Socioeconomic and Geographic Correlates of Intimate Partner Violence in Sri Lanka: Analysis of the 2016 Demographic and Health Survey

Abstract

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health issue and violation of human rights. The prevalence of IPV in South Asia is especially pronounced. We examined the associations between socioeconomic position (SEP), geographical factors and IPV in Sri Lanka using nationally representative data. Data collected from Sri Lanka’s 2016 Demographic and Health Survey were analysed using multilevel logistic regression techniques. A total of 16,390 eligible ever-partnered women aged 15-49 years were included in the analysis. Analyses were also stratified by ethnicity, type of violence, neighbourhood poverty and post-conflict residential status for selected variables. No schooling/primary educational attainment among women (OR 2.46 95% CI 1.83-3.30) and their partners (OR 2.87 95% CI 2.06-4.00), financial insecurity (OR 2.17 95% CI 1.92-2.45) and poor household wealth (OR 2.64 95% CI 2.22-3.13) were the socioeconomic factors that showed the strongest association with any IPV, after adjusting for age and religion. These associations predominately related to physical and/or sexual violence, with weak associations for psychological violence. Women living in a post-conflict environment had a higher risk (OR 2.96 95% CI 2.51-3.49) of IPV compared to other areas. Ethnic minority women (Tamil and Moor) were more likely to reside in post-conflict areas and experience poverty more acutely compared to the majority Sinhala women, which may explain the stronger associations for low SEP, post-conflict residence and IPV found among Tamil and Moor women. Policies and programs to alleviate poverty, as well as community mobilisation and school-based education programs addressing harmful gender norms may be beneficial. Trauma informed approaches are needed in post-conflict settings. Further exploratory studies investigating the complex interplay of individual, household and contextual factors occurring in this setting is required.

Clinical and psychosocial factors associated with domestic violence among men and women in Kandy, Sri Lanka

“…In addition, the presence of more children, may reflect lower socioeconomic position and thus household stress. A previous study in Sri Lanka showed indicators of low socioeconomic position, including lower educational attainment and poor household wealth, increased likelihood of IPV and is likely to interact with clinical and psychosocial factors in this setting and thus an important consideration for DV prevention [57].…”

Intimate partner violence in women with breast and gynaecologic cancers: A systematic review

“…To confirm these findings, the findings of the study by Ince‐Yenilmez (2020) examined the impact of socio‐economic factors on the incidence of IPV in 26 predominantly Muslim countries and showed that socio‐economic factors had a significant impact on IPV (Ince‐Yenilmez, 2020). This study showed that lower educational levels among women and their partners, financial insecurity and low household wealth were among the socio‐economic factors that had the strongest association with IPV, which is more related to physical and sexual violence than psychological violence (Bandara et al, 2021). IPV exposure is also severe among married women with high socio‐economic levels (Gul et al, 2020).…”

“…An intimate relationship is an interpersonal relationship that involves physical or emotional intimacy, those in such a relationship may experience partner violence (GoPal et al, 2021). Intimate Partner Violence (IPV), is a severe public health problem, a human rights violation (Bandara et al, 2021), and an important barrier to equal participation, quality of life and personal, social and economic development (Weaver & Riebel, 2021); IPV affects millions of women globally (Miller et al, 2021).…”

Intimate partner violence, suicide and self-harm in Sri Lanka: Analysis of national data

“…The protracted civil war in Sri Lanka together with the 2004 tsunami has had considerable social and economic consequences on the population, particularly for those living in the Northern and Eastern provinces. Batticaloa (located in the Eastern province) has relatively poor educational outcomes and household wealth [ 34 ]. These socio-economic conditions may explain the higher rates of IPV and suicide in this district as economic insecurity is likely to contribute to interpersonal conflict [ 34 , 46 , 47 ], psychological distress and self-harm [ 48 , 49 ].…”

“…District-level prevalence of IPV was calculated using the SLDHS weighted count of IPV as the numerator and weighted count of total respondents for each district as the denominator. IPV prevalence were defined into five equal intervals as previously reported [ 34 ]. Crude rate of self-harm by a household member were calculated as the weighted number of SLDHS respondents who reported self-harm by a household member in the previous 12-months, divided by the total weighted number of survey respondents of a given province.…”