Predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India

Abstract Background The feminist theory posits that spousal coercive control is not random but a purposeful and systematic men’s strategy to control and dominate their female partners. The frequency of coercive control is more than emotional, physical, and sexual intimate partner violence (IPV). Coe...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Suman Kanougiya, Muthusamy Sivakami, Saurabh Rai
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	BMC 2021
Materias:	Coercive control Controlling behaviour Intimate partner violence Violence against women National Family Health Survey-4 India Public aspects of medicine RA1-1270
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/645d3fbb119344d88c4bb9deeb2ecaf6
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:645d3fbb119344d88c4bb9deeb2ecaf6
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:645d3fbb119344d88c4bb9deeb2ecaf62021-12-05T12:09:34ZPredictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India10.1186/s12889-021-12232-31471-2458https://doaj.org/article/645d3fbb119344d88c4bb9deeb2ecaf62021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-12232-3https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2458Abstract Background The feminist theory posits that spousal coercive control is not random but a purposeful and systematic men’s strategy to control and dominate their female partners. The frequency of coercive control is more than emotional, physical, and sexual intimate partner violence (IPV). Coercive control is usually mistaken with psychological abuse when it is not and has recently gained independent attention within the spectrum of IPV. The role of socioeconomic factors in determining coercive control and associations between coercive control and form of IPV is less researched. Objective We aimed to examine sociodemographic and socioeconomic predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with IPV (past 12-months). Methods We analysed data of 66,013 ever-married women aged 15-49 from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS)-4 (2015-2016). Estimates involved bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models, and marginal effects prediction. Results The prevalence of spousal coercive control is more commonly reported by 48% of women than the prevalence of IPV 25% (emotional 11%, physical 22%, and sexual 5%) in the past 12 months. Adjusted odds ratio indicate that women having three and more children (aOR 1.1, 95% CI: 1.0-1.2), women work status (1.1; 1.1-1.2), husband’s secondary (1.1; 1.1-1.2) or higher education (1.1; 1.1-1.2), and husband alcohol consumption (1.7; 1.6-1.7) increase the odds of coercive control. In the fully adjusted model coercive control independently increased the likelihood of experiencing emotional (aOR 2.8.; 95% CI: 2.6, 3.1), physical (2.2; 2.1, 2.3), and sexual (2.5; 2.3, 2.8) IPV in the past 12 months; and with an increase in each additional indicator of coercive control acts, the likelihood of physical, sexual, and emotional IPV further increases. When women reported six indicators of coercive control, the predicted proportion of women experiencing emotional 53%, physical 45%, and sexual IPV was 25% in the fully adjusted model. Conclusion Coercive control limits women’s social support and contacts contributing to low self-esteem, self-efficacy, and poor mental health. The purpose of this study is to highlight that understudied coercive control is more common than other forms of IPV and is a potential risk factor for physical, sexual, and emotional IPV independently. The inclusion of coercive control in interventions is crucial to prevent form of IPV. Survivals long-term safety and independence can be secured if the current protection law against domestic violence is extended to encompass coercive control.Suman KanougiyaMuthusamy SivakamiSaurabh RaiBMCarticleCoercive controlControlling behaviourIntimate partner violenceViolence against womenNational Family Health Survey-4IndiaPublic aspects of medicineRA1-1270ENBMC Public Health, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-13 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Coercive control Controlling behaviour Intimate partner violence Violence against women National Family Health Survey-4 India Public aspects of medicine RA1-1270
spellingShingle	Coercive control Controlling behaviour Intimate partner violence Violence against women National Family Health Survey-4 India Public aspects of medicine RA1-1270 Suman Kanougiya Muthusamy Sivakami Saurabh Rai Predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India
description	Abstract Background The feminist theory posits that spousal coercive control is not random but a purposeful and systematic men’s strategy to control and dominate their female partners. The frequency of coercive control is more than emotional, physical, and sexual intimate partner violence (IPV). Coercive control is usually mistaken with psychological abuse when it is not and has recently gained independent attention within the spectrum of IPV. The role of socioeconomic factors in determining coercive control and associations between coercive control and form of IPV is less researched. Objective We aimed to examine sociodemographic and socioeconomic predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with IPV (past 12-months). Methods We analysed data of 66,013 ever-married women aged 15-49 from the National Family Health Survey (NFHS)-4 (2015-2016). Estimates involved bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models, and marginal effects prediction. Results The prevalence of spousal coercive control is more commonly reported by 48% of women than the prevalence of IPV 25% (emotional 11%, physical 22%, and sexual 5%) in the past 12 months. Adjusted odds ratio indicate that women having three and more children (aOR 1.1, 95% CI: 1.0-1.2), women work status (1.1; 1.1-1.2), husband’s secondary (1.1; 1.1-1.2) or higher education (1.1; 1.1-1.2), and husband alcohol consumption (1.7; 1.6-1.7) increase the odds of coercive control. In the fully adjusted model coercive control independently increased the likelihood of experiencing emotional (aOR 2.8.; 95% CI: 2.6, 3.1), physical (2.2; 2.1, 2.3), and sexual (2.5; 2.3, 2.8) IPV in the past 12 months; and with an increase in each additional indicator of coercive control acts, the likelihood of physical, sexual, and emotional IPV further increases. When women reported six indicators of coercive control, the predicted proportion of women experiencing emotional 53%, physical 45%, and sexual IPV was 25% in the fully adjusted model. Conclusion Coercive control limits women’s social support and contacts contributing to low self-esteem, self-efficacy, and poor mental health. The purpose of this study is to highlight that understudied coercive control is more common than other forms of IPV and is a potential risk factor for physical, sexual, and emotional IPV independently. The inclusion of coercive control in interventions is crucial to prevent form of IPV. Survivals long-term safety and independence can be secured if the current protection law against domestic violence is extended to encompass coercive control.
format	article
author	Suman Kanougiya Muthusamy Sivakami Saurabh Rai
author_facet	Suman Kanougiya Muthusamy Sivakami Saurabh Rai
author_sort	Suman Kanougiya
title	Predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India
title_short	Predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India
title_full	Predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India
title_fullStr	Predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India
title_full_unstemmed	Predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India
title_sort	predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from national family health survey-4 (2015-2016) india
publisher	BMC
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/645d3fbb119344d88c4bb9deeb2ecaf6
work_keys_str_mv	AT sumankanougiya predictorsofspousalcoercivecontrolanditsassociationwithintimatepartnerviolenceevidencefromnationalfamilyhealthsurvey420152016india AT muthusamysivakami predictorsofspousalcoercivecontrolanditsassociationwithintimatepartnerviolenceevidencefromnationalfamilyhealthsurvey420152016india AT saurabhrai predictorsofspousalcoercivecontrolanditsassociationwithintimatepartnerviolenceevidencefromnationalfamilyhealthsurvey420152016india
_version_	1718372195566092288

Predictors of spousal coercive control and its association with intimate partner violence evidence from National Family Health Survey-4 (2015-2016) India

Ejemplares similares