Perspectives of Male Service Providers on Responding to Intimate Partner Violence in Rural Zimbabwe: Findings From Qualitative Interviews

Abstract

Despite efforts made in Zimbabwe to address intimate partner violence (IPV), critical gaps still exist regarding the efficacy of IPV service provision in rural areas. This study examines male service providers’ perceptions of IPV in Chimanimani Rural District in Zimbabwe to provide guidance for policy and practice on IPV intervention in rural areas. A qualitative study was conducted with six male service providers using in-depth interviews and thematic analysis. Our findings revealed how the intersection of social norms and the geographical location of rural areas influence service providers’ perceptions of IPV and service provision. Most of the service providers interviewed had a general understanding of IPV and regarded it as unacceptable social behavior. However, constraints to service delivery typical in rural areas negatively impacted their IPV intervention, including having limited intervention resources, limited male participation, and conflicting identities (professional versus cultural identity). We conclude that service provision in rural areas is essential to respond to and prevent the occurrence of IPV, yet how service providers perceive IPV affects the quality of services rendered to victims.

Keywords

intimate partner violence interventions rural areas service providers Zimbabwe

Intimate partner violence (IPV) remains a global problem that occurs at an alarmingly high rate and disproportionately impacts women and girls (Sardinha et al., 2022). IPV is defined as physical, psychological, and/or sexual harm by an intimate partner, and affects all gender identities and sexual orientations (Groves et al., 2015). Globally, an estimated 30% of women aged 15 or older experience lifetime IPV with regional estimates ranging from 16% in East Asia to 66% in central sub-Saharan Africa (Devries et al., 2013). The prevalence of IPV is higher in sub-Saharan Africa compared to other regions around the world mostly due to poor socio-economic status and higher social acceptance of social norms and values condoning IPV (Klugman, 2017; McCloskey et al., 2016). Although most research has focused on the predictors and consequences of IPV on individuals and children (McCloskey et al., 2016), researchers are increasingly recognizing the importance of efficient service delivery as one of the key strategies in the response and prevention of IPV. A major concern in the provision of services to IPV victims is to ensure that women are not re-victimized by service providers but are treated sensitively.

In Zimbabwe, IPV continues to be a persistent social issue. While the reasons for this are complex, precursors for IPV identified in the literature include patriarchal customs and strong adherence to social norms that promote the subjugation of women and male dominance (Mukanangana et al., 2014). According to the Demographic Health Survey Data conducted in 2015, 35% of women have experienced physical violence with 32% of married women experiencing lifetime spousal violence (Iman’ishimwe Mukamana et al., 2020). These high rates and the deleterious consequences necessitate studies focusing on IPV and service provision.

Previous studies on IPV in Zimbabwe have focused more on the scope and extent of IPV against women and the challenges that victims face in accessing formal support (Fidan & Bui, 2016; Mukanangana et al., 2014; Shamu et al., 2013). Far less research has sought to examine service provision in the context of IPV in rural areas in Zimbabwe. Even less is known about how service providers perceive IPV and the challenges that they face in working within IPV contexts in rural areas. Although service provision is reported to be available in rural areas in Zimbabwe (Chigwata, 2016), not much is known about what it entails, which might subsequently jeopardize effective service delivery. This study examines IPV-related service provision toward building a practice skill base and contributing to debates on service provision in rural areas.

This article presents data from the first author's doctoral research, which included qualitative interviews with women residing in rural areas who experienced IPV as well as service providers (also referred to as key informants in this study). The current manuscript focuses entirely on the interviews with service providers and findings with the survivors can be found in other manuscripts (Chadambuka & Warria, 2020; Chadambuka & Warria, 2022a; Chadambuka, 2022b) . The focus of this article is on IPV perpetrated in heterosexual relationships by males against females in rural areas. The article outlines the general context of IPV service provision, before narrowing it to service provision in rural areas. We then introduce the intersectional feminist theoretical framework that informs the qualitative methodology of the study. In the findings section, we share our analysis of service providers’ understandings and attitudes toward IPV, as well as the role they play and the constraints they face in doing this work. Lastly, we discuss the implications of context-specific multicultural practice for service provision within rural areas.

Literature Review

Service Provision and IPV

IPV has detrimental effects that call for professional intervention. Service provision in the context of IPV entails rendering a wide range of support to include formal support services such as healthcare, legal protection, and psychosocial services. Because women are a heterogeneous group and experience IPV based on factors that include geography and the availability of services, any assessment of IPV service provision needs to consider the context and situation where it occurs (Colombini et al., 2013). In patriarchal cultures, IPV may be tolerated and perceived as a cultural norm and an acceptable way of disciplining “disobedient women.” However, different contextual factors contribute to IPV. As argued by Iman’ishimwe Mukamana et al. (2020), socio-economic factors play a significant role in the rise and perpetration of IPV, as women who are financially dependent on their abusive partners have exacerbated vulnerability to IPV. Likewise, women with low educational levels are also perceived to be at a higher risk of IPV as, in most cases, are unaware of their rights and of laws regarding IPV (Iman’ishimwe Mukamana et al., 2020; Nabaggala et al., 2021). From an ecological perspective, IPV is a multifaceted and multi-level phenomenon and therefore calls for a multidisciplinary response (Eastman et al., 2007). As such, service provision in the IPV context should not operate on a linear level but ought to involve different service providers with varied but complementary roles.

The role of service providers in IPV interventions may vary depending on different factors such as service providers’ background training and skill set, personal attitudes, as well as gender norms and stereotypes that govern their day-to-day living in different contexts. For instance, in studying service providers’ views on IPV and their role in IPV prevention, Baldry and Pagliaro (2014) noted that service providers can be unsympathetic and judgmental toward victims, thus negatively contributing to service users’ perceptions of services being offered. As some service providers may also hold stereotypes and misconceptions about IPV that are common in the broader community, this could also explain the judgmental and unsympathetic attitudes (Colombini et al., 2013).

Two approaches are identified as effective in dealing with and managing IPV: a criminal justice approach (focused on mandatory arrest and persecution of the abuser) and a victim-centered approach (focused on placing the rights and needs of victims at the center of interventions) (McCloskey et al., 2016; Messing et al., 2015). However, it has been argued that, in some instances, these approaches are neither transferable nor adaptable to the African context due to the difficulties in translating models and the lack of infrastructure and resources to respond effectively (Bosch & Bergen, 2006; McCloskey et al., 2016). For example, the under-resourced shelter system compromises the safety and well-being of IPV victims especially those residing in rural areas (Klugman, 2017; McCloskey et al., 2016). It is also largely not viable in rural communities in Africa where families, and not shelters, are mandated with the role of resolving IPV-related matters.

Service provision in Zimbabwe is centered on improving and maintaining the health and well-being of victims of IPV. The provision of services to victims of IPV/domestic violence is governed by the Domestic Violence Act (2006) which addresses all forms of IPV and makes provisions for the protection of victims of IPV. Provision of intervention services serves two main purposes (i) protective victim-centered services, and (ii) empowerment of victims (Albanessi et al., 2021). The provision of both protective victim-centered, and empowerment services is governed by the government through its Ministry of Women Affairs, Gender, and Community Development. Much of the rehabilitative services are provided by advocacy and support groups largely funded by the government, private and public sector. The victim-centered services consist of government services such as psychosocial support services, and medical and law enforcement services.

Within the Zimbabwean context, gender, socioeconomic, and cultural factors have played a significant role in the rise of IPV (Jewkes, 2002; Jewkes et al., 2002) and women in different geographical locations have had different experiences. For instance, IPV against women residing in rural areas in Zimbabwe cannot be viewed only from a cultural lens given that rural areas are largely characterized by high levels of unemployment and high poverty levels. These nuances should be acknowledged in the provision of appropriate and context-specific intervention services.

Cultural attitudes that condone IPV and frequent mistrust of formal support systems can make intervention challenging (Bosch & Bergen, 2006). Given that rural areas are closely knit and afford little privacy (Riddell et al., 2009), there is a tendency to become familiar with the community and its members when one is working in rural areas. This familiarity may compromise service delivery and service providers’ perceptions of IPV (Chadambuka & Warria, 2022). Eastman et al. (2007) report that service provision in rural areas takes on a holistic and generalist approach with practitioners having to take on multiple roles simultaneously. In rural areas, patriarchal norms are not only at the center of marriages but also influence service delivery and impede the help-seeking process. Barriers such as prevailing social norms that enforce these patriarchal attitudes and limit male participation tend to render intervention efforts futile (Mashiri, 2013).

The study focuses on the Chimanimani Rural District, which is amongst the poorest districts in Zimbabwe, with high rates of poverty, rugged terrain, under-developed infrastructure, and remote households/villages. The population of Chimanimani consists of Ndau (a Shona dialect) speakers. Services are provided based on the ward system with each ward being equipped with basic services such as a clinic and satellite police station. All service providers are integrated, and they live in this area—among the locals.

Theoretical Framework

Intersectional Feminist Theory in the Context of IPV Service Provision

The intersectional theory adopted in this study emerged to make the experiences and vulnerabilities of marginalized women (e.g., women residing in rural areas) more visible (Crenshaw, 1991). It underscores the extent to which converging social variables (e.g., gender, ability, geographical locations) shape the IPV experiences of marginalized women. Women with contending multiple oppressions and inequalities are at a higher risk of IPV and may encounter challenges in accessing care and support. These challenges may or may not be adequately dealt with by mainstream IPV services (Kulkami, 2019).

As argued by Mohanty (1988), IPV research in the Global South has been conceptualized from a Eurocentric context and embedded in colonial beliefs and experiences of the Global North. The conceptualization of women as a homogeneous group, and the equation of their experiences to those of women in the Global North, erases their individualized experiences. Mohanty (1988) essentially states that the image of a “Third World Woman” that was created in the Global North categorizes women from different cultural and socio-economic contexts as powerless. Since they are regarded as powerless, their experiences are grouped with those of women in the Global North who also face violence. This assumption overlooks the heterogeneity of women and is oppressive by blanketing women's (from Global North and Global South) experiences, which ultimately makes it difficult for women to receive the appropriate care and support. Indeed, in the same way, the experiences of women from the Global South cannot be universalized, rural women's experiences should not be equated to urban women's experiences of violence. Thus, an intersectional lens that looks past the false conception of a “struggling sisterhood and oppressed women” and considers the intersection of geographical location and different identity markers (e.g., gender, socio-economic status, ethnicity, religion, and culture) is crucial in effective service provision initiatives in rural areas.

In Zimbabwe, gender equality reflects women’s experiences shaped by pre-colonization, colonization, and independence (Chadambuka, 2022a; Fidan & Bui, 2016; Law, 2021). Regardless of the patriarchal norms reinforcing the subjugation of women in the precolonial era, women had certain levels of autonomy since they could access pieces of land from their husbands and be able to feed the family (Fidan & Bui, 2016). This autonomy was eroded during the colonization era as women no longer had access to this land to produce food and generate income, as the land was believed to be “scarce” (Hindin, 2002). The postcolonial era, regardless of the legislative efforts made to empower women, posed significant barriers to gender equality with customary laws that disadvantage women (Fidan & Bui, 2016). These barriers are significant for women in rural areas where there is strong adherence to norms condoning violence against women (Chigwata, 2016).

IPV victims in rural areas are at the intersection of multiple disadvantages that make them more susceptible to abuse and make intervention efforts less successful (Sandberg, 2013). Considering the complexities associated with rural areas, intersectional feminism challenges service providers to closely align programs to the specific needs and preferences of IPV victims within their respective communities (Kulkami, 2019). It highlights the need for a structural analysis of hierarchies created by systems to accurately describe the experiences of marginalized groups (Hill-Collins & Bilge, 2016). This requires consideration of different support systems that are involved in the provision of IPV intervention services and recognition that marginalized women navigate these systems differently based on the intersection of multiple social variables (Lippy et al., 2020). We therefore, argue that, for an accurate representation of IPV experiences and interventions in rural areas, there is a need to acknowledge the missing piece of the puzzle by examining how service providers perceive IPV in rural areas, as these perceptions inform their response to IPV incidences. This is because the converging social variables such as geographical location, social class, ability, education, and social norms have a bearing on the well-being of IPV victims and influence the provision of IPV services in rural areas.

Methodology

Participants

This study adopted a qualitative approach due to its flexibility in conducting explorative research on sensitive topics and its ability to yield meaningful and useful results (Nowell et al., 2017). Purposive sampling was utilized in the selection of participants due to its flexibility in choosing participants with rich and detailed information pertaining to service provision (Sharma, 2017). The six service providers in this study also referred to as key informants, consisted of two gender officials (officials in Chimanimani but overseeing all gender programs at the district and ministry level), two village heads, one police officer, and one nurse.

The inclusion criteria in selecting key informants were: (i) at least 3 years working experience, (ii) residing in Chimanimani District, (iii) has dealt with cases of IPV in Chimanimani during the 3 years, and (iv) willingness and availability during data collection. The recruitment method involved the first author approaching the service providers individually, sharing the participant information sheet, and explaining the purpose of the study. They were allowed to ask any questions about the study prior to written consent being obtained from them. The time and place for interviews were confirmed verbally and through phone calls.

Although one of the gender officials did not work and reside in Chimanimani district, his participation in this study was crucial as he worked for the Ministry of Women Affairs, Community, Small, and Medium Enterprise Development, which is responsible for the development and implementation of gender policies. Initially, we had included a social worker in our sample who had agreed to be interviewed for the study; however, she could not participate in the study due to Cyclone Idai, which affected the Chimanimani region. This participant was redeployed to assist victims of the disaster. Given the complexity of rural areas and the internet connection issues caused by the cyclone damages, a telephonic or Skype interview with the social worker was not possible. Consequently, the social worker had to withdraw from the study.

Data Collection

Data collection was conducted by the first author over three months, i.e., between March and May 2019 in Chimanimani. Face-to-face in-depth interviews, guided by a semi-structured interview schedule, were conducted using a narrative approach (Moen, 2006). Considering that the key informants were from different professional backgrounds, each interview schedule had some questions that differed depending on the interviewee’s profession but shared common questions exploring the interviewee’s understanding of IPV in rural areas. Considering that the first author is a native Shona speaker, interviews were conducted in both Shona and English depending on the key informant's preference. All interviews were recorded with the consent of the service providers, and they took place at a place and time of their choice.

In accordance with ethics requirements, permission was obtained from the Zimbabwean Ministry of Women Affairs, Community, Small and Medium Enterprise Development, and Chimanimani Rural District Council. Ethics Clearance (No. H18/11/04) was granted by the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (non-medical) at the University of the Witwatersrand. In addition, permission was further sought from the village heads as custodians of social norms and traditional leaders.

Data Analysis

Audio-recorded interviews were transferred to the lead author's password-protected computer. The lead author transcribed the interviews. Interviews conducted in Shona were transcribed and further translated to English. The transcribed interviews were analyzed using thematic analysis. This method of data analysis was selected due to its flexibility in the selection of themes and subthemes (Nowell et al., 2017). The steps that were utilized in this study included familiarization with the data, searching for themes, and reviewing and naming themes.

Triangulation of analysis was applied to this study and de-identified data was shared with another qualitative analyst for further analysis. Saldana (2009) argues that the use of multiple coders in qualitative research is essential in addressing researcher bias. Discrepancies that emerged from the coding process were addressed during regular discussions with the qualitative analyst. The reviews from the qualitative analyst were taken into consideration.

Sample Characteristics

A total of six service providers participated in this study. Although all participants were Shona speakers, the majority (83%) were born and raised in Chimanimani rural district and spoke the Ndau dialect, which is predominantly spoken in Chimanimani. Only one participant spoke the Zezuru dialect. Most participants (66%) had a post-secondary qualification except for the two village heads—partly because village headship in Zimbabwe is not based on educational qualifications (Mugweni et al., 2012). Nearly all participants (83%) had more than 10 years of experience in dealing with IPV-related cases, except for the gender official from the government ministry who had five years. Five of the participants were interviewed in person while one was interviewed via telephone. Five of the participants opted to have their interviews conducted in Shona with one opting to use both Shona and English.

All participants were male. This is partly because some of the potential female participants were not willing to participate in the study due to various reasons, with most of them citing unavailability of time. It was not surprising that the village heads would be male, as male figures commonly take leadership roles in rural areas in the Shona culture (Mugweni et al., 2012). As highlighted by Chigonda and Chazireni (2018), posts in healthcare, psychosocial services, and police are largely under-staffed, hence there was a limited number of key informants that could be recruited from these posts.

Given that our participants were all male, we acknowledge that female service providers might have brought different experiences and perspectives that were not available for this study. The first author, a woman, who conducted recruitment and the interviews is a native Shona speaker, born and bred in a rural area in Zimbabwe. While this experience is valuable in navigating the recruitment process from gatekeepers and participants, we approached this study with an awareness of biases and insensitivity in research. We recognize that the first author's lived experiences as a woman from a rural area may have influenced the interpretations and analysis of these interviews. We also considered the diversity in recruiting our participants, although only male service providers were willing to participate, to make meaningful and adequate interpretations of findings.

Findings

We grouped findings from the analysis under three broad themes: namely, i) service providers’ understanding of and attitudes toward IPV, (ii) perceived roles by service providers, and iii) constraints in service provision. These themes are discussed in detail in the following sections.

Service Providers’ Understanding of and Attitudes Toward IPV

Common Forms of IPV: Emotional, Financial, and Physical Abuse

In this study, all six service providers understood IPV as a form of violence against women and men in intimate relationships. Their responses were consistent as they reported that emotional, physical, and financial abuse were the most common forms of IPV in rural areas and that IPV has detrimental effects on the well-being of victims, especially women. These are highlighted in the extracts below:
IPV is abuse between people in a relationship and in this case it's abuse against women. There is emotional abuse, which involves verbal abuse. The other one is physical, and this is very dangerous and sometimes women are beaten to the point of death. … There is the aspect of economic abuse which refers to voluntarily withholding money for basic needs from the woman and leaving her and children to starve. This usually reinforces physical abuse. (Gender Officer—District Level)

There is financial abuse which is common. Most women in this area are going through financial abuse because they do not go to work, they wait for their husbands to bring food. It often leads to beatings especially when a woman asks for money. (Police Officer—Ward Level)
Service providers understood IPV as abuse that can be perpetrated on anyone in the context of intimate relationships. Interestingly, economic abuse was highlighted by all participants as a significant form of IPV, despite the Zimbabwe Domestic Violence Act not recognizing it as a criminal offense. Yet participants identified economic abuse as a major form of IPV and a precursor to physical abuse. As highlighted by Yates et al. (2023), economic abuse is exacerbated for women in rural areas given the high poverty levels, inequitable income, and high unemployment rate. Likewise, in rural Zimbabwe, most women are unemployed and relying more on subsistence farming—ultimately limiting their economic self-sufficiency (Chireshe, 2015; Matavire, 2012). Arguably, the combination of the economic realities of rural women may influence the severity of physical and emotional abuse and can even pose additional barriers to seeking formal care and support (Yates et al., 2023).

Perceptions of Private Versus Public Resolution of IPV Cases

Service providers in this study further highlighted that IPV was an intolerable and unacceptable behavior and not the best way to resolve conflicts in intimate relationships. In addition, they all acknowledged that IPV was generally resolved by the family in rural areas. See quotes below:
A woman is not supposed to be beaten in intimate relationships. In our culture, there are better ways of resolving such conflicts without involving violence or insults. Families are critical in resolving such disputes. We do not encourage wife-beating. (Village head 2)

The law does not condone wife-beating. Some men beat women, even pregnant ones, thinking they are reprimanding them. They hurt them and it becomes a criminal offense. This is unacceptable and such people should be punished. (Police—Ward Level)
Evidently, service providers in rural areas acknowledge that IPV against women is violent behavior that should not be condoned. Notable in the above quotations is the unacceptable nature of IPV in rural areas. It is interesting to note the differences in quotes provided by the village head who indicates that disputes are resolved at home versus the police who see it as a criminal offense. Such differing viewpoints could impact service provision in rural settings. There was a predominant perception of IPV as a private issue that is generally resolved within the family, which explains why intervention from service providers may often regarded as the “last resort” in the help-seeking process. Given that traditional courts are usually the first point of contact for victims of IPV in rural areas, cases of IPV likely reported to village heads will be resolved within the family in line with the cultural norms that place high emphasis on family preservation. Consequently, this has a bearing on the disclosure of violence to formal support services and could explain the low level of IPV disclosure in rural areas (Klugman, 2017).

Conflicting Attitudes Toward Sexual Violence

While the Zimbabwean Sexual Offences Act (2001) criminalizes marital rape and willful infection of a spouse with HIV/AIDS, there has not been any consensus in the “marital rape versus conjugal rights” debate. Marriage elevates women's social status in the Shona culture and the payment of roora (bride price) commodifies them, hence having sex is seen as a conjugal right to be enjoyed by married men (Mugweni et al., 2012). Accordingly, recognizing spousal sexual abuse as a criminal offense could be likened to misrepresentation of the Shona culture of roora and marriage (Mugweni et al., 2012).

There was no consensus amongst participants on whether sexual abuse within marriages can be considered a criminal offense. In describing IPV, village heads, the nurse, and the police officer were reluctant to include sexual abuse as one of the forms of IPV. The reluctance to recognize sexual abuse as a form of IPV is a concern, as sexual abuse might not be viewed as violence if it happens in the context of a marriage.

While the two gender officials did acknowledge that forced sex in marriage is unacceptable and can be regarded as a criminal offence, they did highlight that it was difficult to reinforce such thinking in rural areas considering that rural areas are considered custodians of cultural norms around marriages. As they explained:
Culturally a married woman is expected to have sex with her husband even if she is tired after she has spent the whole day working in the fields. A woman must bath and wait for the husband to come back from the beerhall and sleep with her. The idea of bathing is because a woman would have spent the whole day working in the field. And in rural areas it's even worse, a woman has to wait for the husband while stark naked and regardless of the exhaustion they are expected to perform in ways that leave the man sexually satisfied. Failure to do so can warrant a beating, so is refusal to have sex. So, in as much as marital rape is there, not one rural woman will disclose it because of these cultural norms. (Gender Officer—Ministry level)
For the village heads, sexual issues are private and cannot be discussed with people outside the marriage. This makes it difficult for them to confirm if women are abused sexually:
If someone gets married, I must know, if she gives birth I have to know. But I do not get involved in bedroom issues, those issues are for two people. So, because this is a private matter that happens between two married people it is hard to know if women are being abused. Besides, what is the main reason why a man pays money for a woman; and a woman leaves her parents. Isn’t it to sexually satisfy the husband? (Village Head 2)

This resonates with findings from previous studies conducted in Zimbabwe, which indicated that sex is regarded as a conjugal right rather than a violation of human rights in intimate relationships (Chireshe, 2015; Shamu et al., 2013). This could explain why most of the participants were reluctant to describe sexual abuse as a form of IPV. By virtue of sexual abuse being shrouded in the culture of silence due to its sensitive nature, women are discouraged from discussing such sensitive issues with “outsiders.” Consequently, this reflects the cultural dimension of IPV, which places more emphasis on conjugal rights in intimate relationships and in doing so makes sexual abuse harder to identify and address.

Perceived False IPV Allegations as an Exit Strategy

Women in rural areas are mostly perceived as weak and powerless and mostly regarded as victims, but when they are thought to have lied, then their status of possible victimhood shifts. Two participants highlighted that women sometimes lie, and misrepresent their experiences of violence, all in a bid to leave their poor husbands for “better” ones. Of importance to note is that there is no tangible evidence to discount women's accounts of violence; it appeared service providers’ explanations were based on their perceptions and assumptions. Cases of women lying about their domestic violence experiences were reported by the nurse and the police officer:
Although IPV is not tolerated there is need to acknowledge that women in this area lie about IPV in a bid to leave their husbands. Remember we have magweja (illegal miners) here … they make quick money, and most women here end up dating them. Some of the women go about stealing vegetables in people's fields and gardens and when they come here for treatment, they lie that the husband has abused them. So, we are always alert when women come with such accusations. (Nurse—Ward Level)
The police also mentioned that:
The problem is women lie when they are fed up with a relationship. A hungry person can do anything to escape the situation and they know that if they come to me and lie that they have been abused we will arrest the man, and this gives her an opportunity to do whatever she wants. She will justify her actions by using us. We now know so sometimes we ask them to solve their issues at home if we see that she is lying. (Police—Ward level)

Contrary to research by Goodman et al. (2009) and Ahmadabadi et al. (2017) on poverty and IPV, the nurse in this study highlighted that women in rural areas use IPV as an exit strategy from their poverty-stricken marriages. Although, we do not denounce this view, we also argue that the influence of social norms should not be discounted in terms of how service providers may respond to IPV reports in rural areas. Subscribing to social norms that hide IPV can have an impact on how service providers perceive IPV and such assumptions without tangible evidence can heighten women's vulnerability to the abuse. Consequently, this raises questions on the criteria used by service providers in determining the validity of women's accounts of IPV. Service providers who hold such general stereotypes are likely not to prioritize IPV cases that will be reported to them. Lying to village heads attracted a hefty fine and serious punishment for women and their families, perhaps this explains why village heads did not report such encounters.

Service Providers’ Role in IPV Contexts

Intervention as the Key Role

The key informants shared their roles in the provision of IPV services in rural areas. Although service providers in rural areas have varied roles, these roles are context specific and are informed by the unique needs of the abused women and by the expertise of the service provider. What emerged from this study was that service providers in rural areas are aware of their specific roles in IPV intervention (i.e., medical role and law enforcement role) but bearing in mind the nature of rural areas, they tended to shift from these roles depending on the context and situation.
Our role is to intervene in communities and conscientize them. We go to communities and try to encourage to involve women in positions of authority in development committees. …we make sure we have awareness campaigns where we teach women and men on the dangers of gender-based violence. The thing is we don’t directly deal with the victims, but we deal with the community as whole with the help of the village heads. (Gender Officer-District level)
At the ward level, although they were aware of their specific roles, they also highlighted their advisory role in guiding IPV victims.

When they (IPV victims) come we get such reports, together we bring in the perpetrator. But sometimes the women themselves do not want their husbands to be arrested. So, we end up counseling them and sometimes call their immediate family members and they go home. Some prefer resolving everything with their aunts and uncles. (Police—Ward level)

Mediation involving family and community members appears to be the pillar of IPV intervention as village heads indicated that women tend to report to them and resort to family mediation. Village heads tend to involve the police only when the abuse becomes life-threatening.

If the beating is minor and there are no injuries, I assess to see if it the woman would like to proceed further to the police because reporting to police will mean no money or food for her, since the breadwinner will be arrested and in other cases pays a fine. So, I advise them as the village head, and I also encourage them to resolve the conflict with the help of family members and ask each other for forgiveness. (Village Head 1)

Evidently, our findings reveal the extent to which social norms influence the role that service providers play in rural areas when helping IPV victims. Notably, at district and national levels, the roles of service providers are more focused on raising awareness in communities than working directly with victims, and this is done in a collective manner. At the ward level, the roles are focused more on the victims. Noteworthy is the extent to which the role of “mediation and advising” takes precedence over professional roles such as medical and policing roles. Similar to previous studies (Matavire, 2012; Riddell et al., 2009), our findings indicate the importance placed on family and community mediation in resolving marital disputes. In such circumstances, patriarchal norms preserving marriages and maintaining male supremacy take precedence in service provision. As such, service providers in rural areas often resort to mediation in IPV situations by “advising” victims to go back to their families and resolve the conflicts with their partners and family.

While family mediation is considered the “best” and “safest” culturally acceptable intervention initiative, the utility and efficacy of this method of intervention is questionable (Milne, 2004; Riddell et al., 2009). Arguably, IPV mediation in patriarchal contexts leans more on reinforcing male supremacy and the subjugation of women. As argued by Riddell et al. (2009), when service providers reinforce male dominance, their actions increase women's mistrust in the system and can ultimately discourage women from seeking formal care and support. This perhaps explains why disclosure of violence in rural areas remains a challenge (Klugman, 2017).

The Constraints in Service Delivery

Conflicting Identities (Professional Identity vs. Cultural Identity)

The male service providers interviewed described significant tensions between their professional and their gender roles as men within Shona communities. Service providers in rural areas are professionals and at the same time, they are part of the Shona community and are expected to adhere to patriarchal norms and values. Key informants reported that sometimes it is challenging for them to engage with communities as they are always met with challenges that affect both their Shona personal identity and professional identity. Additionally, it also seemed difficult to separate their cultural identity from their professional identity given the domination of social norms condoning the control of women. Ultimately, cultural survival takes precedence and service providers find it difficult to speak against such norms that they partially or wholly subscribe to.

Denouncing IPV, even as a service provider, can be easily regarded as shameful, given that IPV is shrouded in social norms that condone male supremacy and male service providers can, at times, benefit from this privilege. Deviation from these norms is discouraged and regarded as shameful, weak, and embarrassing for every Shona man regardless of training or education level (Chireshe, 2015).
You would not want to be labeled as a person who does not adhere to the cultural norms of this community, and I don’t want people to think that I have deviated from our Shona culture… So, at times when we go to these rural areas, we tend to avoid these very important issues because it becomes personal and people don’t want them to be discussed or else they will walk away from your campaigns. (Gender Officer—District Level)
Another indicated that:
…it is a community expectation that a woman should fulfil the sexual desires of the husband regardless of how they feel. So, it is difficult to penetrate such communities that condone abuse of women to that extent. They will look at you and question you about your own beliefs as a man. They take it as if you are disrespecting them and no one takes you seriously let alone attending the campaigns. Sometimes you are forced to avoid some crucial topics like sexual abuse… (Gender Officer—National Level)

From the above quotations, it is evident that gendered norms constrained the ability of male service providers to speak out about IPV. When men challenge male privileges that reinforce IPV they deviate from their prescribed gender role. As a result, service providers working in rural areas may have conflicting identities, which makes it challenging to intervene in IPV situations. Given that some service providers in rural areas are permanent residents of the communities they serve, they are expected to abide by the community norms as residents in addition to their professional ethics. As argued in previous studies, the setup of rural areas, largely characterized by lack of anonymity, makes it difficult for providers to resort to professional measures, and ultimately family meditation is given priority over formal intervention (Matavire, 2012; Riddell et al., 2009). In some instances, service providers can be related to the perpetrators, impacting their responses to such situations. Considering the close-knit nature of rural areas that prioritize social cohesions, service providers are inclined to use mediation and counseling to preserve their relationships. Ultimately, they end up prioritizing their interests at the expense of the well-being of IPV victims.

Limited Intervention Resources

Limited intervention resources were identified by all participants as one of the key challenges when working with victims of IPV in rural areas. This lack of resources left service providers feeling helpless as they failed to assist victims in emergency cases, especially those working within the medical field.
We do not have adequate resources and we fail to provide emergency services (e.g., ambulance to ferry victims with serious injuries) to the victims and the community does not have confidence in us. It is difficult to provide services in these circumstances … it is very frustrating because the people in this community do not understand that we do not have adequate resources they end up thinking we do not assist them because we do not want to. (Nurse—Ward Level)
For the police officer, the lack of intervention resources was largely visible as they struggled with transportation from the police station to different villages. This made it difficult for them to respond to reported IPV cases and to arrest perpetrators:
Sometimes it is really hard to move around because of transport issues. Even if you use public transport, you are expected to pay and with our meagre salaries it is difficult. Back then if you are wearing your uniform and have evidence that you are coming from this depot you could travel in public transport for free, but times have changed. It is frustrating and makes the job harder. Sometimes it is not because we are not concerned but you look at the distance to the village and you don’t even have any means to get there and assist. (Police—Ward Level)

In addition, the frustrations emanated from a lack of intervention resources, which made it difficult to intervene in emergencies. There are always disparities in terms of resource allocation between urban areas and these are on both quantities of resources and quality of services rendered (Li & Chang, 2008). Similar to findings from previous studies conducted (Moffitt et al., 2022; Ogunkola et al., 2020; Peek-Asa et al., 2011), key informants reported that rural areas lack crucial resources (e.g., transportation like ambulances) that are needed in responding to reported IPV cases and this tend to mitigate efficient service delivery in rural areas. The lack of resources also results in delayed responses to emergency IPV cases and in most cases service providers reported that they were eventually unable to assist women, and this perhaps explains the frustrations and unempathetic behavior they may exhibit when interacting with IPV victims/survivors. This may also possibly explain why service providers in rural areas tended to encourage family mediation, which, according to them, provided timely responses and temporary interventions to IPV incidences.

Recanting of IPV Statement

Recanting (when IPV victims change their story or take back their statement) was reported as a challenge at the ward level (amongst police, nurses, and village heads). It was reported that victims of IPV in rural areas who reported to service providers tended to change their statements especially where the police are involved. Service providers did not clearly state the reason why women would change their statements. The police officer explained:
These women twist the story when they are with their husbands, and we cannot force them to admit that they are abused. It will be my word against hers. Sometimes the women are even forced to deny ever talking to me by the husband and they start lying that they got the bruises when they fell on their way to the fields or the river. Even when you see that the person was injured what can you do because everyone, sometimes even the neighbors, refuse to disclose the abuse. … so, it is very difficult to intervene and assist the victims let alone record IPV cases. (Police Officer—Ward Level)
The nurse also mentioned that women always change stories when they come to the hospital:
When they come here, they tell you that they were beaten, and you do the necessary paperwork and assist with contacting the police. Then the next day you get a phone call from the police telling you that the victim is saying they didn’t say they were abused. You know you end up looking like a fool, and it is now difficult to help these women because you know that tomorrow they will change especially when the husband around. I think in most cases they are forced to change their statement or sometimes it's just fear that if the husband gets arrested my children will die of hunger. (Nurse—Ward Level)

Given the nature of IPV, recantation in this context could have stemmed from the trauma that the victims were subjected to. This coupled with fear of rejection and feelings of self-worthlessness can interfere with the victims’ decision to stop or respond to the abuse. The key informants in this study argued that women denied having been abused particularly when in the presence of the perpetrator. A study by Bonomi et al. (2011) reveals that victims of IPV usually recant due to several reasons including perpetrators’ appeal to victim sympathy, and repetitious minimization of violence. While this may be true, we argue that in the context of rural areas, these may not be the tipping point for women to recant, rather cultural norms take precedence as women may be “forced” by situations to reconsider their actions and prioritize the preservation of marriage according to cultural values. Additionally, the fear of community and family rejection can also explain why victims may change their statements.

Consistent with studies conducted by Githui et al. (2018) the women in this study possibly resorted to changing their statements considering the nature of intervention highlighted by the key informants where perpetrators and victims are questioned in the same room. As Riddell et al. (2009) suggest, this kind of intervention, which is frequently employed by service providers in rural areas, tends to infuriate the perpetrator and can expose the victim to further abuse. Similar to suggestions by other researchers, women changed their statements considering that some of them are economically and socially dependent on the perpetrators (Katiti et al., 2016; Vranda et al., 2018). In the Shona culture, men are traditionally expected to engage in productive income-generating projects to support their families (Matavire, 2012). As such, disclosing violence to service providers may consequently entail the risk of losing their source of income and assuming the financial responsibility for providing for the family.

Limited Male Participation in Intervention Programs

This study looked at the perpetration of violence against women by men. Thus, interventions put in place need to ensure male participation in programs that are aimed at minimizing and preventing IPV in rural areas. While IPV intervention in rural areas focuses mainly on the provision of assistance to victims and survivors of the abuser, key informants in this study highlighted that male participation is equally important. Limited male participation in intervention programs was singled out as one of the constraints in the prevention of IPV in rural areas. Interestingly one participant highlighted that men in rural areas have assigned gender-based violence under “women's stuff” hence their lack of interest in intervention programs.
Another challenge is little male participation even in gender meetings within several communities. … The other thing: the moment we talk of gender issues men have a tendency to link it to women; they say it is women's stuff. Only women show up for these kinds of things. When we call for a meeting on gender-based violence, they think we are only trying to address issues to do with women, which means male participation currently is limited and poses challenges in terms of intervention. As long as the men don’t realize that beating your wife is a problem then we still have a problem. (Gender officer—District level)
Another participant shared the same sentiments indicating that the absence of men tends to mitigate IPV prevention efforts:
Men don’t take gender-based violence (GBV) campaigns seriously because no man in rural areas will tolerate being told by someone from outside that you must not force your wife to have sex with you. … You will be having a GBV community meeting to raise awareness just in front of the community beerhall, but the men will not come; they will be drinking. … We need to do more advocacy because our intervention programs are sometimes futile because men are not part of them. (Gender Officer—National Level)

Limited male participation in intervention programs in rural areas was identified as one of the constraints in service provision within IPV contexts in rural areas. IPV is rooted in patriarchal systems that are created and maintained by men who are socialized into violence and aggressive behaviors often learned from their families and peers hence they rarely recognize IPV as abuse (Antai, 2011; Napoli et al., 2019; Tran et al., 2016). Furthermore, the key informants in this study highlighted those men in rural areas regard meetings on IPV as “women's meetings” considering that traditional rural masculinity tends to assign hard labor and traditional court meetings as men's duties. Contrary to this, participation of men in IPV programs in rural areas is essential as research has indicated that they are at a higher risk of substance abuse, and some of them might have been exposed to IPV in their childhood, contributing toward their abusive behavior in intimate relationships (Condino et al., 2016; Hossain et al., 2014). For service providers, this is one of the major setbacks as limited male participation will ultimately result in “half-baked” intervention programs that fail to address the roots of IPV perpetration. This can possibly explain the level of abuse regardless of intervention efforts by the government and civil society.

Limitations

There are limitations associated with this study. While the data obtained is important in understanding the perceptions of service providers in rural areas, it is not exhaustive of all service providers that are involved in IPV intervention in rural areas in Zimbabwe. As such, the responses cannot be representative of the perceptions of service providers working in IPV contexts in rural Zimbabwe as IPV intervention is context and situation specific. A further limitation lies in the fact that our study included males only, and a majority were Shona (Ndau) speaking service providers and this affected the diversity of perspectives on service provision. Views from female service providers were likely to provide important insights in terms of dealing with IPV victims in rural areas. Finally, our findings did not include the perspectives of the social worker providing psychosocial support services to IPV victims in rural areas. Perhaps future studies on service provision in rural areas should prioritize social workers’ perspectives.

Implications for Service Provision in Rural Areas

The findings from this study highlighted the uniqueness of rural women's IPV experiences and the need for context-specific interventions tailor-made to respond to the specific needs of marginalized women. Likewise, urban models of intervention cannot be adapted to rural areas due to the uniqueness of rurality, and further work is required in terms of cross-cultural multi-disciplinary practice in IPV contexts (Neill & Hammatt, 2015). Our data showed that there are still critical gaps that exist in the way service providers understand and perceive IPV and this ultimately influences the way they respond to IPV cases. For example, sexual abuse is not commonly identified and mentioned as abuse despite its dire effects on the well-being of women. These gaps in service provision show the need for more culturally sensitive training on IPV. Such training should encompass context-specific and cultural training on IPV and its different forms and manifestations and how to screen and respond to different cases within cultural community settings. Cultural training will include institutional/organizational training that helps service providers learn about cultural differences that will help them work more effectively with IPV victims in rural areas (Shepherd, 2019). Colombini et al. (2013) suggest that such training would entail how to ask victims questions sensitively, validate their IPV reports, be empathetic and maintain a strong referral network essential to effective service provision. Sensitization and awareness workshops with service providers will provide a clear picture of their roles and responsibilities and how they can respond to IPV in the rural communities that they serve. This entails training them on how they can make use of existing informal support systems in strengthening IPV interventions considering that they are readily available for victims (Chadambuka & Warria, 2020).

In this study, the nurse and the police officer reported that victims of IPV tended to change their statements to hide and deny the abuse and this is due to fear of further abuse and loss of financial support. Service providers in rural areas can create platforms where women can discuss IPV-related issues without fear. Research has revealed that women tend to disclose IPV more when they are in their community groups (e.g., informal self-help groups) (Chadambuka & Warria, 2022; Vranda et al., 2018). These groups can be used as platforms and pathways in sensitizing women on the importance of seeking formal assistance, which is crucial for their well-being. Engaging with them in such groups is not intimidating and encourages women to share their varied experiences of IPV. As Colombini et al. (2013) suggest, a well-resourced and supportive environment in terms of resource allocation undoubtedly influences service providers’ ability to respond to IPV. Thus, there is a need for the government to ensure that there is adequate resource allocation in rural service agencies. This facilitates coordinated response between service agencies (e.g., law enforcement, healthcare, and social service), which is essential in reducing the constraints in service provision.

Findings from this study highlighted the need to include men in prevention efforts. As suggested by Hossain et al. (2014) and Tran et al. (2016), service providers should strive to include men in rural areas in intervention programs regardless of the patriarchal beliefs that they subscribe to. Given the complexity of working in cultural rural settings, there should be a systemic way of intervening, which may entail dealing with individual genders before engaging in collective intervention (i.e., men and women). Firstly, this can be done through engaging with village heads (these are mostly men) in awareness campaigns, and platforms such as traditional courts can be utilized as forums for men with the village heads also leading these dialogues. Secondly, service providers can take these dialogues to popular places where men meet (e.g., community beerhalls). There is the possibility that when men engage with other men in the absence of their wives, they tend to open-up and actively participate. Furthermore, the inclusion of young boys in such programs is crucial in shifting the attitudes and beliefs that condone IPV. Thus, it is recommended that further studies be conducted on perpetrators of IPV and the role that men can play in preventing IPV against women in rural areas.

Conclusion

This study sought to explore the perceptions of service providers with regard to IPV in rural areas. Significantly, our findings reveal the complexity of service delivery in rural areas given the influence of social norms in responding to IPV situations in rural communities. Findings from the study revealed service providers’ understanding of IPV and their attitudes toward it. The findings also revealed the different constraints in service delivery in rural areas, which include limited resources, conflicting cultural and professional identities, and limited male participation. These challenges should not only be seen as deterrents to effective service delivery in rural areas but also as opportunities to strengthen and improve IPV service delivery in rural communities in Zimbabwe. This may further require a multidisciplinary approach where collaboration and coordination are at the center of service provision in rural areas.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the service providers who participated in this study.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest regarding authorship, research, and publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Cyndirela Chadambuka

Author Biographies

Cyndirela Chadambuka is an Associate Professor, working on multiple projects to find out the connections that violence, gender, and transnational migration (and communities) have with other development issues. Because if we can figure out the relationships between the interconnecting factors, we can co-create sustainable interventions. Cyndirela's goal is to demystify human trafficking trends, exploitation, and migration patterns, allow coherent and holistic narratives to be constructed, and prioritize relationality and building impactful connections in research. Cyndirela's research projects help to figure out context-related ways to engage with victims and survivors and strengthen implementation of interventions. Previously, Cyndirela has worked on migration, trafficking, and exploitation studies in sub-Sahara.

Ajwang Warria is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Social Work at the University of Calgary (Canada). She works on multiple projects to find out the connections that violence and transnational migration (and communities) have with other development issues. Because if we can figure out the intersections, we can co-create sustainable, relational, and context-based interventions with victims and survivors, build meaningful connections and healthy communities, and strengthen transdisciplinary responses.

References

Ahmadabadi

Najman

J. M.

Williamns

G. M.

Clavarino

A. M.

(2017). Income, gender, and forms of intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 35(23-24), 5500–5525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260517719541

Albanesi

Tomasetto

Guardabassi

(2021). Evaluating interventions with victims of intimate partner violence: A community psychology approach. BMC Women's Health, 21(1), 138. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-021-01268-7

Antai

(2011). Traumatic physical health consequences of intimate partner violence against women: What is the role of community-level factors? BMC Women’s Health, 11(56), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6874-11-56

Baldry

A. C.

Pagliaro

S. C.

(2014). Helping victims of intimate partner violence: The influence of group norms among lay people and the police. Psychology of Violence, 4(3), 334–347. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034844

Bonomi

A. E.

Gangamma

Locke

C. R.

Katafiasz

Martin

. (2011). “Meet me at the hill where we used to park”: Interpersonal processes associated with victim recantation. Social Science & Medicine, 73(7), 1054–1061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.07.005

Bosch

Bergen

M. B.

(2006). The influence of supportive and non-supportive persons in helping rural women in abusive partner relationships become free from abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 21, 311–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-006-9027-1

Chadambuka

Warria

(2020). Examining support systems available for victims of intimate partner violence in rural areas in Zimbabwe. Practice, 32(5), 381–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/09503153.2020.175057

Chadambuka

Warria

(2022). Intimate partner violence: Understanding barriers in seeking formal support services in a rural area in Zimbabwe. Journal of Family Violence, 37, 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-021-00275-4

Chadambuka

(2022a). Feminist scholarship, femocracy and the glass ceiling in Zimbabwean politics. Journal of Higher Education in Africa/Revue de l’enseignement Supérieur En Afrique, 20(1), 43–66. https://www-jstor-org-443.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/48678876 https://doi.org/10.57054/jhea.v20i1.2186

10.

Chadambuka

(2022b). Coping strategies adopted by women who experienced intimate partner violence in the context of social norms in rural areas in Zimbabwe. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(5-6), 2776–2800. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520943734

11.

Chigonda

Chazireni

(2018). Once rural, always rural? Social services provision in selected rural cases from Zimbabwe. National Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 3(1), 469–475.

12.

Chigwata

(2016). The role of traditional leaders in Zimbabwe: Are they still relevant? Law Democracy And Development, 20, 69–90. https://doi.org/10.4314/ldd.v20i1.4

13.

Chireshe

(2015). Christian women’s experiences of domestic violence in Zimbabwe. Journal of Women and Social Work, 30(3), 380–394. https://doi.org/https://dx.https://doi.org/10.1186%2Fs12905-017-0441-8

14.

Colombini

Mayhew

Ali

S. H.

Shuib

Watts

(2013). I feel it is not enough: Health providers’ perspectives on services for victims of intimate partner violence in Malaysia. BMC Health Services Research, 13(65), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-13-65

15.

Condino

Tanzilli

Speranza

A. M.

Lingiardi

(2016). Therapeutic interventions in intimate partner violence: An overview. Research in Psychotherapy: Psychopathology, Process and Outcome, 19(2), 79–88. https://doi.org/10.4081/ripppo.2016.241

16.

Crenshaw

(1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

17.

Devries

K. M.

Mak

J. Y.

Garcia-Moreno

Petzold

Child

J. C.

Falder

Lim

Bacchus

L. J.

Engell

R. E.

Rosenfeld

Pallitto

Vos

Abrahams

Watts

C. H.

(2013). Global health. The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science, 340(6140), 1527–1528. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1240937

18.

Eastman

B. J.

Bunch

S. G.

Williams

H. A.

Carawan

L. W.

(2007). Exploring the perceptions of domestic violence service providers in rural localities. Violence Against Women, 13(7), 700–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801207302047

19.

Fidan

Bui

H. N.

(2016). Intimate partner violence against women in Zimbabwe. Violence Against Women, 22(9), 1075–1096. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1077801215617551

20.

Githui

Chege

Wagoro

M. C. A.

Mwaura

(2018). Nurse’s perception on non-disclosure of intimate partner violence by pregnant women: A cross-sectional study. International Journal of Contemporary Research & Review, 9(1), 20198–20203. https://doi.org/10.15520/ijcrr/2018/9/01/403

21.

Goodman

L. A.

Smyth

K. F.

Borges

A. M.

Singer

(2009). When crises collide: How intimate partner and poverty intersect to shape women’s mental health and coping? Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 10(4), 306–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838009339754

22.

Groves

A. K.

Moodley

McNaughton-Reyes

Martin

S. L.

Foshee

Maman

(2015). Prevalence of intimate partner violence among South African women during pregnancy and post-partum period. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 19(3), 487–495. https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10995-014-1528-6

23.

Hill-Collin

Bilge

(2016). Intersectionality. Polity Press.

24.

Hindin

M. J.

(2002). For better or for worse: Women’s autonomy and marital status in Zimbabwe. Social Science Research, 31(1), 151–172. https://doi.org/10.1006/ssre.2001.0724

25.

Hossain

Zimmerman

Kiss

Abramsky

Kone

Bakayoko-Topolska

Annan

Lehmann

Watts

(2014). Working with men to prevent intimate partner violence in a conflict-affected setting: A pilot cluster randomized controlled trial in rural Côte d’Ivoire. BMC Public Health, 14(339), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-339

26.

Iman’ishimwe Mukamana

Machakanja

Adjei

N. K.

(2020). Trends in prevalence and correlates of intimate partner violence against women in Zimbabwe, 2005–2015. BMC International Health and Human Rights, 20(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12914-019-0220-8

27.

Jewkes

(2002). Intimate partner violence: Causes and prevention. Lancet, 359(9315), 1423–1429. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08357-5

28.

Jewkes

Levin

Penn-Kekana

(2002). Risk factors for domestic violence: Findings from a South African cross-sectional study. Social Science & Medicine, 55(9), 1603–1617. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(01)00294-5

29.

Katiti

Sigalla

G. N.

Rogathi

Manongi

Mushi

(2016). Factors influencing disclosure among women experiencing intimate partner violence during pregnancy in Moshi Municipality, Tanzania. BMC Public Health, 16(715), 1–9. https://doi.org/DOI 10.1186/s12889-016-3345-x

30.

Klugman

(2017). Gender based violence and the law. World Development Report Background paper. World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/26198

31.

Kulkami

(2019). Intersectional trauma-informed intimate partner violence (IPV) services: Narrowing the gap between IPV service delivery and survivor needs. Journal of Family Violence, 35, 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-018-0001-5

32.

Law

(2021). ‘We wanted to be free as a nation, and we wanted to be free as women’: Decolonisation, nationalism and women's liberation in Zimbabwe, 1979–851. Gender & History, 33(1), 249–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0424.12491

33.

Chang

G. H.

(2008). Disparity in health resource allocation between rural and urban areas in China: Is it getting worse? Chinese Economy, 41(6), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.2753/CES1097-1475410602

34.

Lippy

Jumarali

S. N.

Nnawulezi

N. A.

Williams

E. D.

Burk

(2020). The impact of mandatory reporting laws on survivors of intimate partner violence: Intersectionality, help-seeking, and the need for change. Journal of Family Violence, 35, 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-019-00103-w

35.

Mashiri

(2013). Conceptualisation of gender-based violence in Zimbabwe. International Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(15), 94–103.

36.

Matavire

(2012). Interrogating the Zimbabwean traditional jurisprudence and the position of women in conflict resolution. A case of Shona tribes in Muzarabani district. International Journal Of Humanities And Social Sciences, 2(3), 218–223. http://www.ijhssnet.com/

37.

McCloskey

L. A.

Boonzaier

Steinbrenner

S. Y.

Hunter

(2016). Determinants of IPV in sub-Saharan Africa: A review of prevention and intervention programs. Partner Abuse, 7(3), 277–315. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.7.3.277

38.

Messing

J. T.

Ward-Lasher

Thaller

Bagwell-Gray

M. E.

(2015). The state of intimate partner violence intervention: Progress and continuing challenges. Social Work, 60(4), 305–313. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/swv027

39.

Milne

A. L.

(2004). Mediation and domestic abuse. In Folberg

Milne

A. L.

Salem

(Eds.), Divorce and family mediation (pp. 304–335). Guilford Press.

40.

Moen

(2006). Reflections on the narrative research approach. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(4), 56–69. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690600500405

41.

Moffitt

Aujla

Giesbrecht

C. J.

Grant

Straatman

A. L.

(2022). Intimate partner violence and COVID-19 in rural, remote, and Northern Canada: Relationship, vulnerability and risk. Journal Of Family Violence, 37(5), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00212-x

42.

Mohanty

(1988). Under western eyes: Feminist scholarship and colonial discourses. Feminist Review, 30(1), 61–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109913504153

43.

Mugweni

Pearson

Omar

(2012). SHORT REPORT: Traditional gender roles, forced sex and HIV in Zimbabwean marriages. Culture, Health & Sexuality, 14(5/6), 577–590. https://www-jstor-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/23265706 https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2012.671962

44.

Mukanangana

Moyo

Zvoushe

Rusinga

(2014). Gender based violence and its effects on women’s reproductive health: The case of Hatcliffe, Harare, Zimbabwe. African Journal of Reproductive Health, 18(1), 110–122.

45.

Nabaggala

M. S.

Reddy

Manda

(2021). Effects of rural–urban residence and education on intimate partner violence among women in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis of health survey data. BMC Women's Health 21(1), 149. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-021-01286-5

46.

Napoli

I. D.

Procentese

Carnevale

Esposito

Arcidiacono

(2019). Ending IPV and locating men at stake: An ecological approach. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(1652), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16091652

47.

Neill

K. S.

Hammatt

(2015). Beyond urban places: Responding to intimate partner violence in rural and remote areas. Journal of Forensic Nursing, 11(2), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1097/JFN.0000000000000070

48.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules

N. J.

(2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

49.

Ogunkola

I. O.

Adebisi

Y. A.

Imo

U. F.

Odey

G. O.

Esu

Lucero-Prisno

D. E.

3rd. (2020). Rural communities in Africa should not be forgotten in responses to COVID-19. The International Journal Of Health Planning And Management, 35(6), 1302–1305. https://doi.org/10.1002/hpm.3039

50.

Peek-Asa

Wallis

Harland

Beyer

Dickey

Saftlas

(2011). Rural disparity in domestic violence prevalence and access to resources. Journal of Women’s Health, 20(1), 1743–1749. https://doi.org/10.1089/jwh.2011.2891

51.

Riddell

Ford-Gilboe

Leipert

(2009). Strategies used by rural women to stop, avoid, or escape from intimate partner violence. Health Care for Women International, 30(1-2), 134–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/07399330802523774

52.

Saldana

(2009). The coding manual for qualitative researcher. Sage.

53.

Sandberg

(2013). Backward, dumb, and violent hillbillies? Rural geographies and intersectional studies on intimate partner violence. Affilia, 28(4), 350–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109913504153

54.

Sardinha

Maheu-Giroux

Stöckl

Sarah Rachel Meyer

S. R.

Claudia García-Moreno

(2022). Global, regional, and national prevalence estimates of physical or sexual, or both, intimate partner violence against women in 2018. The Lancet, 399(10327), 803–813. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02664-7

55.

Shamu

Abrahams

Zarowsky

Shefer

Temmerman

(2013). Intimate partner violence during pregnancy in Zimbabwe: A cross-sectional study of prevalence, predictors, and associations with HIV. Tropical Medicine & International Health, 18(6), 696–711. https://doi.org/10.1111/tmi.12078

56.

Sharma

(2017). Pros and cons of different sampling techniques. International Journal of Applied Research, 3(7), 749–752.

57.

Shepherd

S. M.

(2019). Cultural awareness workshops: Limitations and practical consequences. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1450-5

58.

Tran

T. D.

Nguyen

Fisher

(2016). Attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women among women and men in 39 low- and middle-income countries. PLoS One, 11(11), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0167438

59.

Vranda

M, N.

Kumar

C. N.

Muralidhar

Janardhana

Sivakuma

P. T.

(2018). Barriers to disclosure of intimate partner violence among female patients availing services at tertiary care psychiatric hospitals: A qualitative study. Journal of Neurosciences In Rural Practice, 9(3), 326–330. https://doi.org/10.4103/jnrp.jnrp_14_18

60.

Yates

Shillington

K. J.

Tryphonopoulos

Jackson

K. T.

Mantler

(2023). “When I decided to leave, I had nothing”: The resilience of rural women experiencing economic abuse in the context of gender-based violence. The Journal of Rural and Community Development, 18(1), 1–18.