a review. Psychiatr Serv. 1996;47:517–521. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Krishnan SP, Baid-Amin M, Gilbert L, El-Bassel N, Waters A. Lifting the veil of secrecy—domestic violence against South Asian women. In: Das Gupta S, ed. A Patchwork Shawl: Chronicles of South Asian Women in America. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press; 1998:145–169.
- 9.Krishnan SP, Hilbert JC, VanLeeuwen D, Kolia R. Documenting domestic violence among ethnically diverse populations: results from a preliminary study. Fam Community Health. 1997;20(3):32–48. [Google Scholar]
- 10.Yoshioka M. Social support and disclosure of abuse: a comparison of African American, Hispanic, and South Asian battered women. J Interpersonal Violence. In press.
- 11.Dasgupta SD, Warrier S. In the footsteps of Arundati: Asian Indian women’s experience of domestic violence in the US. Violence Against Women. 1996;2:238–259. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.George MS, Rahangdale L. Domestic violence and South Asian women. N C Med J. 1999;60:157–159. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Jagannathan P. Caring for the caregivers: NAWHO’s pioneering report outlines the unique health needs of South Asian women. India Currents. April1996. Available at: http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/sahealth.html. Accessed April 14, 2000.
- 14.Straus MA, Hamby SL, Boney-McCoy S, Sugarman DB. The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): development and preliminary psychometric data. J Fam Issues. 1995;17:283–316. [Google Scholar]