535255 research-article2014

JIVXXX10.1177/0886260514535255Journal of Interpersonal ViolenceKelmendi

Article

Domestic Violence Against Women in Kosovo: A Qualitative Study of Women’s Experiences

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 2015, Vol. 30(4) 680­–702 © The Author(s) 2014 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0886260514535255 jiv.sagepub.com

Kaltrina Kelmendi, MA1,2

Abstract Research on gender-based violence describes domestic violence by male partners as a major public health issue and serious human rights violation. Many studies have been conducted in Kosovo to understand the factors that contribute to violence against women. The present study aims to examine the experiences of battered women and their understanding of the violence from an ecological framework, by asking questions regarding personal, situational, and socio-cultural factors. The study is qualitative, consisting of 50 in-depth interviews with victims of domestic violence, and uses a grounded theory approach to identify main themes of the women’s experiences. Findings from the study suggest that poverty, a patriarchal culture, strictly defined gender roles, and lack of programs for reintegrating victims subordinate women and leave them susceptible to domestic violence. Keywords domestic violence, victims, violent experiences, patriarchal culture

1Masaryk

University, Brno, Czech Republic of Prishtina, Kosova

2University

Corresponding Author: Kaltrina Kelmendi, Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University, Jostova 10, Brno-mesto, 60200 Brno, Czech Republic. Email: [email protected]

Kelmendi

681

Violence against women is prevalent all over the world, representing a violation of women’s rights and a major public health problem (Ellsberg, 2006; Garcia-Moreno, Jansen, Ellsberg, Heise, & Watts, 2006; Krug, Dahdlberg, Mercy, Zwi, & Lozano, 2002). In almost 50 countries around the world, 10% to 52% of women surveyed reported physical or other abuse by their partner at some point in their lives (Heise, Ellsberg, & Gottemoeller, 1999). Furthermore, the WHO multi-country study estimates that lifetime prevalence of physical violence by intimate partner falls between 13% and 61%, most sites falling between 23% and 49%. Between 4% and 49% of ever-partnered women reported severe physical violence. Lifetime prevalence of sexual violence by intimate partner falls between 6% and 59%, with most sites between 10% and 50%. Lifetime prevalence of physical or sexual abuse, or both, by intimate partner falls between 15% and 71% (Garcia-Moreno et al., 2006). According to Heise’s (1998) ecological model, domestic violence can be explained as an interactive influence of three main factors: personal, situational, and socio-cultural. At the individual level, the most consistent predictors of violence are young age (Carrado, George, Loxam, Jones, & Templar, 1996; Mirrlees-Black, 1999), low level of education (Ackerson, Kawachi, Barbeau, & Subramanian, 2008; Brown, Thurman, Bloem, & Kendall, 2006; Chan, 2009; Dalal, Rahman, & Jansson, 2009; Johnson & Das, 2009; Koenig, Stephenson, Ahmed, Jejeebhoy, & Campbell, 2006), childhood experience of family violence and corporal punishment (O’Leary, Smith Slep, & O’Leary, 2007; Riggs & O’Leary, 1996), and agreement with sexist, patriarchal, and/ or sexually hostile attitudes (Abrahams, Jewkes, Hoffman, & Laubsher, 2004; Boyle, Georgiades, Cullen, & Racine, 2008; Gage, 2005; Jewkes et al., 2006; Johnson & Das, 2009; Murnen, Wright, & Kaluzny, 2002; Tang & Lai, 2008). At the family and relationship level, the predictors are relationship status, poor problem-solving and communication skills, and female economic dependency (Carlson, Worden, Ryn, & Bachman, 2000); female threats of abandonment and male jealousy (Dutton, Saunders, Starzomski, & Bartholomew, 1994); male control over social and economic decision-making and other gender inequalities (Heise, 1994). At the level of peer groups and organizational cultures, male dominance, gender segregation, hostility toward women, and acceptance of violence (Flood & Pease, 2009) are the strongest predictors. Moreover, the stigma attached to services for female victims, the phenomenon of violence in general (Carlson et al., 2000), and poverty (Heise & Garcia-Moreno, 2002; Jewkes, Sen, & Garcia-Moreno, 2002) are considered major factors at the community level. At the societal level, the strongest predictors of violence are rigid and unequal gender roles, male dominance, and toughness (Russo & Pirlott, 2006; Taft, Bryant-Davis, Woodward, Tilman, & Torres, 2009). Heise (1994) posited that culture, through specific

682

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

socialization trends, prescribed gender roles, male dominance, and perception of women as property, forms an environment where violence against women is considered acceptable. Another factor is gender-based inequality of power and resources (World Health Organization, 2002). The present study interviewed ethnic Albanian women concerning their experiences of domestic violence and the support they received from formal sources. By means of an ecological framework, the study examines the personal, situational, and socio-cultural factors related to violence (Ellsberg & Heise, 2005).

Background Legal and Political Context In 2008, Kosovo declared its independence and thus became the newest country in Europe, characterized by a very young population. Economic stagnation, widespread poverty, high unemployment, poor quality of life, and pervasive discrimination against women continue to burden the country (United Nations Development Program [UNDP], 2010). Findings from the Kosovo Human Development (UNDP, 2010) report show that the elderly and disabled, ethnic minorities, and rural women are those most subjected to poverty or discrimination. Kosovo institutions continue to improve human rights by means of domestic legislations and policies that deal with gender inequalities and conditions that subordinate and humiliate women in public and private. In 2010, the Assembly of Kosovo enacted the Law of Protection against Domestic Violence 3L/182 (LPDV). The LPDV aimed to prevent domestic violence in all its forms through legal measures. It also aimed to treat domestic violence perpetrators. The LPDV underlined protective measures against domestic violence, including psychosocial treatment for perpetrators of violence (Article 4), prohibition of approaching the survivor of domestic violence (Article 5), prohibition of harassment to persons exposed to violence (Article 6), and removal of the perpetrator from apartment, house, or other premises (Article 7). Yet, despite an advanced legal framework for human rights, gender equality, survivor protection, and prosecution of perpetrators, the mechanism to implement these protective measures is lacking. Findings from the Kosovo Women’s Network study “More Than Words on Paper? The Response of Justice Providers to Domestic Violence in Kosovo,” which aimed to support legislation on domestic violence, identified numerous issues with responses of civil court judges. These included delays in issuing protection orders (POs); limited use of measures provided by domestic violence regulations, discounting of evidence, insufficient follow-up of POs, lenient

Kelmendi

683

sentencing when POs were broken; and rare imprisonment of perpetrators, even in cases of recidivism (Qosaj-Mustafa & Farnsworth, 2009). In accordance with laws1 meant to promote gender equality and services for victims, Kosovo has designated a number of governmental and nongovernmental institutions to respond and provide protection to victims of domestic violence, including domestic violence police units, Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare (MLSW), Department of Social Welfare (DSW) and Centres for Social Welfare (CWS), Ministry of Justice and Victims’ Advocacy and Assistance Division (VAAD), and shelters and other nongovernmental organizations. Domestic violence cases are referred to the nearest police station, where the domestic violence unit takes care of the case. If the case is considered high risk, they place the women and children in a domestic violence shelter that usually provides housing, food, clothing, health care, health education, psychological counseling, advice on human rights, vocational training (languages, computers, Internet, reading, writing, sewing, cooking, hairdressing, and tailoring), job-seeking services, and children’s activities (music, drawing, dancing). Shelters are financed by the Municipal Department of Social Welfare under the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare. Social workers strive to reconcile the couple, while the justice system provides a lawyer for each victim of domestic violence. Studies found a number of failures in the Kosovo institutions’ response to domestic violence: lack of sensitivity to gender-based violence in general and domestic violence in particular, few well-trained police, social services’ failure to represent children’s best interests, a shortage of human and financial resources to protect and advocate for victims, and a failure to coordinate responses among the various agencies (Farnsworth & Qosaj-Mustafa, 2008; Qosaj-Mustafa & Farnsworth, 2009).

Domestic Violence in Kosovo Background Studies Findings from the latest study indicate that patriarchal family structure, traditional social norms, and conservative cultural attitudes prevail in Kosovo, and that a major portion of the violence affecting women in general and young girls in particular is domestic (Farnsworth & Qosaj-Mustafa, 2008). In the year 2000, the United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM) conducted the first study of violence against women in Kosovo. A total of 213 women who participated in educational workshops organized by local activists were recruited through random sampling from 10 urban and rural communities and anonymously completed the survey. The methodology involved in-depth interviews with groups of women, interviews with men from the

684

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

community, and questionnaires. The study showed that the women experienced different types of violence: emotional, physical, sexual, and social, as through forced isolation. Of the 213 women, 23% reported physical violence by a partner or other family member, while 18% reported rape by husband (partner; Wareham, 2000). It was clear that many incidents, including domestic violence and rape, went unreported, as 12% of the victims did not seek help, 32% asked help from their family, and only 9% from their friends, whereas institutional involvement was lacking (Wareham, 2000). Findings from the same study also indicated that violence against women (including violence at home, rape, sexual slavery, trafficking, and prostitution) needed to be addressed as human rights issues, emphasizing legal reform, and not only as welfare and protection issues (Wareham, 2000). In 2006, the Women’s Wellness Centre in Peja conducted research on gender-based violence in nine villages of the Peja region. In all, 332 interviews were conducted with women, ages 18-49, about violence within the family and in general during the war (1988-1999), during displacement (1998-1999), and after the war (1999-2000). The study tried to understand the types of violence, the services offered to victims, and the impact of violence on the victim’s emotional health. Findings from the study showed that women experienced violence not only during the war by non-family members but also in the post-war period at home by family members. Rates of physical violence by both family and non-family members were highest during displacement (27%), lower during the war (16%), and lowest after the war (1%). The highest rates of sexual violence took place during displacement (23%), a lower rate during the war (15%), and 2% after the war (The Women’s Wellness Center, 2006). The Kosovo Women’s Network (KWN), using mixed methods, conducted research related to domestic violence in 2008. In-depth interviews were conducted with 51 victims of domestic violence and 96 professionals who worked closely with the cases of domestic violence. The study provided results on types of violence, the groups at greatest risk, and the impact of violence on women’s mental and physical health (Farnsworth, 2008). In 2008, another study on domestic violence was conducted by Kosovo Women’s Network with support of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and Women’s Safety and Security Initiative (WSSIR). This quantitative study was done with 1,256 women and men. The aim was to inform the Kosovo National Action Plan against Domestic Violence and to understand the general population’s view of violent relationships. The study focused on physical, psychological, sexual, and economic violence directed toward women, children, and elderly people. Findings from the study illustrated that domestic violence was still considered shameful and stigmatized in Kosovo, which may explain why it was underreported. In all, 40% the participants

Kelmendi

685

agreed that “Violence is a normal part of any relationship, and society in general accepts that violence happens sometimes” (41% of men and 37% of women), whereas 20% of participants declared it was acceptable sometimes for the husband to hit his wife (Farnsworth & Qosja-Mustafa, 2008, p. 2). In addition, sexual violence was not considered violence if it occurred between partners. In all, 50% of respondents stated that it was acceptable to “slap children when needed.” Approximately 43% of all respondents, 46.4% of all women and 39.6% of all men, had experienced some kind of domestic violence in their lifetimes. Most participants blamed unemployment for violent behavior (62.4%) or alcohol (43%), and 38.9% believed violence was “normal” or acceptable in such circumstances (Farnsworth & Qosja-Mustafa, 2008). Furthermore, findings from this study indicated that 52.9% of respondents surveyed reported that the male family member decided how the family’s money should be spent, whereas only 10.7% of the respondents said a female member made the financial decisions for the family. When it came to important decisions, 60.5% reported that a male family member had the final say (Farnsworth & Qosja-Mustafa, 2008). These findings indicated once more that women’s voices and rights were secondary to those of men in the family. Decision-making processes excluded the women; financial insecurity made them vulnerable to violence.

Social and Cultural Context Kosovan society is patriarchal and views men as dominant with innate rights; it sees women as vulnerable and men as forceful (Dukagjini, 1989). For example, the Code of Leke Dukagjini, the traditional law of social behavior, provides men with many advantages over women (Young, 2000). This code has created a background for discrimination against women and is still applied by some families. Violence against women in Kosovo is common and often linked to subordination of women to men. According to the latest study in Kosovo, around 43% of Kosovans experienced domestic violence at some point in their lives (Farnsworth & Qosja-Mustafa, 2008). Women are conditioned to believe that they “must stay for the children and keep the family together” or that a battered wife is “not being a good enough woman for him.” The legal system and institutional framework, developed around family values, might trap women in abusive relationships and at the same time condemn them for staying. This belief creates a justification for violence against women (Baban, 2004). Findings from the report prepared on men and women by the Statistical Office of Kosovo (2007) provide more information on the social position of Kosovan women: The illiteracy rate among women is more than twice that of men (7.5% vs. 3.3% in urban areas and 11.3% vs.

686

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

5.5% in rural areas), with a higher dropout rate for girls than boys between mandatory primary education and secondary education. The unemployment rate is highest among young, uneducated women (32% among men and 44.4% among women); men earn four times more than women and women typically hold lower-paid positions than men; men own around 90% of property and real estate in Kosovo compared with women, who own less than 10%.

Method Qualitative methodology, in particular a grounded theory approach, was used for this study. The semi-structured face to face interviews were based on five main questions and constructed on an ecological framework that would broaden later through feedback and responses. The interviewer explored how the women experienced marriage and violence, how the marriage started, what they thought influenced it, their position and duties within the marriage, and their attitudes toward self-seeking behaviors. In addition, the interviewer asked about relationships with the husband and other family members, and explored social and cultural attitudes, norms, and expectations. The interviewers also asked about the women’s experiences with service providers.

Participants From domestic violence shelters in five cities throughout Kosovo, 50 participants who experienced severe violence were chosen through a convenience sampling technique. The author, an ethnic Albanian female researcher with a degree in psychology and 2 years of experience with domestic violence cases, conducted the interviews. The participants’ ages ranged from 20 to 58 years: 17 women from 20 to 35, 21 women from 36 to 50, and 12 women from 51 to 58. The participants’ educational backgrounds were diverse: 23 had finished high school, 15 had some years of university study, and 9 had finished university. Three women had not managed to finish high school. In all, 73% came from villages near the main cities, and 27% came from the main cities of Kosovo. A psychologist working in each shelter made the first contacts with the women and informed them about the study’s aim. The researchers contacted only the women who expressed an interest in participating. The researchers then contacted these women to see if they still wanted to take part and provided them with more detailed information on the goal of the study. If the women agreed to participate, a mutually convenient meeting was arranged. The reason for conducting 50 interviews was for saturation of data.

Kelmendi

687

Measures The interview focused on an ecological perspective regarding domestic violence, types of violence, services offered, and the impact of culture and tradition on violence. Questions were divided into five sections of about five questions each. The first set of questions were personal and dealt with marriage information, marriage dynamics, feelings and thoughts about the marriage before the onset of violence (e.g., “Could you please describe to us how and when you met your husband?” “Tell me more about the relationship dynamics with your husband”; “How was your married life before the violence started?” “How did you feel about the marriage before the violence?”). The second set of questions dealt with the participant’s experience of domestic violence (e.g., “Please could you describe the history of the violence”; “How did you feel about it?” “Tell me more about your thoughts at that time”; “What happened next?” “Tell me more about the relationship with your husband after the violence occurred”; “What did you do?”). The third set of questions dealt with the participant’s thoughts on factors that may have caused the violence (e.g., “What contributed to the violence?” “What were the reasons for the violent incident?”). The fourth set of questions dealt with the participant’s experience regarding the services offered (e.g., “Tell me more about your decision to report the violence”; “What were you thinking?” “How were you feeling about making this decision?” “How do you feel about the services you have been offered?”). The fifth set of questions dealt with the participant’s experience as a woman in our society (e.g., “How do you feel regarding the position of women in our society?” “What do you think should be done about it?”). The reason for asking the fifth set of questions was to understand the overall perspective of battered women on the position of women in our society and what could be done to improve their position.

Procedure A pilot study was conducted with three battered women at a shelter in Prishtina, to ascertain their reactions to the questions. The interview protocol was then revised, based on the findings of the pilot study. Appointments were then made to get official permission for conducting interviews at all five shelters in Kosovo. After permission was granted, the researcher visited the shelters several times to meet the battered women and create a comfortable environment where the participants could disclose their feelings related to their experiences. In the beginning, a few demographic questions were asked and then the interviews began. Interviews lasted from 1 to 2 hr.

688

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

Ethical Considerations An informed consent form, which contained information about the aim of the study, was given to each participant. Confidentiality, anonymity, and right to withdraw from the study at any time were assured. In addition, an approval was sought from the Ethical Commission that operates within the Department of Psychology, University of Prishtina.2

Data Analysis A grounded theory approach was used for analysis of the data (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). This approach enables one to understand a participant’s subjective experience of the phenomena and to develop a theory from the collected data through identified themes. Grounded theory formulated by Glaser and Strauss emerged in the 1960s. These sociologists explained the grounded theory approach as a way to discover theory from data (Charmaz, 2006). Over the years, adaptations have been made to the process (Corbin & Strauss, 2008), and three strands of grounded theory emerged: “Glaserian, Straussian and Charmazian” (Hood, 2007, p. 163). Each strand maintains the core principles of theoretical sampling, constant comparison, and theory development. Traditional Glaserian grounded theory builds theory on the basis of what “really exists in the data” (Annells, 1996). Strauss and Corbin (1998) departed from Glaser’s positivism by referring to the construction, rather than the discovery, of grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006). Charmaz (2006) has taken a step further by announcing that researchers “can use basic grounded theory guidelines with twenty-first century methodological assumptions and approaches” (p. 9). Charmaz’s grounded theory approach represents an evolved perspective. It argues that researchers inevitably approach their data with prior knowledge or theoretical standpoints (Charmaz, 2006). This view acknowledges that sensitizing concepts are brought to the coding process and that theory is not discovered but constructed through the process of data collection and analysis (Bowen, 2006; Charmaz, 2000). Furthermore, background assumptions and disciplinary perspectives give the initial idea to pursue, sensitize, and ask particular kinds of questions about the topic, and alert the researchers to certain processes and possibilities in the data (Charmaz, 2006). According to Charmaz (2006), sensitizing concepts provide a place to start, not to end. For the purpose of this research, an ecological perspective was taken into account using sensitizing concepts. The researcher reflected that women’s experiences of violence could not be understood without a context of personal, situational, social, and cultural factors. Themes were jointly constructed and developed by the interviewed participants and researcher. The first step of data analysis,

Kelmendi

689

coding, helped move away from abstract interpretations of the interview data (Charmaz, 2006). The data were examined sentence by sentence and open codes assigned to the interview texts, which were read several times to identify themes. Codes were assigned according to statements in the interview. For example, in the code “Traditional Way of Living,” one participant said, “It is normal that I do the cooking and take care of the children.” Another said, “I have to fulfill my duties as wife and bride of that family.” The second step, focused coding, compared between codes of one participant and also compared different participants with attention to similarities and differences. As the interviews progressed, codes with similar content were grouped into categories through constant comparison. The constant comparison analysis continued to categorize and subcategorize data to the point of theoretical saturation. To ensure validity of identified themes, the researcher consulted with shelter managers on their long-term experience with domestic violence.

Outcomes Four main themes were identified: similarities and differences between women in married life, in experience of abuse, in family influences, and protection systems. Participants showed both differences and similarities in dynamics at the beginning of marriage. In marriage history, participants expressed varying thoughts and feelings on the way their marriage happened. In most cases, they met their husbands through a cousin or other relatives. Usually these were arranged marriages; the mediator arranged date, place, and other technicalities. If the couple liked each other the mediator spoke with the girl’s father and arranged the engagement and marriage as well. Some of the participants met their husbands on their own, during high school or the first year of university. Those who were studying when they met their husbands interrupted their studies to fulfill the duties of married women according to the husband’s and his family’s expectations. Where, according to Kosovan tradition, the decision for marriage fell to the father, a few participants married without having known their husbands. One of the women said, I was not ready to get married; I was willing to finish high school. But as you know, according to our tradition, we have to respect our father’s decision. Otherwise, it would be considered disrespectful toward him. In the beginning it was pretty difficult for me, but after a month I got used to it. I respected him and his family, we rarely talked and he was the one making decisions. (Woman X1, 50)

Traditional way of living was a common feature within the married lives of women who experienced violence. Most participants stated that their

690

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

married lives were acceptable in the beginning. Usually they lived as extended families, with the husband’s parents and siblings, in a flat or house. The wife dealt with the children, housework, cooking, and care of her husband’s parents, while the husband earned a living. All the earnings at the end of the month were given to the head of household, the father-in-law, who took care of the family’s expenses. Regarding the involvement of husbands in housework, most participants stated that their husbands did not show any willingness to participate in house-related duties. They were considered the breadwinners and dealt only with the “heavy labors” expected of men. Thus, in a way they accepted their husbands’ unwillingness to perform houserelated work. Most of the participants, especially the older ones, stated they did not even expect their husbands to do housework. Furthermore, most participants said that taking care of children and helping them with school were also considered a wife’s job. A quotation by a victim of violence: I have learned even from my mother and from our tradition that all the housework belongs to the wife. I feel all right regarding this thing. My husband should work in order to create for us favourable conditions of living. Therefore I do not ask anything from him. (Woman X2, 56)

A few participants stated that they lived only with their husband from the beginning of marriage and their life in the beginning was very good, with respect, love, commitment, and support. These were younger women, with at least some higher education and awareness about their needs and rights. Usually, they asked their husbands to get involved in family-related issues. All of these women were working and felt it was difficult to do everything themselves, as they also contributed to the family earnings. According to these women, the conflicts usually began here. One of the women said, Our Albanian males are not used to doing anything since their mothers brought them up that way. They are used to getting everything ready and prepared for them. So if they miss something they will begin to shout and create conflict about that. When you ask for support from them, they are not ready to offer you that support. They consider that as shameful. In these cases I am so angry and I do not know why I married him. He is thinking the same way as my father did. I think that everything has to do with mentality. (Woman X4, 35)

Similarities were noticed also in terms of household decision-making; the marriage relationship was based from the beginning on traditional norms of marriage. Men expected to overpower and control their wives. Most participants described the men as controlling, giving orders, making decisions, and

Kelmendi

691

having more freedom than the women. Some of the women, especially younger ones, described the relationship as more flexible with some degree of freedom in decision-making, but on vital issues (regarding children, family dynamics, financial expenses, permission to go out, visit family, or meet friends), the traditional way remained. Similarities and differences were identified in terms of violence as well. Most participants stated that the violence arose from minor conflicts. Usually, the fights began when the women had behaved in a way that the husband disliked, or she failed to fulfill her duties as a wife. Most of the participants stated that these acts of violence were rather isolated in the beginning. A quotation by a victim of violence: It came out of blue . . . I really didn’t know that he was upset . . . It just happened, he slapped me. I was so angry and angry that I cannot even describe . . . Afterwards he came and explained to me that he had some problems . . . I tried to understand him. (Woman X6, 38)

Most of the participants stated that at first they tried to be quiet about the violence in the hope that it wouldn’t happen again. Some participants said that in the beginning they also felt responsible for the violence by failing to fulfill some of their marital duties. However, most of the participants said that the violence began to happen more often, for relatively minor mishaps. They said that they felt afraid, helpless, and ashamed to talk about it. One of the participants said, I had to calm my daughter, since if she began crying he would come and slap me because I couldn’t calm her. I did not know with whom to talk. I knew that everybody would blame me. I was feeling helpless to do anything. (Woman, 35)

Another cause of violence based on the participants’ descriptions was the stress of living together with the husbands’ parents and other family members. Custom in Albanian society dictates that one of the sons must live with and care for the parents. The son’s earnings are given to his father, who heads the household, and so the son’s wife must ask her husband or father-in-law for every expense. Thus, she may be subjected to violence not only from her husband but also from other family members who might resent the wife’s encroaching on limited funds and thus assert their control, especially the mother-in-law and sisters-in-law. To make matters harder, tradition opposes a wife’s financial independence, outside employment and inheritance of wealth and property.

692

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

A few participants stated that the violence occurred after the wife got a job and began to participate in family allocations. They said that in the beginning violence had been attributed to other issues such as coming home late, not having lunch prepared, or not having a certain shirt clean. After some such incidents, the husband began to express suspicion and jealousy directly, trying to know and control his wife’s every movement. Regarding types of violence participants mentioned all types of violence, including physical, emotional, intimidation, threats against children and other family members, isolation, insults, degradation, and name-calling. The majority of women in shelters experienced severe forms of physical violence, but a few women experienced less severe forms, especially psychological violence (intimidation, isolation, insults, movement control, and threats). Most participants said they had experienced violence in the presence of other family members, children as well. However, the violence was regarded as secret and nobody talked about it. According to some participants, the violence was considered “normal” behavior for the family. Not surprising was the fact that none of the participants discussed sexual violence. A quotation from a victim: He used to bring friends late at night. He would come and wake me up and ask me to prepare something to eat for them. If I would just make faces or not smile at his friends, he would come into the kitchen and threaten me that he will show me when they leave. After they would leave, he would find a reason to beat me up. (Woman X9, 51)

Most participants stated that the relationship between husband and wife remained the same after the violence, and the husbands continued to live as if nothing happened The husband expressed no guilt for his actions and tended to blame his wife for the violent incidents. Moreover, the husband behaved as though the woman deserved to be slapped or beaten and continued as before until a new act of violence would occur. Few participants would try to discuss the act of violence, but would rather deny and minimize it. One of the women said, I was feeling helpless; I was thinking that something with me is not ok. I was worrying about the children; what will I/he do with them if I decide to leave. I had no job, no money, no house.

Most of the participants described the decision to report the case to the police and make it public as very difficult. This quotation by a victim explains their feelings:

Kelmendi

693

I was thinking about my family, his family. Everybody would know; our neighbors. It is a shame for them and for me as well. I couldn’t bear anymore. I was tired. I was thinking that I have nothing to lose. I was just worried about my children.

Family influences also emerged as a theme in the women’s descriptions of domestic violence. Most participants mentioned family dynamics as one of the factors that contributed to the violence. In this regard, living with their husbands’ parents, sisters, and brothers precipitated the conflict. In addition, according to most of the participants, the violence usually began after the mother-in-law or sisters-in-law complained to the husband. A woman is not only subjected to violence by her partner but also by other family members because of her inferior position. The situation becomes even worse when the woman is financially dependent on her husband and other family members. This aspect increases her vulnerability for continuous victimization. A few participants who were living in a separate house with their husband and children described the conflict and violence that arose when family members intervened. In general, the above-mentioned situations describe the inferior position and gender-role expectations of a wife or bride in Kosovan society. When the woman fails to meet expectations she is judged, humiliated, and deemed responsible for the violence. Most participants described their family of origin as another factor that reinforced violence, as the family blamed the woman’s failures for the violence she experienced. The families of origin asked the wives to return to their husbands, respect them, and behave as expected. Sometimes the family responded with anger toward the woman for having shamed and dishonored their name and prestige. Sometimes the family of origin carried the violence further. Some participants did not want to go back to the husband’s family and the shelter would not keep them anymore. The families of origin would accept the women back but would not accept their children. One of the victims said, “It was so humiliating from my family. I was so angry with them. My mother was not supporting me in this . . . I did not have a choice; I had to go back to my husband’s family” (Woman X13, 31). Finally, it is more than obvious that the patriarchal structure that governs Kosovan society systematically discriminates against women and implicitly supports hostile behaviors by men and other family members. Women suffer violence throughout their lives, at the hands of both family of origin and their husband’s family. It seems that violence is prevalent and linked to prescribed gender roles that govern the relationship between men and women. Regarding protection systems, most of the women stated that the shelter, food, clothes, and medical services in the shelter were very good, but felt

694

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

unhappy with the legal representatives, social workers, police, and other stakeholders in the protection mechanism. Participants stated that most of the time the system failed to achieve its goal; sometimes it even reinforced the violence. Most participants said that their experience with the police was humiliating from the start. They tended to blame and judge the victim, minimize the abuse, and justify the perpetrator. According to one of the participants, the police brought her to a shelter only after she fainted from the violence. A quotation from the victim: I called them even twice before. First my husband was threatening me that he would kill me and I was afraid since he was also drunk and not very aware what he was doing. When they came they considered that I was not at a high-risk level for the shelter. On the second time, I had signs of violence all over my body, but again they did not consider my case at high risk. The third time I fainted while I was calling them and then they took me seriously. (Woman X14, 42)

Another theme that emerged regarding the protection system was the social workers’ ineffectiveness. Most participants stated that the social workers tended to minimize the violence and justify the partner’s violent acts based on traditional roles in Kosovan families. Most participants said they did not trust social workers and the system they represented. Participants felt that social workers fought for the rights of husbands and blamed victims for the violence. One of the victims explained, They try to convince the women to go back to the violent husband since they have no solution for you, especially when the family of origin is not supporting you. They could not find you a place to live and there is no social assistance for our category. You do not have a choice. (Woman X16, 25)

In this study, a group of participants were considered as recidivist cases, and their experience of the services was even worse than the non-recidivist cases. According to these women, they were the ones who decided to leave the abusive relationship and continue their life independently. They were not supported in this direction either by the existing system or by their family of origin. There was no mechanism to support the victims with lodging, education, or finding a job. Therefore, despite a strong will to leave the perpetrators, the victims had no choice but to return to their abusive husbands. According to most of the participants, the rate of violence increased as a result of the shame and stigma the family experienced when the case was reported. As the information had spread to neighbors, community, and other institutions, family members felt they had been dishonored and their brutality toward the wives increased.

Kelmendi

695

Regarding legal support services, most participants reported the same tendency to blame the victim, and usually the perpetrator did not incur any penalty. According to the knowledge of most participants, only in very risky cases would a judge issue a PO, which in practice was never respected. Some of the participants who lived in villages stated that usually the husbands knew people in all the institutions and the women’s complaints were not taken into account at all. Some of the participants suggested that the husbands/perpetrators should leave the house and be placed in shelters. Most participants considered it harmful for children to be isolated in a shelter.

Discussion The responses in this study support much of the existing research in the field of domestic violence in Kosovo and abroad. The findings show once more that several factors interact in women’s experiences of domestic violence in Kosovo. Regarding personal factors in domestic violence against women in Kosovo, findings show that desire to keep the family together, fear of losing the children, the stigma attached to domestic violence, insecurity, lack of support, and financial dependency are major reasons that women stay in abusive relationships. Similarly, research indicates that women’s economic and emotional dependency on men contributes to risk of abuse by a domestic partner. This finding is compatible with those of another study, which indicates that high levels of emotional dependency in an abused partner may reduce likelihood that the victim will end the relationship (Bornstein, 2006). Women’s decisions, to accept every kind of humiliation rather than report the violence they suffer at home, are based on the concern they feel for the family’s welfare, above their own (Kurst-Swanger & Petcosky, 2003). The consideration of beliefs about married life helps to illuminate the experiences of domestic violence survivors in Kosovo. For example, findings show that married life is constructed on traditional norms of marriage (Dobash, 1979 as cited in Anderson & Umberson, 2001), where men are described as controlling, giving orders, making decisions, and enjoying more freedom. On the other hand, women are supposed to fulfill their marital duties through taking care of the house and children, respecting the husband’s and family’s needs, and sacrificing their lives for the family and marriage. Regarding situational factors, findings show that, for most of the participants, families both of the husband and of origin supported or in some cases reinforced the violence. The findings from this study concur with many clinical experiences and research findings that the family is not only a system that offers emotional, social, and financial support but also one that supports violence (Ellsberg & Heise, 2005).

696

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

In terms of socio-cultural factors, findings from this study show that Kosovo society shares many patriarchal features that tend to subordinate the position of women and thus leave them susceptible to violence. For example, the marriage decision and married life in general tended to align with many research findings on violence against women (Wareham, 2000), with most of these marriages having been arranged. In addition, strictly defined gender roles reinforced through socialization and dictated by society contribute to gender inequalities, creating different expectations for women and men. Similar to these findings, some studies show that men who grew up in homes with rigidly defined gender roles were more liable to become adult perpetrators than men who grew up in egalitarian homes (Fagot, Loeber, & Reid, 1988; Gwartney-Gibbs, Stockard, & Bohmer, 1983; Malamuth, Sockloskie, Koss, & Tanaka, 1991, 1995 as cited in Crowell & Burgess, 1996). Most of the women explained that the violence happened because of a drive for power and control. This is similar to Grant (2007), who states that the objective of violence is to take and maintain control over the partner, and that it is usually a characteristic of patriarchal societies where the husband feels that violence against women is normal and accepted. According to the attitudes of patriarchal societies, institutions and other mechanisms have no right to interfere between partners. If it happens that women report the case, the violence and abuse increase because of the disrespect shown toward the family. Most of the participants mentioned physical and psychological violence, and sometimes financial dependency, which placed them in greater positions of subordination and increased reluctance to report violence. Interestingly, sexual violence was not mentioned by any of the participants. The findings from the present study are similar to findings obtained from qualitative studies conducted locally and internationally on patriarchal and traditional societies (Bates, Schuler, Islam, & Islam, 2004; Kasturirangan & Williams, 2003). Finally, the protection system is considered ineffective judgmental, and only partially functional, and fails to protect the victims of domestic violence. These perceptions by victims in the protection system are based on several features such as lack of reintegration for women who decide to leave the abusive marriage, lack of a program for perpetrators, and lack of financial support for empowerment of women. The findings from the study indicate that the services, especially the stakeholders (domestic violence police units, social workers, victim protection units, health centers), that deal with victims of domestic violence tend to blame the victim and minimize the violence they experienced. Most of the victims felt ambivalent about the offered support, owing to the attitudes of system representatives. This is similar to research (done by Bostock, Plumpton, & Pratt, 2009) that illustrates how situations of

Kelmendi

697

domestic abuse are prolonged by limited options for support, protection, and public acknowledgment that domestic abuse is unacceptable.

Conclusion In this article, the researcher draws on reflections of battered women and their experiences of violence by male perpetrators. This exploratory study provides clues about personal, situational, and socio-cultural factors associated with violence against women. The findings from the study suggest the patriarchal structure that governs Kosovan society may be considered a feature that promotes violence against women. In addition, strictly defined gender roles that place all authority on men and subordinate women make women even more vulnerable to violence. Living in larger families because of tradition and poverty indirectly contributes to the violation of women’s rights. In these larger families, the woman’s duty is to sacrifice herself for the good of the family. Failure to do so results in conflict, which may then lead to violence. Furthermore, reporting the violence or asking for help is considered a shame and dishonor for the husband’s family. In these cases, the woman loses support of her family of origin as well. The situation gets even worse when the woman decides to report the case. The police, the legal advisor, and the social worker tend to blame the victim and convince her to return to the perpetrator. This happens because of two important factors: a culture that approves of violence against women and the lack of a comprehensive system that provides women with an opportunity to reintegrate. Some of the limitations in this study were that most participants came from rural areas and only a few from the cities, and most were older than 35 years. In addition, the experiences of women who reported violence were severe, representing another limitation of the study. Thus, despite the reasonably large sample for a qualitative study, it was impossible to make generalizations on the subject of violence against women. Future studies might consider a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate violence against women in a larger sample. Future qualitative studies might focus on perceptions of men and women regarding violence against women. Acknowledgment The author expresses her appreciation to the participants of this study.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

698

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes 1. Law on Protection Against Domestic Violence 3L/182 (LPDV); the Criminal Code of Kosovo (CCK) and Criminal Procedure Code of Kosovo (CPCK); Gender Equality Law (2004/18); Anti-Discrimination Law (Regulation 2004/32); Law on Social and Family Services (2002/L-17); The Kosovo Family Law (2004/32). 2. In Kosovo, there is no institutional review board that regulates protection of human subjects in research, but the Department of Psychology, University of Prishtina’s Ethical Commission reviewed and approved the present study.

References Abrahams, N., Jewkes, R., Hoffman, M., & Laubsher, R. (2004). Sexual violence against intimate partners in Cape Town: Prevalence and risk factors reported by men. Bulletin of World Health Organization, 82, 330-337. Retrieved from http://apps. who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/72309/1/bulletin_2004_82%285%29_330-337.pdf Ackerson, L. K., Kawachi, I., Barbeau, E. M., & Subramanian, S. V. (2008). Effects of individual and proximate educational context on intimate partner violence: A population based study of women in India. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 507-514. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2007.113738 Anderson, K. L., & Umberson, D. (2001). Gendering violence: Masculinity and power in men’s accounts of domestic violence. Gender & Society, 15, 358-380. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3081889 Annells, M. (1996). Grounded theory method: Philosophical perspectives, paradigm of inquiry, and postmodernism. Qualitative Health Research, 6, 379-393. Baban, A. (2004). Domestic violence against women in Albania. Tirana, Albania: UNICEF. Bates, L. M., Schuler, S. R., Islam, F., & Islam, K. (2004). Socioeconomic factors and processes associated with domestic violence in rural Bangladesh. International Family Planning Perspectives, 30, 190-199. Retrieved from http://www.guttm acher.org/pubs/journals/3019004.html Bornstein, R. B. (2006). The complex relationship between dependency and domestic. Journal of Marriage and Family, 52, 1067-1078. Bostock, J., Plumpton, M., & Pratt, R. (2009). Domestic violence against women: Understanding social processes and women’s experiences. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 19, 95-110. doi:10.1002/casp.985 Bowen, G. A. (2006). Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(3). Retrieved from http://www.ualberta .ca/~iiqm/backissues/5_3/pdf/bowen.pdf

Kelmendi

699

Boyle, M. H., Georgiades, K., Cullen, J., & Racine, Y. (2008). Community influences on intimate partner violence in India: Women’s education, attitudes toward mistreatment and standards of living. Social Science & Medicine, 69, 691-697. Brown, L., Thurman, T., Bloem, J., & Kendall, C. (2006). Sexual violence in Lesotho. Studies in Family Planning, 37, 269-280. doi:10.1111/j.1728-4465.2006.00105.x Carlson, B. E., Worden, A. P., Ryn, M., & Bachman, R. (2000). Violence against women: Synthesis of research for practitioners. National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/ grants/199577.pdf Carrado, M., George, M. J., Loxam, E., Jones, L., & Templar, D. (1996). Aggression in British heterosexual relationships: A descriptive analysis. Aggressive Behavior, 22, 401-415. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2337(1996)22:63.0.CO;2-K Chan, K. L. (2009). Sexual violence against women and children in Chinese societies. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 10, 69-85. doi:10.1177/1524838008327260 Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London, England: Sage. Crowell, N. A., & Burgess, A. W. (Eds.). (1996). Understanding violence against women. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. L. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Sage Publication, Inc. Dalal, K., Rahman, F., & Jansson, B. (2009). Wife abuse in rural Bangladesh. Journal of Biosocial Science, 41, 561-573. doi:10.1017/S0021932009990046 Dukagjini, L. (1989). Code of Leke Dukagjini (S. Gjeqovi, Ed.). New York. NY: Gjonlekaj Publishing. Dutton, D. G., Saunders, K., Starzomski, A., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). Intimacy, anger and insecure attachment as precursors of abuse in intimate relationships. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24, 1367-1386. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1994. tb01554.x Ellsberg, M. (2006). Violence against women and the Millennium Development Goals: Facilitating women’s access to support. International Journal of Gynecology & Obstetrics, 94, 325-332. doi:10.1016/j.ijgo.2006.04.021 Ellsberg, M., & Heise, L. (2005). Researching violence against women: A practical guide for researchers and activists. Washington, DC: World Health Organization. Retrieved from http://www.path.org/publications/files/GBV_rvaw_front.pdf Fagot, B. I., Loeber, R., & Reid, J. B. (1988). Developmental determinants of male to female aggression. In G. W. Russell (Ed.), Violence in intimate relationships (pp. 91-105). Great Neck, NY: PMA Publishing Corporation. Farnsworth, N. (2008). Exploratory research on the extent of gender based violence in Kosovo and its impact on women’s reproductive health. Prishtina: Kosovo Women’s Network (KWN).

700

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

Farnsworth, N., & Qosaj-Mustafa, A. (2008). Security begins at home: Research to inform the first national strategy and action plan against domestic violence in Kosovo (Agency for Gender Equality). Prishtina: Government of Kosovo. Flood, M., & Pease, B. (2009). Factors influencing attitudes to violence against women. Trauma Violence Abuse, 10, 125-142. Gage, A. J. (2005). Women’s experience of intimate partner violence in Haiti. Social Science & Medicine, 61, 343-364. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.078 Garcia-Moreno, C., Jansen, H. A., Ellsberg, M., Heise, L., & Watts, C. H. (2006). Prevalence of intimate partner violence: Findings from the WHO multi country study on women’s health and domestic violence. Geneva, Switzerland: Department of Gender, Women and Health, World Health Organization. doi:10.1016/S0140–6736(06)69523-8f Grant, H. (2007). Escape domestic violence. London, England: Hodder Arnold. Gwartney-Gibbs, P. A., Stockard, J., & Bohmer, S. (1983). Learning courtship violence: The influence of parents, peers, and personal experiences. Family Relations, 36, 276-282. Heise, L. (1994). Gender-based abuse: The global epidemic. Cadernos de Saúde Pública, 10(Suppl. 1), 135-145. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.br/pdf/csp/ v10s1/v10supl1a09.pdf Heise, L. (1998). Violence against women: An integrated ecological framework. Violence Against Women, 4, 262-290. doi:10.1177/1077801298004003002 Heise, L., Ellsberg, M., & Gottemoeller, M. (1999). Ending violence against women (Population Reports, Series L, No. 11). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health, Population Information Program. Heise, L., & Garcia-Moreno, C. (2002). Violence by intimate partners. In E. Krug, L. Dahlberg, J. A. Mercy, A. B. Zwi, & R. Lozano (Eds.), World report on violence and health (pp. 87-121). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Hood, J. C. (2007). Orthodoxy vs. power: The defining traits of grounded theory. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp. 151-164). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jewkes, R., Dunkle, K. L., Koss, M. P., Levin, J., Nduna, M., Jama, N., & Sikweyiya, Y. (2006). Rape perpetration by young rural South African men: Prevalence, patterns and risk factors. Social Science & Medicine, 63, 2949-2961. Jewkes, R., Sen, P., & Garcia-Moreno, C. (2002). Sexual violence. In E. G. Krug, L. L. Dahlberg, J. A. Mercy, A.B. Zwi & R. Lozano, (Eds.), World report on violence and health (pp. 149-181). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Johnson, K. B., & Das, M. B. (2009). Spousal violence in Bangladesh as reported by men: Prevalence and risk factors. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 977-995. doi:10.1177/0886260508319368 Kasturirangan, A., & Williams, E. N. (2003). Counseling Latina battered women: A qualitative study of the Latina perspective. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 31, 162-178. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1912.2003.tb00541.x Koenig, M. A., Stephenson, R., Ahmed, S., Jejeebhoy, S. J., & Campbell, J. (2006). Individual and contextual determinants of domestic violence in North India. American Journal of Public Health, 96, 132-138. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.050872

Kelmendi

701

Krug, E. G., Dahdlberg, L. L., Mercy, J. A., Zwi, A. Z., & Lozano, R. (2002). World report on violence and health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. Kurst-Swanger, K., & Petcosky, J. L. (2003). Violence in home: Multidisciplinary perspective. Cary, NC: Oxford University Press. Malamuth, N. M., Sockloskie, R. J., Koss, M. P., & Tanaka, J. S. (1991). Characteristics of aggressors against women: Testing a model using a national sample of college students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 59, 670-681. doi:10.1037//0022-006X.59.5.670 Mirrlees-Black, C. (1999). Domestic violence: Findings from a new British Crime Survey self-completion questionnaire (Home Office Research Study 191). London, England: Home Office. Murnen, S. K., Wright, C., & Kaluzny, G. (2002). If “boys will be boys,” then girls will be victims? A meta-analytic review of the research that relates masculine ideology to sexual aggression. Sex Roles, 46, 359-375. doi:10.1023/A:1020488928736 O’Leary, D. K., Smith Slep, A. M., & O’Leary, S. G. (2007). Multivariate models of men’s and women’s partner aggression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75, 752-764. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.75.5.752 Qosaj-Mustafa, A., & Farnsworth, N. (2009). “More than words on paper?” The response of justice providers to domestic violence in Kosovo. United Nation Development Fund, Women’s Safety and Security Initiative, UNDP, Prishtina, Kosovo. Riggs, D. S., & O’Leary, K. D. (1996). Aggression between heterosexual dating partners: An examination of a courtship model of courtship aggression. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 11, 519-540. doi:10.1177/088626096011004005 Russo, N. F., & Pirlott, A. (2006). Gender-based violence: Concepts, methods, and findings. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1087, 178-205. doi:10.1196/annals.1385.024 Statistical Office of Kosovo. (2007). Women and men in Kosovo. Author. Retrieved from https://ask.rks-gov.net/ENG/pop/publications Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basic of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London, England: Sage. Taft, C. T., Bryant-Davis, T., Woodward, H. E., Tilman, S., & Torres, S. E. (2009). Intimate partner violence against African American women: An examination of socio-cultural context. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 14, 50-58. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2008.10.001 Tang, C. S., & Lai, B. P. (2008). A review of empirical literature on the prevalence and risk markers of male-on-female intimate partner violence in contemporary China, 1987–2006. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 13, 10-28. United Nations Development Program. (2010). Kosovo Human Development Report. Retrieved from http://www.kosovo.undp.org/?cid=2,142 Wareham, R. (2000). No safe place: An assessment on violence against women. Prishtina. United Nations Development Fund for Women (UNIFEM). Prishtina, Kosovo. The Women’s Wellness Center. (2006). Prevalence of gender-based violence: Preliminary findings from a field assessment in nine villages in the Peja region. Peja: Author, Kosovo.

702

Journal of Interpersonal Violence 30(4)

World Health Organization. (2002). Reducing risks promoting health life. Geneva, Switzerland: Author. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/whr/2002/en/ Young, A. (2000). Women who become man: Albanian sworn virgins. New York, NY: Beng Publishing.

Author Biography Kaltrina Kelmendi is a senior assistant at the Department of Psychology, University of Prishtina, in Kosovo. She has finished her bachelor and master studies at University of Prishtina. Recently, and currently pususing PhD studies in social psychology at the Masaryk University in Brno Czech Republic with full scholarship from European Commission (www.joineusee.eu). Her research interests are related to social issues, especially gender issues, domestic violence, interpersonal violence, and other related socio-psychological phenomena.