Community Organizing and Transformative Change in the Response to Domestic Violence in India

Abstract

Pervasive cultural narratives that normalize domestic violence have made efforts to respond to domestic violence in India challenging. An effective response to domestic violence in India needs to be transformative in nature, supporting the empowerment of survivors of violence and empowering communities to support survivors. Various studies have highlighted the importance of settings like grassroots organizations for promoting empowerment of members through community organizing. This qualitative study builds on this growing body of research using a grassroots agency in India as an exemplar to understand (a) empowering processes at the individual and community level associated with the agency’s community organizing efforts; and (b) salient mechanisms associated with social change and action in the response to domestic violence in the community. At the individual level, the agency’s organizing efforts provided knowledge, skills and resources, and opportunities for participation and leadership. At the community level, the agency engages in capacity building and increases social capital of members. The mechanisms that emerged as salient were increased critical consciousness of members, an emphasis on breaking the silence around domestic violence, community trust and cohesion, and capacity for informal social control. Implications of our findings for intervention and prevention work are discussed. Highlights Community organizing is an important avenue for change in the response to domestic violence. Community organizing can facilitate empowering processes like participation and leadership. Building capacity and social capital is central to facilitating empowerment of communities.

Community Organizing and Counter Narratives in the Response to Domestic Violence in India

“…Archival data indicated that the agency had conducted meetings with 24,364 women and 15,340 men through community meetings. Additional details about the agency’s activities related to community engagement are described elsewhere (see Menon & Allen, in press). The present study focused on emerging counter narratives in the response to domestic violence.…”

“…The field of community psychology has studied collaborations between agencies and communities, or community coalitions, as an effective vehicle for social change efforts, particularly among disenfranchised communities (e.g., Chavis, 2001). Thus, by effectively engaging and mobilizing community members in a collaborative manner (see Menon & Allen, in press) and empowering them through community participation, the agency is able to facilitate the creation of a community that upholds counter narratives that are supportive to survivors of violence and takes on collective responsibility in this area. This approach is unique in its recognition that changes at the individual level (e.g., working with survivors alone), without accompanying shifts in community contexts are not likely to be sustainable (Maton, 2000).…”

“…We see this project as having implications for adding to a larger body of knowledge on empowering and empowered settings by documenting the processes and outcomes related to a specific setting, and also spreading awareness by disseminating information related to the organization. While the current study focused on counter narratives emerging from the agency’s work, findings from the broader study of this grassroots agency (see Menon & Allen, in press) help to highlight various aspects that may have been important in the agency’s success. For example, the agency’s long‐standing community‐based engagement efforts with the target communities and its focus on a relational and non‐hierarchical approach with community members appear to help community members perceive themselves as being part of the agency (Menon & Allen, in press).…”

“…Data for this study are part of a larger study on the impact of this grassroots agency of survivors’ empowerment and social change in the response to domestic violence (see Menon & Allen, in press; Menon & Allen, forthcoming). The study was conducted following approval by the University Institutional Review Board (IRB).…”

“…Most survivors belonged to under‐privileged backgrounds, residing in neighboring shanty towns and did not have an education beyond the 8th grade. Further details about survivors included in the sample, like their levels of family support and outcomes, are provided in (Menon & Allen, forthcoming). Survivor interviews asked about women’s experiences with the agency (e.g., “What led you to seek help from this agency”; “In what ways was the agency helpful to you?”; “In what ways was it unhelpful?”), and the changes they saw in themselves and the community as a result of the agency’s work (e.g., “What are some things you learned after working with the agency that you would like to share?”; “What changes if any do you notice in yourself?”; “In what ways, if any, have people in your community changed as a result of this agency’s involvement?”).…”