Domestic Violence
Who is affected? Despite the recognition that
violence against women (VAW) is a global health emergency – one in three women and girls experience violence at least once in their life from the age of 15 – it has not inspired action by governments. At an individual level, violence immediately affects the health of a woman or girl. The mental and physical health effects can lead to poor earnings, employment instability, and low productivity; they can also result in women being unable to undertake household tasks, like cooking or bringing her children to school, which in turn affects the wellbeing of her children and extended family. These impacts, over a lifetime, reflect a loss of human potential for the individual, her community and the society and economy. My work is on measuring the impacts to prove the suffering reaches much further than the individual victims, survivors and perpetrators.
Some of these impacts can be monetised, such as the cost of seeking healthcare for injuries, and we can easily count these as economic costs.
“Violence
imposes burdens on the informal systems ] ] of family, kinship, and community networks” However, this is the tip of the iceberg. Capturing the cost of pain, or the long-term impact on capabilities and potential, is far more difficult, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. It is necessary to look at the costs to families and informal networks, to businesses small and large, and at the ways all of these costs multiply and affect societies over time.
Violence Against Women Harms Us All Studies in the global south demonstrate that violence imposes burdens on the informal systems of family, kinship, and community networks. A recent study in Egypt found that the most significant economic impacts are the loss of unpaid care work, the burden placed on families to provide refuge for the woman/girl, and the costs to a family of providing protection for women in the public space. This shows that the greatest costs of violence against women are absorbed by informal institutions and thus remain invisible to governments and planners, while placing a significant strain on families, communities and societies. Some of these impacts can be monetised, such as the cost of seeking healthcare for injuries, and we can easily count these as economic costs. However, this is the tip of the iceberg. Capturing the cost of pain, or the long-term impact on capabilities and potential, is far more difficult, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. It is necessary to look at the costs to families and informal networks, to businesses small and large, and at the ways all of these costs multiply and affect societies over time.
More Than 40% of Domestic Violence Victims Are Male About two in five of all victims of domestic violence are men, contradicting the widespread impression that it is almost always women who are left battered and bruised, a new report claims. The charity’s analysis of statistics on domestic violence shows the number of men attacked by wives or girlfriends is much higher than thought. Its report, Domestic Violence: The Male Perspective, states: “Domestic violence is often seen as a female victim/male perpetrator problem, but the evidence demonstrates that this is a false picture.” Data from Home Office statistical bulletins and the British Crime Survey show that men made up about 40% of domestic violence victims each year between 2004-05 and 2008-09, the last year for which figures are available. In 200607 men made up 43.4% of all those who had suffered partner abuse in the previous year, which rose to 45.5% in 2007-08 but fell to 37.7% in 2008-09.
Men assaulted by their partners are often ignored by police, see their attacker go free and have far fewer refuges to flee to than women, says a study by the men’s rights campaign group Parity.
“Male victims are almost invisible to the authorities such as the police” Similar or slightly larger numbers of men were subjected to severe force in an incident with their partner, according to the same documents. The figure stood at 48.6% in 2006-07, 48.3% the next year and 37.5% in 2008-09, Home Office statistics show. The 2008-09 bulletin states: “More than one in four women (28%) and around one in six men (16%) had experienced domestic abuse since the age of 16. These figures are equivalent to an estimated 4.5 million female victims of domestic abuse and 2.6 million male victims.”
In addition, “6% of women and 4% of men reported having experienced domestic abuse in the past year, equivalent to an estimated one million female victims of domestic abuse and 600,000 male victims”. Campaigners claim that men are often treated as “second-class victims” and that many police forces and councils do not take them seriously. “Male victims are almost invisible to the authorities such as the police, who rarely can be prevailed upon to take the man’s side,” said John Mays of Parity. “Their plight is largely overlooked by the media, in official reports and in government policy, for example in the provision of refuge places – 7,500 for females in England and Wales but only 60 for men.” The official figures underestimate the true number of male victims, Mays said. “Culturally it’s difficult for men to bring these incidents to the attention of the authorities. Men are reluctant to say that they’ve been abused by women, because it’s seen as unmanly and weak.”
Meanwhile, in countries where women’s labour force participation rates are high, costing studies show that violence primarily influences absenteeism and productivity loss in the workplace. For example, a study I undertook in Vietnam showed the productivity loss to be equivalent to 1.79% of 2011 GDP. A 2014 study in Peru (pdf) on the costs to businesses estimated that overall 70m workdays (equivalent to about 230,000 full-time jobs) were lost in a year due to the impacts of violence on women’s and men’s absenteeism and presenteeism (being late, leaving early, not concentrating).
We are currently looking at ways, through the UK’s Department for International Development What Works programme, to generate new data on the scale of the cost of VAW and provide basic benchmark data to monitor effectiveness of efforts to address violence. The global What Works programme is also testing ways of preventing violence as well as measuring cost effectiveness to make the rigorous case for investment priorities in promising interventions.
Studies in the global south demonstrate that violence imposes burdens on the informal systems of family, kinship, and community networks. A recent study in Egypt found that the most significant economic impacts are the loss of unpaid care work, the burden placed on families to provide refuge for the woman/girl, and the costs to a family of providing protection for women in the public space.
A recent study in Egypt found that the most significant economic impacts are the loss of unpaid care work, the burden placed on families to provide refuge for the woman/girl, and the costs to a family of providing protection for women in the public space. This shows that the greatest costs of violence against women are absorbed by informal institutions and thus remain invisible to governments and planners, while placing a significant strain on families, communities and societies.
How Can We Stop It?
Some of these impacts can be monetised, such as the cost of seeking healthcare for injuries, and we can easily count these as economic costs. However, this is the tip of the iceberg. Capturing the cost of pain, or the long-term impact on capabilities and potential, is far more difficult, particularly in low- and middle-income countries. It is necessary to look at the costs to families and informal networks, to businesses small and large, and at the ways all of these costs multiply
Studies in the global south demonstrate that violence imposes burdens on the informal systems of family, kinship, and community networks. A recent study in Egypt found that the most significant economic impacts are the loss of unpaid care work, the burden placed on families to provide refuge for the woman/girl, and the costs to a family of providing protection for women in the public space. This shows that the greatest costs of violence against women are absorbed by informal institutions and thus remain invisible to governments and planners, while placing a significant strain on families, communities and societies. The mental and physical health effects can lead to poor earnings, employment instability, and low productivity; they can also result in women being unable to undertake household tasks, like cooking or bringing her children to school, which in turn affects the wellbeing of her children and extended family. These impacts, over a lifetime, reflect a loss of human