Female Participation in Household Decision Making and the Justification of Wife Beating in Bangladesh

Abstract

We examined female participation in household decision making and its association with the justification of wife beating in Bangladesh. We used nationally representative data from the 2014 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey. Our sample consisted of currently married women of age 15 to 49 years (n = 16,463). Chi-square tests and multilevel logistic regression models were performed. Approximately 84% of women in the survey were participants in at least one household decision, and 72% reported that wife beating is not justified in any circumstance. Women who reported their participation in at least one type of household decision less frequently reported that wife beating could be justified than those who did not participate in any household decisions (adjusted odds ratio = 1.49; 95% confidence interval = [1.25, 1.78]). In addition to participation in household decision making, other factors including age at first marriage, females’ and their husbands’ education, religion, parity, contraceptive use, and socioeconomic status were associated with the justification of wife beating. The results indicate that female participation in household decision making is significantly associated with the justification of wife beating in Bangladesh. Further study is needed, but the results suggest that policy makers should consider interventions proven to empower women and lead to increased participation in decision making as methods that may reduce domestic violence against women.

Keywords

household decision making women’s empowerment wife beating intimate partner violence Bangladesh

Introduction

Domestic violence, in particular intimate partner violence (IPV), has been recognized as a leading cause of mortality and morbidity among women of reproductive age in Bangladesh (Ziaei, Naved, & Ekström, 2014). IPV is a public health concern (Krug, Mercy, Dahlberg, & Zwi, 2002), and research suggests that the proclivity to engage in IPV passes from one generation to the next in Bangladesh (Islam, Tareque, Tiedt, & Hoque, 2014). The consequences of IPV to maternal and child health are severe—diminished maternal reproductive health, poor infant and child health, and increased incidence of mortality in Timor-Leste as well as in Bangladesh (Taft, Powell, & Watson, 2015; Ziaei et al., 2014)—and the consequences are widespread in Egypt (Diop-Sidibé, Campbell, & Becker, 2006). Wife beating, a dimension of IPV, is physical punishment inflicted by a husband to “correct” an erring wife. In several parts of the world, wife beating is considered the husband’s right, and is socially and culturally accepted (Counts & Brown, 1992; Jejeebhoy, 1998; Rao, 1997). Although the prevalence varies throughout the globe, wife beating occurs in every society.

A significant proportion of men and women in some developing countries justify wife beating to punish divergence from normative roles (Hindin, 2003; Koenig et al., 2003; Rani, Bonu, & Diop-Sidibe, 2004). These divergences include disobedience, adultery, and disrespect of the husband’s relatives (Haj-Yahia, 2003). Gender roles play an important part in the attitudes and overall societal prevalence of wife beating. A study of seven sub-Saharan African countries found that more than 75% of women were likely to accept wife beating under certain circumstances (Rani et al., 2004).

The reasons why women justify wife beating remain elusive; yet in many places, women more often justify wife beating than men (Koenig et al., 2003; Rani et al., 2004). Justification of wife beating may represent a feeling state that describes the woman’s awareness of her rights/freedom. Theories of cognition describe that feeling states regulate cognitive processes and judgments which shape actions (Fiske & Macrae, 2012). That means, if a woman does not justify wife beating in a circumstance she may act to protect herself from prospective beating in the same or related circumstance. While the evidence is not universal, previous studies have established a link between the justification of wife beating and IPV (Yoshikawa, Shakya, Poudel, & Jimba, 2014). This evidence and theories of cognition suggest that to reduce wife beating, its justification should be reduced. And to reduce its justification, it is important to understand the attitudes and behaviors associated with justification. Understanding the association of wife beating attitudes may offer important insights to curb the cultural acceptance and intergenerational transmission of wife beating, and prevent further violence.

It has been suggested that wife beating may be related to patriarchal institutional dominance, unequal gender power distribution, and the control of household resources (Dobash & Dobash, 1979). Household decision making, a dimension of intrahousehold gender equality, is a commonality between these factors. While previous studies have explored the association between household decision making and wife beating in different settings (Gelaye, Lam, Cripe, Sanchez, & Williams, 2010; Hindin, 2003; Hindin & Adair, 2002; Islam, Tareque, Sugawa, & Kawahara, 2015; Linos, Khawaja, & Al-Nsour, 2010; Mann & Takyi, 2009; Rahman, Hoque, & Makinoda, 2011; Sambisa, Angeles, Lance, Naved, & Thornton, 2011), the associations are inconsistent in many countries, including Bangladesh. Some studies of Bangladeshi women have reported that more than 75% justify wife beating, and that wife beating occurs more frequently in households where men make more of the key decisions (National Institute of Population Research and Training [NIPORT], Mitra and Associates, & ICF International, 2016; Schuler & Islam, 2008; Schuler, Yount, & Lenzi, 2012). However, other studies have found that promoting female empowerment may increase the risk of IPV (Rahman et al., 2011).

Understanding the behaviors associated with the justification of wife beating is important in designing interventions to reduce domestic violence (Schuler et al., 2012). Therefore, an in-depth examination of the association between women’s justification of wife beating and their role in household decision making in Bangladesh is necessary. This study aims to examine how women’s self-reported participation in household decision making is associated with their justification of wife beating in Bangladesh. We hypothesize that greater reported participation in household decision making is associated with less justification, which has potential implications for domestic violence in the patriarchal society of Bangladesh. Support for this hypothesis would suggest the need to consider this additional benefit to interventions designed to promote female participation in household decisions and assess the effectiveness of these interventions at reducing the justification of wife beating as well as IPV.

Method

Data

The current study used data from the 2014 Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey (BDHS), a nationally representative sample survey of ever-married women aged 15 to 49 years residing in noninstitutional dwelling units in Bangladesh. The 2014 BDHS was conducted under the authority of the National Institute for Population Research and Training (NIPORT) of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare of Bangladesh. The sampling design, survey instrument, and data collection procedure are described elsewhere in detail (NIPORT, Mitra and Associates, & ICF International, 2016).

The 2014 BDHS was based on a two-stage stratified sample of households. With the sampling design, it selected 18,000 residential households. All married women of reproductive age (15-49 years) who slept in the chosen households the night before the survey were eligible to participate in the survey. A total of 18,245 ever-married women aged 15 to 49 years were identified in the selected households and 17,863 were interviewed with a response rate of 98%. Data collection started on June 28, 2014, and ended on November 9, 2014. For the current study, we limited our sample to women who were currently married to avoid relying on recall of domestic violence which reduced the sample size to 16,830. In addition, we dropped observations with missing information for the variables included in the analysis, which left data on 16,463 currently married women as our analytical sample.

Outcome Variable

The outcome variable is a binary describing the justification of wife beating. Female survey respondents were asked if they would justify the domestic violence under five circumstances: (a) going out without telling her husband, (b) neglecting the children, (c) arguing with her husband, (d) refusing to have sexual intercourse, and (e) burning the food. For each circumstance, if a respondent thought a beating would be justified, she was assigned a score of 0, or if a respondent thought a beating would not be justified, she was assigned a score of 1. The internal consistency among the five variables (i.e., five circumstances) was .77 (Cronbach’s α = .77). All five circumstances were used to generate the binary outcome variable: 0 if the respondent thought beatings were justified in any circumstance, and 1 if the respondent thought beatings were not justified in any circumstance.

Predictor Variable

The main predictor of the current study is self-reported participation in household decision making. This predictor was based on responses to individual questions regarding who within the household makes decisions in four circumstances: (a) own health care, (b) major household purchases, (c) visits to family or relatives, and (d) child health care. For each circumstance, the response categories were as follows: (a) respondent alone; (b) respondent and husband, partner jointly; (c) husband/partner alone; (d) someone else; and (e) other. In this study, full or partial participation described in options (a) and (b) was assigned a score of 1, no participation described in options (c), (d), and (e) was assigned a score of 0. The internal consistency among the four variables (i.e., four circumstances) was .81 (Cronbach’s α = .81). The predictor variable is equal to 1 if the respondent participated in any of the circumstances, and 0 otherwise.

Confounding Variables

We included a number of individual and household characteristics as confounding variables due to their association with either the outcome or predictor variables. Individual characteristics included respondent’s current age (classified as 15-24, 25-34, and 35+ years), age at first marriage (less than 18 years, or 18 and above), respondent’s and husband’s education (illiterate, primary education with less than or equal to 5 years of schooling, secondary education with 6 to 10 years of schooling, and higher education with 11 years of schooling and above), respondent’s work status (yes or no), respondent’s religion (Muslim or non-Muslim), parity (0, 1-2, and 3+), and current contraceptive method. Current contraceptive method was categorized as not current user, using female methods or using couple/male methods. Pill, intrauterine device (IUD), injections, female sterilization, and implants/Norplant were considered as female contraceptive methods, whereas periodic abstinence, withdrawal, lactational amenorrhea, condom, male sterilization, and other contraceptive methods were considered as couple/male contraceptive methods. Household characteristics included respondent’s place of residence (rural or urban), region, and socioeconomic status. Region was categorized according to seven administrative divisions of Bangladesh (Barisal, Chittagong, Dhaka, Khulna, Rajshahi, Rangpur, and Sylhet). A national-level wealth index (quintiles) constructed from household assets measured household socioeconomic status. We refer to the bottom 40% as “poor,” the next 40% as “middle,” and the top 20% as “rich” (Filmer & Pritchett, 2001; Tareque, Begum, & Saito, 2014).

Ethics Statement

The DHS Program is authorized to distribute, at no cost, unrestricted survey data files for legitimate academic research (see more details at http://dhsprogram.com/). We obtained permission from the DHS Program to download and analyze the 2014 BDHS dataset for the current study. As the deidentified data for this study came from secondary sources, this study does not require ethical approval.

Statistical Analyses

After descriptive statistics of the study sample using mean and percentage distribution, we used chi-square tests to identify differences in the justification of wife beating by participation in household decision making, and other individual and household characteristics. Then, we examined the association between the justification of wife beating and self-reported participation in household decision making with two logistic regression models. The first model (labeled as Model 1) established a bivariate association between the justification of wife beating and participation in household decision making without any adjustments for confounders. The second model (labeled as Model 2) regressed justification of wife beating on participation in household decision making as well as individual- and household-level confounding variables. A standard error larger than 2.0 indicates multicollinearity among the independent variables in logistic regression analysis (Chan, 2004). The standard errors of the regression coefficients in our analyses were less than 0.6, which suggested that multicollinearity was not a problem. The net significance of the participation in household decision making in all models was estimated by calculating the difference in the log-likelihood statistic (Δ − 2X log-likelihood[LL]) between equations that did and did not include participation in household decision making.

The 2014 BDHS used multistage stratified sampling technique that was based on nested sources of variability such as individuals nested in households and households nested in communities. To account for sampling variability, we employed multilevel logistic regression models with household and community random intercepts. Multilevel analysis produces more valid results when lower levels are nested within higher levels (Rabe-Hesketh & Skrondal, 2006; Twisk, 2006). All analyses were performed taking into account the probability sample design. The svy commands were used in descriptive and bivariate analyses, and probability weight, proposed by Rabe-Hesketh and Skrondal (Rabe-Hesketh & Skrondal, 2006), was applied to multilevel logistic regression analysis. The entire analysis of the study was performed with Stata/MP version 13.0 (StataCorp, LP, and College Station, Texas, United States).

Results

Table 1 presents the basic characteristics of respondents. The average age and age at first marriage, respectively, were 31 and 16 years. The highest percentage of respondents were in age 25 to 34. Approximately 76% of women were married before reaching the legal age at marriage for women in Bangladesh (18 years). About 23% of female respondents had no education, and 29% of their husbands were illiterate. About 68% of female respondents were not working, and 90% were Muslim. Around half of the respondents reported live births of one to two children. More than one third of respondents were not using any contraceptive methods, whereas 47% were using female methods. About 72% of respondents reside in rural areas, and 35% in Dhaka.

Table 1.

Basic Characteristics of the Study Participants (n = 16,463).

Characteristics	M	95% CI
Characteristics	M	Lower Limit	Upper Limit
Age	30.6	30.4	30.7
Age at first marriage	15.8	15.7	15.9
	%
Age group
15-24	30.1	29.2	31.1
25-34	37.0	36.0	37.9
35+	32.9	32.0	33.8
Age at first marriage
<18	76.1	74.8	77.4
≥18	23.9	22.6	25.2
Education
Illiterate	23.4	21.7	25.2
Primary	30.6	29.4	32.0
Secondary	39.0	37.5	40.5
Higher	7.0	6.2	7.8
Husband’s education
Illiterate	28.5	26.8	30.2
Primary	28.2	27.1	29.3
Secondary	30.8	29.4	32.2
Higher	12.6	11.5	13.8
Work status
No	67.8	65.8	69.7
Yes	32.2	30.3	34.2
Religion
Muslim	90.0	87.3	92.2
Non-Muslim	10.0	7.8	12.7
Parity
0	8.9	8.3	9.5
1-2	49.4	48.3	50.6
3+	41.7	40.5	42.9
Current contraceptive methods
No	37.1	35.8	38.4
Female methods	46.7	45.4	47.9
Couple/male methods	16.2	15.2	17.3
Place of residence
Rural	72.1	69.8	74.2
Urban	27.9	25.8	30.2
Region
Barisal	6.2	5.1	7.6
Chittagong	18.6	16.9	20.5
Dhaka	34.6	31.5	37.9
Khulna	10.4	9.6	11.2
Rajshahi	11.8	10.9	12.7
Rangpur	11.7	10.0	13.5
Sylhet	6.7	5.7	7.9

Note. M = mean; CI = confidence interval.

Figure 1 shows the distribution of the predictor variable, the percentage of females who reported participating in the various elements of household decision making. Between 62% and 71% of women reported participating in a household decision depending on the type of decision, the largest female participation occurring in child health decisions (see Figure 1). Approximately 84% of female respondents reported participating in at least one household decision.

Figure 1.

Percentage of female participation in household decision making.

Figure 2 shows the distribution of the outcome variable, the percentage of females who report that they would not justify wife beating by circumstance. Wife beating was least justified when food is burned (4%), and most frequently justified when the women argue with their husband (20%). Overall, 72% of female respondents report that they would not justify wife beating in any of the stated circumstances.

Figure 2.

Percentage of females who would not justify wife beating by circumstance.

Table 2 further analyzes women’s justification of wife beating by examining variation by sociodemographic characteristics. Women who reported participating in at least one household decision were less likely to justify wife beating than those who did not participate in any household decisions. Women who were married when 18 years of age and above were less likely to justify wife beating than women married prior to age 18. Women with secondary or higher education and women whose husbands were with secondary or higher education were less likely to justify wife beating than their counterparts. Non-Muslim women less frequently justified wife beating than Muslim women. Women with lower parity (0-2 children) justified wife beating less frequently than women with higher parity (three or more children). Women in couples using couple/male methods of contraception less frequently justified wife beating than women who used female or no contraceptive methods. Women residing in urban areas or particularly in Dhaka would justify wife beating less than rural women or women from other divisions of the country. Women with higher socioeconomic status would justify wife beating less than women with lower socioeconomic status.

Table 2.

Percentage of Females Who Would Not Justify Wife Beating by Sociodemographic Characteristics.

Characteristics	95% CI
Characteristics	%	Lower Limit	Upper Limit
Participated in at least one decision
No	67.4	65.0	69.7
Yes	73.2	71.7	74.6
p value	.00
Age group
15-24	72.7	70.9	74.4
25-34	72.7	71.0	74.4
35+	71.3	69.0	73.6
p value	.39
Age at first marriage
<18	70.7	69.1	72.3
≥18	77.2	75.2	79.1
p value	.00
Education
Illiterate	67.7	63.8	71.3
Primary	68.5	66.4	70.6
Secondary	75.2	73.5	76.8
Higher	88.0	85.4	90.2
p value	.00
Husband’s education
Illiterate	67.5	64.4	70.4
Primary	69.1	67.0	71.2
Secondary	74.6	73.0	76.2
Higher	84.3	82.0	86.4
p value	.00
Work status
No	72.2	70.8	73.6
Yes	72.4	69.9	74.6
p value	.92
Religion
Muslim	71.8	70.4	73.3
Non-Muslim	76.1	72.0	79.7
p value	.05
Parity
0	74.9	71.9	77.6
1-2	74.4	72.9	75.8
3+	69.2	67.2	71.1
p value	.00
Current contraceptive methods
No	72.0	70.4	73.7
Female methods	70.6	69.0	72.1
Couple/male methods	77.7	74.6	80.5
p value	.00
Place of residence
Rural	70.9	69.1	72.5
Urban	75.9	73.5	78.2
p value	.00
Region
Barisal	64.4	59.2	69.2
Chittagong	71.2	67.7	74.4
Dhaka	76.9	74.3	79.3
Khulna	70.7	67.6	73.7
Rajshahi	66.7	64.1	69.2
Rangpur	74.4	70.1	78.3
Sylhet	67.3	63.8	70.6
p value	.00
Socioeconomic status
Poor	66.7	64.4	69.0
Middle	72.4	70.8	73.9
Rich	81.7	79.5	83.8
p value	.00

Note. The p values are of chi-square tests. CI = confidence interval.

Table 3 shows the results of multilevel logistic regression models that forecasted the odds of not justifying wife beating in any studied circumstances. Log-likelihood ratio tests indicated that multilevel logistic regression models with random effects were necessary compared with single-level logistic regression models without random effects. In Model 1, women who reported participating in at least one household decision were 1.49 times more likely to not justify wife beating compared with women who did not report participating in any household decisions. Similarly, in Model 2 which incorporates confounding variables, women who reported participating in at least one household decision were 1.49 times more likely to not justify wife beating than women who did not report participating in any decisions. While age was not significantly associated with the justification of wife beating, being equal to or above 18 years old at the time of marriage was associated with higher odds of not justifying wife beating, with a borderline significance level (p = .08). The point estimate suggests that females with secondary or higher education and the higher education of their husbands were significantly associated with less justification of wife beating. Non-Muslim women were 1.48 times more likely to not justify wife beating than Muslim women. Women of one or two parities were associated with higher odds of not justifying wife beating with a borderline significance level than women of 3+ parities. Females belonging to couples using either couple or male methods of contraception were more likely to not justify wife beating than women using any other contraception or none, with a 10% level of significance. Women from Dhaka had the highest odds of not justifying wife beating among all divisions. Finally, higher socioeconomic status was also associated with less justification of wife beating.

Table 3.

Odds Ratio for a Woman for Not Justifying Wife Beating Versus Justifying Wife Beating.

Characteristics	Model 1			Model 2
Characteristics	Odds Ratio	95% CI	p Value	Odds Ratio	95% CI	p Value
Participated in at least one decision
No	1.00			1.00
Yes	1.49	[1.25, 1.77]	.00	1.49	[1.25, 1.78]	.00
Individual
Age group
15-24				0.92	[0.69, 1.23]	.58
25-34				0.99	[0.83, 1.19]	.94
35+				1.00
Age at first marriage
<18				1.00
≥18				1.16	[0.98, 1.36]	.08
Education
Illiterate				1.00
Primary				1.04	[0.83, 1.30]	.73
Secondary				1.44	[1.10, 1.87]	.01
Higher				2.79	[1.80, 4.32]	0.00
Husband’s education
Illiterate				1.00
Primary				0.94	[0.78, 1.13]	.49
Secondary				1.07	[0.88, 1.30]	.49
Higher				1.70	[1.27, 2.29]	.00
Religion
Muslim				1.00
Non-Muslim				1.48	[1.14, 1.93]	.00
Parity
0				1.17	[0.82, 1.67]	.39
1-2				1.21	[0.98, 1.50]	.08
3+				1.00
Current contraceptive methods
No				1.00
Female methods				0.92	[0.79, 1.07]	.26
Couple/male methods				1.21	[0.96, 1.53]	.10
Household
Place of residence
Rural				1.00
Urban				1.01	[0.80, 1.27]	.92
Region
Barisal				1.00
Chittagong				1.56	[1.04, 2.34]	.03
Dhaka				2.80	[1.89, 4.14]	.00
Khulna				1.49	[1.02, 2.18]	.04
Rajshahi				1.19	[0.83, 1.70]	.35
Rangpur				2.20	[1.47, 3.29]	.00
Sylhet				1.35	[0.88, 2.07]	.17
Socioeconomic status
Poor				1.00
Middle				1.29	[1.10, 1.52]	.00
Rich				2.10	[1.59, 2.78]	.00
Variance (cov) of random effect
Level 2 (household)	4.00 (0.74)			4.11 (0.77)
Level 3 (community)	1.15 (0.17)			0.86 (0.14)
L	−8,814.72			−8,621.17
Δ − 2X LL^a	25.25		.00	387.11		.00

Note. CI = confidence interval; LL = log-likelihood.

Change in −2X log-likelihood when adding participated in at least one decision to a model containing other variables. For Model 1, it is the change when adding participated in at least one decision to a model containing the constant only.

Overall, the results from Models 1 and 2 indicate that female self-reported participation in household decision making is associated with less justification of wife beating. Statistically significant values of Δ − 2X LL for all models indicated that the equations showing the relationship between decision making participation and justification of wife beating with additional controls are better fitted than the equations without the decision making participation.

Discussion

The main finding of the study is that female self-reported participation in at least one household decision (own health care, major household purchases, visits to family or relatives, and child health care) is associated with less justification of wife beating. Justification of wife beating encompasses five circumstances: going out without telling husband, neglecting the children, arguing with husband, refusing sexual intercourse, and burning the food. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to focus on the association between female participation in household decision making and her justification of wife beating, among currently married women in Bangladesh. The results also identify other significant factors associated with the justification of wife beating: age at first marriage, females’ and their husbands’ education, religion, parity, contraceptive methods, socioeconomic status, and residential location.

IPV is one of the most common forms of violence against women worldwide (Devries et al., 2010). Many men and women in developing countries throughout the world justify wife beating as a consequence of divergence from normative roles (Hindin, 2003; Koenig et al., 2003; Rani et al., 2004). Previous studies across contexts have produced varying results related to IPV (Gelaye et al., 2010; Hindin, 2003; Hindin & Adair, 2002; Islam et al., 2015; Linos et al., 2010; Mann & Takyi, 2009; Rahman et al., 2011; Sambisa et al., 2011). In Nepal, husbands’ justification of wife beating was positively associated with IPV, whereas wives’ justification of wife beating was not associated with IPV (Yoshikawa et al., 2014). Women who reported that they make household decisions jointly with their partners were less likely to justify wife beating in Zimbabwe (Hindin, 2003). In Bangladesh, the results are inconclusive as to whether wife beating occurs more frequently in households where men are the key decision makers (NIPORT, Mitra and Associates, & ICF International, 2016; Schuler & Islam, 2008; Schuler et al., 2012), or if female empowerment increases the risk of wife beating (Rahman et al., 2011). While the current study does not document the incidence of IPV and its association with household decision making, the results provide evidence that female participation in at least one household decision is associated with less justification of wife beating. As stated earlier, research suggests that a woman’s justification of wife beating is a feeling state which may shape her actions. A potential implication of our findings is that greater participation in household decisions may reduce women’s justification of wife beating in any circumstance.

In addition to other previously documented positive effects of female participation in household decisions (Duflo, 2000; Majlesi, 2016), the association between female participation in household decisions and their justification of wife beating may have other effects, including the significantly lower rate of intergenerational transmission of IPV (Islam et al., 2014). The variety of benefits including the association with less frequent justification of wife beating should be considered by the policy makers when formulating wife beating and IPV-related policies.

In addition to the main association between women’s reported participation in household decision making and their justification of wife beating, we document other associations that are important to consider in efforts to reduce wife beating and IPV. Many Bangladeshi marriages in impoverished settings are arranged for girls when they are in their teens (Johnston & Naved, 2008), but these are unlawful in Bangladesh. Previous studies found that women who got married young tend to have less power in household decision making and more likely to experience domestic violence in different settings (Islam et al., 2015; Islam et al., 2014; Jejeebhoy, 1998; Jensen & Thornton, 2003). The current study also revealed that women who got married at 18+ years were less likely to justify wife beating. This association suggests that proper implementation of the existing law (i.e., marriage is legal at 18+ years for girls) or increasing the marriage age for women may reduce the justification of wife beating.

Earlier studies showed that literate women and women from higher socioeconomic status experienced IPV and justified wife beating in lower rate than their counterparts (Bates, Schuler, Islam, & Islam, 2004; Dhaher, Mikolajczyk, Maxwell, & Krämer, 2010; Hindin, 2003; Islam et al., 2015; Islam et al., 2014; Khawaja, Linos, & El-Roueiheb, 2008; Rani & Bonu, 2009; Rashid, Kader, Perera, & Sharma, 2014). In line with these research, our study documents that women with higher education, husbands with higher education, and women from higher socioeconomic status are each less likely to justify wife beating. This association suggests that educational and socioeconomic inequalities should be taken into consideration when designing interventions to empower women and reduce the justification of wife beating.

Women having more children experience less IPV in Bangladesh (Islam et al., 2015; Islam et al., 2014). A potential explanation of this result is that women with more children are also older, and as they age they become accustomed to their husbands’ wife beating attitudes. Relatedly, previous studies have documented that the use of couple/male contraceptive methods is associated with increased female participation in household decision making (Hameed et al., 2014). Our study finds that the use of couple/male contraceptive methods is also associated with less female justification of wife beating. The use of couple/male contraceptive methods is a sign of female empowerment, and policies designed to promote this behavior may produce changes in the justification of wife beating.

In addition, the current study found that non-Muslim women justify wife beating less in all studied circumstances than Muslim women. While this association could be accurate, wife beating is discouraged in Islam (Ammar, 2007), and there are at least two possible alternative explanations: First, Muslim women may overreport their justification of wife beating, and second, Muslim women may disclose incidences of domestic violence differently than non-Muslim women. Regional differences in justification of wife beating were also found in the current study, which are not in a single direction.

Limitations

The limitations of the study should be considered when interpreting the findings. First, data were cross-sectional, and the study was unable to provide cause–effect relationships. Second, we used self-reports of participation in household decision making which could differ from objective measures of participation in household decision making. Third, the study only used data from women who were currently married, so the prevalence of women’s participation in household decision making and their justification of wife beating should not be generalized to all women in Bangladesh.

Conclusion

The study uses large population-based sample data with national coverage as well as multilevel analysis to demonstrate the association between female participation in household decision making and their justification of wife beating. The study demonstrates results that are significant for policy makers aiming to reduce the justification of wife beating in Bangladesh. Female participation in any of the household decisions of own health care, major household purchases, visits to family or relatives, and child health care should be promoted as it would lead to reductions in the justification of wife beating. Microfinance and other interventions that have demonstrated effects on participation in household decision making in other locations could also produce significant reductions in the justification of wife beating (Gupta et al., 2013; Kim et al., 2007). Policy makers should also consider the findings on age at first marriage, females’ and their husbands’ education, religion, parity, contraceptive methods, and socioeconomic status, including divisional differences at the time of formulating policies and programs. Further study is needed to identify the causal link between the justification of wife beating and domestic violence, but the results suggest that policy makers should consider interventions proven to empower women and lead to increased participation in decision making as methods that may reduce domestic violence against women.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Md. Shahin Alam and Md. Ismail Tareque contributed equally to this work.

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.

Funding

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

ORCID iD

Md. Ismail Tareque

Author Biographies

Md. Shahin Alam, MSc, is a research fellow of the Department of Population Science and Human Resource Development, University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh. His research interests include women’s empowerment, intimate partner violence, and public health.

Md. Ismail Tareque is an associate professor of the Department of Population Science and Human Resource Development, University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh as well as a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at Centre for Ageing Research and Education, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore 169857, Singapore. His areas of research cover health expectancy, disability, population aging, intimate partner violence, and public health.

Evan D. Peet is an associate economist at the RAND Corporation. Peet’s research focuses on factors driving the development of human capital and spans the areas of economic development, health, and labor economics. He is an applied microeconomist experienced with a broad array of econometric and machine learning tools for predictive and causal analysis. Dr. Peet received his PhD in Economics from Duke University in 2013, then completed a postdoctoral fellowship in global and environmental health at Harvard University before joining the RAND Corporation in 2015.

Md. Mosfequr Rahman is an associate professor of population science and human resource development, University of Rajshahi, Bangladesh. His doctoral dissertation examines the relationship between low age at marriage and intimate partner violence among young adult women in Bangladesh. His work encompassing intimate partner violence, women autonomy, unintended pregnancy, and maternal and child health have been published in top tier journals and have been cited by researchers across the globe. He has attended and presented several of his works in national and international conferences in home and abroad. He has been awarded several scholarships and awards for his outstanding research, teaching, and services.

Tanvir Mahmud, MSc, MPA, is a research, policy advocacy and development practitioner with 15 years experiences in governance and policy sector. His interest and expertise are in the public administration, CSOs & private sector reform, and developing new processes, programs, and learning initiatives for inclusive sustainable development. He is committed to serving as a thought partner with leaders to help them identify and remove barriers that get in the way of unlocking potential and achieving goals. He is dedicated to assisting individuals and groups to promote action research for connecting this findings with policy & development interventions to achieve excellence in ways that promote a collaborative spirit.

References

Ammar

N. H.

(2007). Wife battery in Islam: A comprehensive understanding of interpretations. Violence Against Women, 13, 516-526.

Bates

L. M.

Schuler

S. R.

Islam

M. K.

(2004). Socioeconomic factors and processes associated with domestic violence in rural Bangladesh. International Family Planning Perspectives, 30, 190-199.

Chan

Y. H.

(2004). Biostatistics 202: Logistic regression analysis. Singapore Medical Journal, 45, 149-153.

Counts

D. A.

Brown

J. K.

(1992). Sanctions and sanctuary: Cultural perspectives on the beating of wives. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Devries

K. M.

Kishor

Johnson

Stöckl

Bacchus

L. J.

Garcia-Moreno

Watts

(2010). Intimate partner violence during pregnancy: Analysis of prevalence data from 19 countries. Reproductive Health Matters, 18, 158-170. doi:10.1016/S0968-8080(10)36533-5

Dhaher

E. A.

Mikolajczyk

R. T.

Maxwell

A. E.

Krämer

(2010). Attitudes toward wife beating among Palestinian women of reproductive age from three cities in West Bank. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 518-537. doi:10.1177/0886260509334409

Diop-Sidibé

Campbell

J. C.

Becker

(2006). Domestic violence against women in Egypt—Wife beating and health outcomes. Social Science & Medicine, 62, 1260-1277.

Dobash

R. E.

Dobash

(1979). Violence against wives: A case against the patriarchy. New York, NY: Free Press.

Duflo

(2000). Child health and household resources in South Africa: Evidence from the old age pension program. American Economic Review, 90, 393-398. doi:10.1257/aer.90.2.393

10.

Filmer

Pritchett

L. H.

(2001). Estimating wealth effects without expenditure data-or tears: An application to educational enrollments in states of India. Demography, 38, 115-132. doi:10.1353/dem.2001.0003

11.

Fiske

S. T.

Macrae

C. N.

(2012). The SAGE handbook of social cognition. London, UK: SAGE.

12.

Gelaye

Lam

Cripe

S. M.

Sanchez

S. E.

Williams

M. A.

(2010). Correlates of violent response among Peruvian women abused by an intimate partner. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25, 136-151.

13.

Gupta

Falb

K. L.

Lehmann

Kpebo

Xuan

Hossain

. . . Annan

(2013). Gender norms and economic empowerment intervention to reduce intimate partner violence against women in rural Côte d’Ivoire: A randomized controlled pilot study. BMC International Health and Human Rights, 13, Article 46.

14.

Haj-Yahia

M. M.

(2003). Beliefs about wife beating among Arab men from Israel: The influence of their patriarchal ideology. Journal of Family Violence, 18, 193-206.

15.

Hameed

Azmat

S. K.

Ali

Sheikh

M. I.

Abbas

Temmerman

Avan

B. I.

(2014). Women’s empowerment and contraceptive use: The role of independent versus couples’ decision-making, from a lower middle income country perspective. PLoS ONE, 9(8), e104633. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0104633

16.

Hindin

M. J.

(2003). Understanding women’s attitudes towards wife beating in Zimbabwe. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 81, 501-508.

17.

Hindin

M. J.

Adair

L. S.

(2002). Who’s at risk? Factors associated with intimate partner violence in the Philippines. Social Science & Medicine, 55, 1385-1399.

18.

Islam

T. M.

Tareque

M. I.

Sugawa

Kawahara

(2015). Correlates of intimate partner violence against women in Bangladesh. Journal of Family Violence, 30, 433-444.

19.

Islam

T. M.

Tareque

M. I.

Tiedt

A. D.

Hoque

(2014). The intergenerational transmission of intimate partner violence in Bangladesh. Global Health Action, 7, Article 23591. doi:10.3402/gha.v7.23591

20.

Jejeebhoy

S. J.

(1998). Wife-beating in rural India: A husband’s right? Evidence from survey data. Economic & Political Weekly, 33, 855-862.

21.

Jensen

Thornton

(2003). Early female marriage in the developing world. Gender & Development, 11(2), 9-19.

22.

Johnston

H. B.

Naved

R. T.

(2008). Spousal violence in Bangladesh: A call for a public-health response. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 26, 366-377.

23.

Khawaja

Linos

El-Roueiheb

(2008). Attitudes of men and women towards wife beating: Findings from Palestinian refugee camps in Jordan. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 211-218.

24.

Kim

J. C.

Watts

C. H.

Hargreaves

J. R.

Ndhlovu

L. X.

Phetla

Morison

L. A.

. . . Pronyk

(2007). Understanding the impact of a microfinance-based intervention on women’s empowerment and the reduction of intimate partner violence in South Africa. American Journal of Public Health, 97, 1794-1802.

25.

Koenig

M. A.

Lutalo

Zhao

Nalugoda

Wabwire-Mangen

Kiwanuka

. . . Gray

(2003). Domestic violence in rural Uganda: Evidence from a community-based study. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 81, 53-60.

26.

Krug

E. G.

Mercy

J. A.

Dahlberg

L. L.

Zwi

A. B.

(2002). The world report on violence and health. The Lancet, 360, 1083-1088. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11133-0

27.

Linos

Khawaja

Al-Nsour

(2010). Women’s autonomy and support for wife beating: Findings from a population-based survey in Jordan. Violence and Victims, 25, 409-419.

28.

Majlesi

(2016). Labor market opportunities and women’s decision making power within households. Journal of Development Economics, 119, 34-47. doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2015.10.002

29.

Mann

J. R.

Takyi

B. K.

(2009). Autonomy, dependence or culture: Examining the impact of resources and socio-cultural processes on attitudes towards intimate partner violence in Ghana, Africa. Journal of Family Violence, 24, 323-335.

30.

National Institute of Population Research Training, Mitra Associates, & ICF International. (2016). Bangladesh Demographic and Health Survey 2014. Dhaka, Bangladesh: Author.

31.

Rabe-Hesketh

Skrondal

(2006). Multilevel modelling of complex survey data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A: Statistics in Society, 169, 805-827. doi:10.1111/j.1467-985X.2006.00426.x

32.

Rahman

Hoque

M. A.

Makinoda

(2011). Intimate partner violence against women: Is women empowerment a reducing factor? A study from a national Bangladeshi sample. Journal of Family Violence, 26, 411-420.

33.

Rani

Bonu

(2009). Attitudes toward wife beating: A cross-country study in Asia. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 1371-1397.

34.

Rani

Bonu

Diop-Sidibe

(2004). An empirical investigation of attitudes towards wife-beating among men and women in seven sub-Saharan African countries. African Journal of Reproductive Health, 8, 116-136.

35.

Rao

(1997). Wife-beating in rural South India: A qualitative and econometric analysis. Social Science & Medicine, 44, 1169-1180. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(96)00252-3

36.

Rashid

Kader

Perera

N. K. P.

Sharma

(2014). Wife beating: A population-based study in Bangladesh. Violence and Gender, 1, 170-175. doi:10.1089/vio.2014.0015

37.

Sambisa

Angeles

Lance

P. M.

Naved

R. T.

Thornton

(2011). Prevalence and correlates of physical spousal violence against women in slum and nonslum areas of urban Bangladesh. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26, 2592-2618.

38.

Schuler

S. R.

Islam

(2008). Women’s acceptance of intimate partner violence within marriage in rural Bangladesh. Studies in Family Planning, 39, 49-58.

39.

Schuler

S. R.

Yount

K. M.

Lenzi

(2012). Justification of wife beating in rural Bangladesh: A qualitative analysis of gender differences in responses to survey questions. Violence Against Women, 18, 1177-1191.

40.

Taft

A. J.

Powell

R. L.

Watson

L. F.

(2015). The impact of violence against women on reproductive health and child mortality in Timor-Leste. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39, 177-181. doi:10.1111/1753-6405.12339

41.

Tareque

M. I.

Begum

Saito

(2014). Inequality in disability in Bangladesh. PLoS ONE, 9(7), e103681. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0103681

42.

Twisk

J. W.

(2006). Applied multilevel analysis: A practical guide for medical researchers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

43.

Yoshikawa

Shakya

T. M.

Poudel

K. C.

Jimba

(2014). Acceptance of wife beating and its association with physical violence towards women in Nepal: A cross-sectional study using couple’s data. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e95829. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0095829

44.

Ziaei

Naved

R. T.

Ekström

E. C.

(2014). Women’s exposure to intimate partner violence and child malnutrition: Findings from demographic and health surveys in Bangladesh. Maternal & Child Nutrition, 10, 347-359. doi:10.1111/j.1740-8709.2012.00432.x