ASSESSMENT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND ITS IMPACT ON MENTAL HEALTH: A POPULATION-BASED CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY

Bu makalenin ilk hali 5 Haziran 2025 tarihinde yayımlandı. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/estudamhsd/article/1590031

Düzeltme Notu

In the article titled “Assessment of domestic violence against women and its impact on mental health: a population-based cross-sectional study” (DOI: 10.35232/estudamhsd.1590031), published in ESTUDAM Public Health Journal, Volume 10, Issue 2, the ethical approval number was inadvertently reported incorrectly. The ethical approval number should read E-95531838-050.99-73556 instead of E-95531838-050.99-89769. The article has been corrected accordingly.

Öz

This study investigates the prevalence and predictors of domestic violence against women (VAW), with a particular focus on cultural factors that commonly encountered locally. It also examines the impact of VAW and these cultural factors on women’s mental health. The cross-sectional study was conducted with the 659 women aged 15-49 years residing in the city center of Ağrı, between February 15–March 15, 2024. Domestic Violence Against Women Scale and the Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 were used to measure VAW and mental health outcomes, respectively. Pearson correlation analyses used as preliminary analysis, and hierarchical linear regression analyses were used to identify predictors of VAW and mental health outcomes. The findings revealed 23.5% of women self-reported exposure to physical violence, and 31.4% of participants reported experiencing non-physical forms of domestic violence. Hierarchical linear regression analyses revealed that arranged marriage (β=-0.181), and living in an extended family (β=0.097) predicted VAW among cultural factors. Additionally, low husband’s education level (β=-0.230), low family monthly income (β=-0.105), and history of psychiatric illness (β=0.330) individual and familial factors that predicted VAW. Analyses regarding predictors of mental health outcomes revealed that domestic VAW, history of psychiatric illness and age difference with spouse strongly predicted women’s all mental health outcomes. Additionally, high husbands’ age predicted anxiety, and high husbands’ education level predicted depression, stress, and total DASS scores. The finding of this study underscore efforts to reduce violence against women and ensure mental well-being of women requires a comprehensive approach that considers the individual, familial, and cultural factors.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Domestic violence
• women
• mental health
• culture
• Türkiye

KADINA YÖNELİK AİLE İÇİ ŞİDDET VE RUH SAĞLIĞI ÜZERİNDEKİ ETKİSİNİN DEĞERLENDİRİLMESİ: TOPLUM TABANLI KESİTSEL BİR ÇALIŞMA

Bu makalenin ilk hali 5 Haziran 2025 tarihinde yayımlandı. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/estudamhsd/article/1590031

Öz

Bu çalışmada, özellikle yerel olarak yaygın olarak karşılaşılan kültürel faktörlere odaklanarak, kadına yönelik aile içi şiddetin (KYŞ) yaygınlığı ve belirleyicileri araştırılmıştır. Ayrıca, KYŞ’nin ve bu kültürel faktörlerin kadınların ruh sağlığı üzerindeki etkisi incelenmiştir. Kesitsel tipteki çalışma, 15 Şubat-15 Mart 2024 tarihleri arasında Ağrı il merkezinde ikamet eden 15-49 yaş aralığındaki 659 kadınla yürütülmüştür. KYŞ ve ruh sağlığı semptomlarını ölçmek için sırasıyla Kadına Yönelik Aile İçi Şiddet Ölçeği ve Depresyon Anksiyete ve Stres Ölçeği-21 kullanılmıştır. Ön analiz olarak Pearson korelasyon analizleri kullanılmış, KYŞ ve ruh sağlığı semptomlarının yordayıcılarını belirlemek için hiyerarşik doğrusal regresyon analizleri kullanılmıştır. Bulgular, kadınların %23,5’inin fiziksel şiddete maruz kaldığını, %31,4’ünün ise fiziksel olmayan türde aile içi şiddet yaşadığını ortaya koymuştur. Hiyerarşik doğrusal regresyon analizleri, kültürel faktörler arasında görücü usulü ile evlilik (β=-0,181) ve geniş ailede yaşamanın (β=0,097) KYŞ’yi belirlediğini ortaya koymuştur. Ayrıca, eşin eğitim düzeyinin düşük olması (β=-0,230), ailenin aylık gelirinin düşük olması (β=-0,105) ve psikiyatrik hastalık öyküsünün olması (β=0,330) KYŞ’yi öngören bireysel ve ailevi faktörler olarak bulunmuştur. Ruh sağlığı sonuçlarının öngörücülerine ilişkin analizler, aile içi KYŞ’nin, psikiyatrik hastalık öyküsünün ve eşle yaş farkının kadınların tüm ruh sağlığı sonuçlarını (depresyon, anksiyete, stres) güçlü bir şekilde belirlediğini ortaya koydu. Ayrıca, eş yaşının yüksek olması kaygıyı, eş eğitim düzeyinin yüksek olması ise depresyon, stres ve toplam DASS puanlarını belirledi. Bu çalışmanın bulguları, KYŞ’yi azaltma ve kadınların ruhsal iyilik hallerinin sağlama çabalarının bireysel, ailevi ve kültürel faktörleri dikkate alan kapsamlı bir yaklaşım gerektirdiğini vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Aile içi şiddet
• kadın
• ruh sağlığı
• kültür
• Türkiye

Kaynakça

1. World Health Organization (WHO). Violence against women prevalence estimates, 2018: global, regional and national prevalence estimates for intimate partner violence against women and global and regional prevalence estimates for non-partner sexual violence against women. Int: 2021.Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240022256
2. Stöckl H, Devries K, Rotstein A, Abrahams N, Campbell J, Watts C, et al. The global prevalence of intimate partner homicide: a systematic review. The Lancet. 2013;382(9895):859-65. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61030-2.
3. Alesina A, Brioschi B, La Ferrara E. Violence against women: a cross-cultural analysis for Africa. Economica. 2021;88(349):70-104. doi: 10.1111/ecca.12343.
4. Sardinha L, Maheu-Giroux M, Stöckl H, Meyer SR, García-Moreno C. Global, regional, and national prevalence estimates of physical or sexual, or both, intimate partner violence against women in 2018. The Lancet. 2022;399(10327):803-13. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02664-7.
5. Semahegn A, Torpey K, Manu A, Assefa N, Tesfaye G, Ankomah A. Are interventions focused on gender-norms effective in preventing domestic violence against women in low and lower-middle income countries? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Health. 2019;16:1-31. doi: 10.1186/s12978-019-0726-5.
6. Tekkas Kerman K, Betrus P. Violence against women in Turkey: A social ecological framework of determinants and prevention strategies. Trauma Violence Abuse. 2020;21(3):510-26. doi: 10.1177/1524838018781104.
7. Seçgin L, Arslan T, Selçuk KT. Türkiye’de son beş yılda kadına yönelik şiddet: COVID-19 pandemisinin etkisi. Humanistic Perspective. 2022;4(1):28-43. doi: 10.47793/hp.1025470.
8. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Women and Social Policies, General Directorate on the Status of Women. Research on Domestic Violence against Women in Turkey. Int: 2015. Available from: https://hips.hacettepe.edu.tr/tr/analiz_ve_rapor-102

9. Dikmen HA, Munevver GI. The relationship between domestic violence and the attitudes of women towards honor, gender roles, and wife-beating in Turkey. Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2020;34(5):421-6. doi: 10.1016/j.apnu.2020.07.012.
10. Alkan Ö, Tekmanlı HH. Determination of the factors affecting sexual violence against women in Turkey: a population-based analysis. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21(1):188. doi: 10.1186/s12905-021-01333-1.
11. Uskun E, Çelik A, Ersoy P, Sönmez Y, Kişioğlu A. Isparta’da kadının statüsü: evli kadınlara yönelik ev içi şiddet parametreleri. Med J SDU. 2021;28(1):115-25. doi: 10.17343/sdutfd.805402.
12. Özcan NK, Günaydın S, Çitil ET. Domestic violence against women in Turkey: a systematic review and meta analysis. Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2016;30(5):620-9. doi: 10.1016/j.apnu.2016.04.013.
13. Akalin A, Ayhan F. Intimate partner violence against women in Turkey during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2022;43(1):68-75. doi: 10.1080/01612840.2021.1949764.
14. Basar F, Demirci N. Domestic violence against women in Turkey. Pak J Med Sci. 2018;34(3):660. doi: 10.12669/pjms.343.15139.
15. Sezgin AU, Punamäki R-L. Impacts of early marriage and adolescent pregnancy on mental and somatic health: the role of partner violence. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2020;23(2):155-66. doi: 10.1007/s00737-019-00960-w.
16. Gunarathne L, Bhowmik J, Apputhurai P, Nedeljkovic M. Factors and consequences associated with intimate partner violence against women in low-and middle-income countries: A systematic review. PLoS One. 2023;18(11):e0293295. doi: 10.1371/journal. pone.0293295.
17. Amédée LM, Darius WP, Farahi SMMM, Guillaume D, Jacob G, Guerrier M, et al. Intimate partner violence and symptoms of psychological distress and depression in adolescents and young adults in Haiti. J Affect Disord. 2024;363:626-33. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2024.07.074.
18. White SJ, Sin J, Sweeney A, Salisbury T, Wahlich C, Montesinos Guevara CM, et al. Global prevalence and mental health outcomes of intimate partner violence among women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, Abuse. 2024;25(1):494-511. doi: 10.1177/15248380231155529
19. Howell KH, Thurston IB, Schwartz LE, Jamison LE, Hasselle AJ. Protective factors associated with resilience in women exposed to intimate partner violence. Psychol Violence. 2018;8(4):438. doi: 10.1037/vio0000147.
20. Pourhoseingholi MA, Vahedi M, Rahimzadeh M. Sample size calculation in medical studies. Gastroenterol Hepatol Bed Bench [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2024 Nov 22];6(1):14. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4017493/
21. Kılıç B. Aile içi kadına yönelik şiddetin belirlenmesi ve hemşirenin rolü. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi, İstanbul. 1999.
22. Lovibond PF, Lovibond SH. The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behav Res Ther. 1995;33(3):335-43. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U.
23. Sariçam H. The psychometric properties of Turkish version of Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 (DASS- 21) in health control and clinical samples. Journal of Cognitive Behavioral Psychotherapies and Research. 2018;7(1):19. doi: 10.5455/JCBPR.274847.
24. Republic of Turkey Ministry of Women and Social Policies, General Directorate on the Status of Women. The Strategy Paper and Action Plan on Women’s Empowerment 2018-2023. Int: 2018. Available from: https://www.aile.gov.tr/ksgm/ulusal-eylem-planlari/kadinin-guclenmesi-strateji-belgesi-ve-eylem-plani-2018-2023/
25. Kotan Z, Kotan VO, Yalvaç HD, Demir S. Association of domestic violence against women with sociodemographic factors, clinical features, and dissociative symptoms in patients who receive services from psychiatric outpatient units in Turkey. J Interpers Violence. 2020;35(15-16):2711-31. doi: 10.1177/0886260517703372.
26. Ahmad J, Khan N, Mozumdar A. Spousal Violence Against Women in India: A Social–Ecological Analysis Using Data From the National Family Health Survey 2015 to 2016. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 2021;36(21-22), 10147-10181. doi: 10.1177/0886260519881530
27. Tran DB, Pham TDN, Nguyen TT. The influence of education on women’s well-being: Evidence from Australia. PLoS One. 2021;16(3):e0247765. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247765.
28. Simsek Z, Ak D, Altindag A, Günes M. Prevalence and predictors of mental disorders among women in Sanliurfa, Southeastern Turkey. J. Public Health. 2008;30(4):487-93. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdn025.
29. Sohbati F, Hasanpoor-Azghady SB, Jafarabadi M, Amiri-Farahani L, Mohebbi M. Psychological well-being of infertile women and its relationship with demographic factors and fertility history: a cross-sectional study. BMC Womens Health. 2021;21(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s12905-020-01167-3.
30. Piao X, Ma X, Managi S. Impact of the Intra-household Education Gap on Wives’ and Husbands’ Well-Being: Evidence from Cross-Country Microdata. Soc Indic Res. 2021;156(1):111-36. doi: 10.1007/s11205-021-02651-5.
31. Otten D, Tibubos AN, Schomerus G, Brähler E, Binder H, Kruse J, et al. Similarities and differences of mental health in women and men: a systematic review of findings in three large German cohorts. Front Public Health. 2021;9:553071. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.553071.
32. Abdi F, Rahnemaei FA, Shojaei P, Afsahi F, Mahmoodi Z. Social determinants of mental health of women living in slum: a systematic review. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2021;64(2):143-55. doi: 10.5468/ogs.20264.
33. Lee MS, Lee JJ, Lee H. Domestic Violence Experience, Past Depressive Disorder, Unplanned Pregnancy, and Suicide Risk in the First Year Postpartum: Mediating Effect of Postpartum Depression. Psychiatry Investig. 2024;21(10):1129-36. doi: 10.30773/pi.2024.0105.
34. Liu X, Wang S, Wang G. Prevalence and risk factors of postpartum depression in women: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. J Clin Nurs. 2022;31(19-20):2665-77. doi: 10.1111/jocn.16121.
35. Goularte JF, Serafim SD, Colombo R, Hogg B, Caldieraro MA, Rosa AR. COVID-19 and mental health in Brazil: Psychiatric symptoms in the general population. J Psychiatr Res. 2021;132:32-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2020.09.021.
36. Karsten J, Hartman CA, Smit JH, Zitman FG, Beekman ATF, Cuijpers P, et al. Psychiatric history and subthreshold symptoms as predictors of the occurrence of depressive or anxiety disorder within 2 years. Br J Psychiatry. 2011;198(3):206-12. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.110.080572.
37. Kim J-S, Kim H. Spousal Age Difference and Mental Health by Sex: Korean Survey Results. J. Ecohumanism. 2024;3(3):1479-88. Doi: 10.62754/joe.v3i3.3602.
38. Francis-Tan A, Mialon HM. “A diamond is forever” and other fairy tales: The relationship between wedding expenses and marriage duration. Economic Inquiry. 2015;53(4):1919-30. doi: 10.1111/ecin.12206.
39. Karney BR, Bradbury TN. Research on marital satisfaction and stability in the 2010s: Challenging conventional wisdom. J Marriage Fam.2020;82(1):100-16. doi: 10.1111/jomf.12635.
40. Chandan JS, Thomas T, Bradbury-Jones C, Russell R, Bandyopadhyay S, Nirantharakumar K, et al. Female survivors of intimate partner violence and risk of depression, anxiety and serious mental illness. Br J Psychiatry. 2020;217(4):562-7. doi: 10.1192/bjp.2019.124.
41. Bacchus LJ, Ranganathan M, Watts C, Devries K. Recent intimate partner violence against women and health: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. BMJ Open. 2018;8(7):e019995. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-019995.