Abstract
This article explores the experiences and perceptions of Lebanese women and men with economic abuse. Data were drawn from focus group discussions and face-to-face interviews with men, women and social workers. The findings reveal that Lebanese women experience many forms of economic abuse, including the withholding of earnings, restricted involvement in the labor force, and limited purchasing decisions. Inheritance laws and practices still favor men over women. Women tolerate economic abuse to avoid more serious forms of abuse and ensure family stability. Practical implications of the findings are presented.
Gender-based violence (GBV) is a public health concern that impacts the mental and physical health of individuals (Humphreys, 2007). It has also been recognized as a serious social and human rights issue affecting all societies. GBV is rooted in gender discrimination and is often condoned and codified through laws, institutions, and other social structures. It is not only a manifestation of gender inequality, but often serves to propagate it (Bott, Morrison, & Ellsberg, 2004).
There is ample evidence showing that GBV negatively affects the physical and mental health of women, causing headaches, physical injuries, eating problems, stress, fear and anxiety, sleeping disorders, and other problems (Campbell et al., 2002; Coker, Smith, Bethea, King, & McKeown, 2000; Equay-wuk, 2009; McCauley et al., 1995).
Despite the abundance of literature describing the prevalence and consequences of physical, psychological, and sexual abuse, economic abuse has been underexplored (Adams, Sullivan, Bybee, & Greeson, 2008; Fawole, 2008). Economic abuse involves behaviors that control women’s ability to acquire, use and maintain economic resources, thus threatening their economic security and self-sufficiency (Adams et al., 2008). This may take the form of forbidding, discouraging, or actively preventing women from working outside the home (Brewster, 2003), interfering with their ability to find employment (Raphael, 1996), controlling how resources are distributed or monitoring how they are used (M. A. Anderson et al., 2003; Brewster, 2003), or intentionally depleting women’s available resources as a means of limiting their options. This can occur in a variety of ways, including husbands maliciously creating costs, generating debts, and stealing their partners’ money (M. A. Anderson et al., 2003; Lloyd & Taluc, 1999). By limiting women’s financial independence, batterers can exploit the women’s vulnerability and establish complete power and control over them (Moe & Bell, 2004). This abuse may also involve preventing women from accessing educational resources; restricting access to funds to pay for food, clothing and other basic needs; and, sometimes, controlling the use of health care services and other economic activities (Fawole, 2008).
Economic abuse is often a risk factor for other types of violence. It has known linkages to physical violence, sexual exploitation, and risk of contracting HIV infection, in addition to trafficking of women and girls. It also results in greater impoverishment and poorer educational achievements, which consequently hinder women’s empowerment (Fawole, 2008).
A direct consequence of economic abuse is that the survivor becomes economically dependent on the abuser, creating a critical obstacle for many women who are attempting to leave abusive partners. In addition, a woman whose financial resources are being depleted by an economically abusive husband may suffer short-term and long-term physical and, possibly, mental health problems. Studies have shown a strong relationship between poverty and poor physical and psychological health (Brown & Moran, 1997; Lynch, Kaplan, & Shema, 1997). Low-income women who endure chronic sources of stress, such as substandard housing, inadequate food, and unstable income, have been shown to be at increased risk for depression, anxiety, chronic health problems, and poor general physical health (Dunn & Hayes, 2000; McCallum, Arnold, & Bolland, 2002).
The importance of conceptualizing economic abuse separately from emotional abuse and/or controlling behaviors was highlighted by the United Nations in their statement on indicators of violence against women (UNSTATS, 2010). A number of international studies have touched on this type of abuse. One study conducted in Quincy, Massachusetts in the United States, found that almost 60% of the women interviewed reported some kind of abusive control over their finances by their partners (Buzawa, Hotaling, Klein, & Byrne, 2000). In another study of nonphysical abuse rates in the United States, only 2.1% of men and women reported experiencing economic abuse; however, the researcher used a single item to measure economic abuse and disregarded another item, which might have resulted in underreporting of economic abuse (Outlaw, 2009). On the other hand, computations from the Demographic Health Surveys (DHS) worldwide revealed that women deciding on their earnings, a proxy measurement of economic violence, ranged from 1.3% in Columbia in the 2005 DHS to 27.2% in Malawi in the 2004 DHS (Macro, 2011) (computations by authors using statcompiler).
A few studies have been conducted in the Arab world on economic abuse against women. In a study that surveyed 2,410 Palestinian women in 1994, around 45% of the women indicated that they had been economically abused by their husbands in the 12 months preceding the survey (Haj-Yahia, 2000). A study in Jordan found that approximately 10% of women interviewed (N = 772) reported at least one form of economic abuse, including women’s forced surrender of financial rights, withholding money from women, male nonparticipation in household expenses, taking money from women and not allowing them to use money for their own expenditures. The study also found that women with a positive perception of their psychological well-being are at lower risk for marital abuse, which includes economic abuse (Hamdan-Mansour, Arabiat, Sato, Obaid, & Imoto, 2011). In an analysis of 2005 and 2008 data from the Egypt Demographic and Health Surveys, 43% of married women ages 15 to 49 reported experiences of economic abuse and the number of women deciding on how their earnings were to be used decreased over the years from 40% in 1995 to 20% in 2008 (Macro, 2011) (computations by authors using statcompiler). A study in Alexandria, Egypt found that among women who experienced economic abuse, 27% stated that their husbands forced them to beg for money, 25% were forced to borrow money, and 14% said their husbands refused to spend money on them (Kharboush et al., 2010). Another study conducted in Saudi Arabia in 2008 (n = 267 women) indicated that social, verbal and economic abuse are more widespread than physical and sexual abuse (Mokhtar, 2008). A recent survey on violence conducted by the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (PCBS) found a 55% prevalence rate of economic abuse among the population surveyed (PCBS, 2011).
In Lebanon, domestic violence is quite prevalent: about 35% of women who visited primary health care centers reported experiencing violence, most commonly perpetrated by their spouse (Usta, Farver, & Pashayan, 2007). Psychological violence (e.g., insults, humiliation or threats of harm) were most common (31%), followed by physical violence (e.g., hitting; 23%), emotional violence (e.g., threatening divorce or taking the children away; 14%), and economic violence (e.g., denying financial support; 12%). Many women’s agencies and feminist movements encourage women to join the work force in order to achieve financial independence, improved self-esteem, empowerment and, consequently, the ability to resist an abusive relationship. Currently, women constitute 24% of the workforce in Lebanon (Charafeddine, 2007). However, many working women reported having no control over their own earnings (unpublished observations of the main researcher).
The issue of economic abuse has not been adequately addressed in Lebanon or in the Arab world. This study identifies types and patterns of economic abuse present in Lebanon. It also explores some factors that may predispose women to such abuse, using data collected from focus group discussions (FGDs) and face-to-face interviews with women and men. This study may contribute to the development of preventative measures and interventions.
Adams et al.’s (2008) classifications of the types of abuse were consulted as a guide for framing group factors contributing to economic abuse. This divides behaviors of economic abuse into 3 different types: (a) behaviors preventing women from acquiring resources, which include creating obstacles to obtaining or maintaining employment or education, such as inflicting physical harm, denying women transportation to work, harassing women at work, and forcing them to hand over their salaries; (b) behaviors preventing women from using the resources they already have (e.g., denying them access to money or giving them a limited allowance and demanding to know how this is spent; this form of abuse also includes denying women access to joint bank accounts, use of cars, and other forms of transportation, and forcing women to beg for money; (c) behaviors exploiting women’s resources through directly stealing their money or depleting it by creating costs and debts. These classifications were adapted to local definitions and perceptions of economic abuse that could be considered distinct to the Lebanese or Arab context.
Method
A qualitative research design was used in this study. To identify economically abusive behaviors, the following methods were used in data collection:
Three Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) were held with 20 women waiting to receive services from the Lebanese Ministry of Social Affairs’ (MOSA) primary health care centers or from acquaintances of the social workers of the centers.
Face-to-face interviews with seven women selected as part of a convenience sample from public places, including grocery shops and cafes. Data from these interviews clarified and expanded information on economically abusive behaviors and reasons why an individual would accept such abuse.
One FGD with six social workers who work with women’s organizations or institutions addressing domestic violence. Social workers provided information that validated and supplemented the information collected from the FGDs and the interviews.
Face-to-face interviews with 18 men selected from a convenience sample of men in public places such as grocery shops, cafes, and streets.
Following a brief introduction to the study, the participants were asked to give informed consent. The researchers ensured the confidentiality of information by keeping the identity of participants coded and secured throughout the study. All participants consented to having the contents of their focus group discussions or interviews audio recorded. Ethical approval for this study was granted by the American University of Beirut’s Institutional Review Board.
FGDs and face-to-face interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim in colloquial Arabic. Thematic analysis was employed to analyze the data. First, coding was carried out by the research team by giving every statement in the transcript a descriptive code that reflects specific themes. Following that, the most recurring themes were identified.
Selection of Participants
The female participants in the focus groups were selected as part of a convenience sample by four social workers from the Lebanese Ministry of Social Affairs’ (MOSA) primary health care centers. Selection criteria for identification and recruitment of female participants included variable working status, religious affiliations, and age (20-55 years). A total of 20 women agreed to participate in the study; 15 were MOSA clients and 5 were acquaintances of the social workers. The women were divided into three groups: (a) nonworking women, (b) office workers (e.g., bank employees, teachers), and (c) manual workers (e.g., janitors, agricultural workers).
Women participating in the interviews were selected from a convenience sample from grocery shops or cafes. Women were selected using the same criteria as for the female participants in the FGDs. The research team approached 15 women, requesting their participation in the research, but only seven agreed to be interviewed. The reasons given for refusal were either not having enough time or lack of interest in the topic. Men were also conveniently sampled from public premises, mainly cafes, and were interviewed using face-to-face interviews. The criteria for recruitment included ever-married and age between 20 and 55 years. Twenty-five men were approached and a total of 17 men agreed to participate. Individuals were chosen from public places to ensure a diverse group of participants with varying opinions.
The social workers involved in the FGD were chosen from a convenience sample of five nongovernmental organizations that have been working in the field of domestic abuse against women.
Instruments and Data Collection
A questionnaire was used to collect sociodemographic information from the participants of the focus group discussions. A study guide consisting of standard questions was developed by the research team to conduct FGDs and the interviews. Participants were asked to give their opinions and perceptions about women’s work (e.g., the reasons women work, the advantages and disadvantages of women working). They were also asked to describe the amount of control they exert on household finances and the distribution of household expenses between the couple (e.g., which expenses are the man’s responsibility and which are the woman’s, how was this decided, and whether there are laws dictating these responsibilities). Finally, participants were asked to describe economic abuse (e.g., define economic abuse, describe behaviors associated with economic abuse, risk factors, characteristics of the economically abusive and abused, and available resources for “victims” and reasons the abused may accept economic abuse). The duration of each focus group was approximately 2 hr, while the duration of the interviews ranged between 15 and 20 min. Respondents in the FGDs were encouraged to speak about their own experiences or situations they had heard about. But it was left up to the interviewees to talk about their personal experiences, given the sensitivity of the topic and the public setting of the interviews. The social workers were asked to relay information about cases they encountered in their practice. Topics pertinent to behaviors and knowledge of economic abuse were probed in detail in the interviews.
Data Analysis
Thematic analysis was used to identify types of economic abuse and factors contributing to abuse. The ecological model, which views intimate partner violence as a result of many related factors (individual, relationships, community, and social), was adopted as a conceptual framework to analyze people’s perceptions of economic abuse (WHO, 2002). There was no information collected that would fit into the community category, so it was dropped from the analysis.
Results
Sample Characteristics
The sociodemographic and economic status of participants is presented in Tables 1 and 2. Most women were married for an average duration of 18 years and had between 2 to 3 children. Their ages ranged between 20 to 48 years and they had a family income commensurate with national averages, but their personal earnings were low relative to average individual income. The average national income per person in Lebanon is US$453 (US$458 for males and US$440 for females) (CAS, UNDP, The Ministry of Social Affairs, & ILO, 2008). Eighty-five percent of female participants in the FGDs and only 57% of the women in one-on-one interviews had incomes at or below the national average. Ten women were office workers or teachers, 12 were manual laborers, and five were housewives. The age of the interviewed men ranged between 21 to 56 years, with equal representation in the sample of manual and office workers.
Participants’ Demographic Characteristics.
Note: *In U.S. dollars. Data for men are not complete as most men refused to give such information.
Participants’ Occupation and Wages.
Types of Economic Abuse Faced by Women
All of the social workers who participated in the focus group discussion stated that they commonly encounter economic abuse in their daily practice, yet none of the men interviewed admitted subjecting his wife or sister to any form of abuse, including economic abuse. Only one woman among the 20 focus group participants and 2 interviewed women admitted to being subjected to economic abuse while being married. Yet, almost all of the participants (males and females) agreed that a great majority of nonworking women are victims of economic abuse. One participant acknowledged this abuse, stating that a husband “makes her ask for money so she feels disrespected.” Alternately, working women may be “spared from begging for money,” though they may not be spared other forms of economic abuse. Some men acknowledged that “there are men who put pressure on their wives and use their income.”
Following Adams et al.’s (2008) classification of economic abuse mentioned earlier, the behaviors revealed by the participants were categorized into the following types:
Behaviors Preventing Women From Acquiring Resources
Most behaviors reported by the participants fell into this category and included men forbidding their wives from working outside the home, interfering with their ability to find and sustain employment, or denying them the right of joint ownership of assets. A man can actively prevent his wife from finding or going to her job. “He has the jurisdiction to prevent her from working” or “discouraging her,” one woman confessed. “It is quite tough to continue working, he keeps reminding me that he is sacrificing his comfort at home and accepting people’s criticism for allowing me to work and for helping me at home, although he rarely helps,” one of the women reported about her own situation. Similarly, two men admitted, “making the wife drop work as the situation was not comfortable at home.” A woman’s ability to sustain her work may be jeopardized when she is constantly reminded of her “duty” to care for the house or children: “If she wants to work, she should be able to manage her house too”; “Many times I have to give up meetings with clients as the household should be my priority”; “I had to give up many opportunities for promotion if the working hours extend beyond the time when the children are back from school or my husband is back from work.” These experiences demonstrate how women could be restricted from self-improvement activities because of gendered roles.
Women are also denied joint ownership of assets acquired during marriage. “Many women pay house installments, although the house is registered under his [the husband’s] name.” Women may also be expected to give up their inherited assets “to her male siblings.” Three social workers shed light on the preferential inheritance and considered it to be one feature of economic abuse: “It is frequent to see that assets like house or land are inherited by males, whereas women get little cash, if any.”
Behaviors Preventing Women From Using Resources
This type of abuse usually occurs when men control and monitor how resources are distributed and used. Respondents reported abusive behaviors where women “have to beg for money” and are “at the mercy of their husband’s mood.” One woman talked about a friend of hers whose “husband doesn’t give her money, even for her children’s expenses, unless she agrees to have sex with him.” Another woman discussed a situation in which the husband stops paying expenses when he has a disagreement with his wife and only resumes paying household expenses when she apologizes to him and complies with his whims. Working women are sometimes “forced to surrender their earning to their male relatives” and lack control over the use of their income.
Several women talked about husbands who, as a strategy to prevent them from asking for money, “keep their income secret” while always complaining that their wives were “big spenders, although we are under enormous pressure to cut down on expenses.” Nine men labeled women to be “big spenders and fond of shopping,” which may reflect their use of this strategy.
Behaviors Exploiting Women’s Resources
This type of abusive behavior focuses on strategies used by men to deplete women’s available resources as a means of control. Participants reported that some men occasionally pretend not to have money, forcing their wives to pay bills, pressuring their wives to pay household expenses, or even use their wive’s earnings to purchase personal items. As one respondent stated, “The husband will say why should I pay, if you want to work you have to pay, you are supposed to be working at home.” Some men were reported to save their money while making wives pay for household expenses; or husbands may purchase land, apartments, or cars registered under their own names, refusing partial ownership to their partners. One participant mentioned that her ex-husband took her money to purchase a car for his sister, while another’s savings were taken by her husband to purchase fishing equipment for his hobby. Three women knew of women who, upon their husband’s death, were shocked to learn that their husbands had acquired many assets during their married life without their wives’ knowledge. “All of those years she has been paying for household expenditures and what does she get at the end? Nothing.” Similarly, two men admitted requesting their wives to get money from their birth-family to pay some expenses.
Reasons for Accepting Economic Abuse
The main reason reported by the participants for accepting these behaviors is that economic abuse protects women from facing other forms of abuse, such as threats of divorce, as well as verbal and sometimes physical attacks. “I don’t want to keep fighting, that is very stressful and emotionally exhausting too.” “They keep saying if you don’t attend well to your husband’s needs and secure his comfort, he will have a good reason to search for his happiness outside the marital house, this makes me sometimes give up meetings with potential clients, and I say to myself my household should be my priority.”
Other respondents felt economic abuse can be tolerated “to preserve the unity of the family and protect themselves and their children from painful separation in case of divorce.” Many women explained that they would rather face abuse than divorce in order to protect their children from the effects of the divorce. “Money is not an issue, but the happiness of the children is.”
Factors Contributing to Economic Abuse
The participants mentioned several factors that contribute to economic abuse. These were grouped into individual factors, family factors, and social factors.
Individual Factors
Several themes that could predispose women to economic abuse were highlighted by the participants. The first theme that emerged was the working status of the woman. Here, both employed and unemployed women could be equally predisposed to be victims of economic abuse. The participants described the economically abused woman as someone who “is earning more money than her husband” or is nonworking and “would be dependent on him for her food and clothing.” In either case, the woman could be a victim of economic abuse. As for her personal characteristics, she was considered to be someone “having low self-esteem” and “low self-confidence,” who acts in a nonassertive manner and has “tremendous worry about getting divorced.” In addition, she would be “prioritizing her family’s and children’s needs,” and can very well be the victim of other forms of abuse, such physical or psychological abuse. “He can hit her or make her life miserable to get hold of her salary.” The participants went on to describe the characteristics of the economically abusive man as follows: “He is most probably unemployed,” sick, or disabled. He would be “selfish, stingy, and has a weak personality,” “controlling and striving to prove his manhood,” and “prioritizes personal gains and financial benefits.”
Family Factors
During the interviews, purchasing decisions made at home and other family-related elements emerged among the factors contributing to economic abuse. Concerning the purchasing decisions at home, women participating in the three FGDs reported that they were consulted before the purchase of household items. Most women reported being in charge of deciding what to purchase for their homes and families: “My husband leaves me his salary as it is, and never asks me what I bought or why.” The majority of women stated that despite the trust placed in them, they consulted with their husbands, though the final decisions were theirs.
However, women and men interviewed separately indicated that the decisions regarding items purchased are usually made by men. Six women declared being the decision makers in the purchasing process, with or without consultation with their husbands. Two women said that although purchasing items for the household is a shared decision, they are the ones to concede to their husbands’ decision when a conflict occurs. One woman reported not being involved in the decisions made about what items to purchase for the household. Five men reported that they would take women’s opinions into consideration when deciding how to spend money only if the women were working and contributing to household expenses. One man stated that “the woman’s mind is not set to organize financial matters!” Only 2 men reported completely leaving the purchasing decisions to their wives. Similar information was revealed in the focus group held with social workers, who observed that it was usually men who made the final decisions on spending.
The items purchased using the women’s income varied according to the socioeconomic situation of women. Women in the middle-income group reported that their income was not used to purchase basic necessities, such as food, basic clothing, or family shelter, but rather to improve the quality of life or the living standard of the family. Working women’s salaries were used in several ways: education or development services for children, personal needs or “whims” (e.g., clothes; social obligations, such as presents to family members and friends), and more expensive but low-priority items, such as family vacations and entertainment, birthday celebrations, and family outings. Some women mentioned buying items or presents for their husbands using their own money, although this was not frequently done.
Women in the lowest income group declared that purchasing food and clothes for children were priorities for spending their income. Two participants always purchased clothing and food items for their husbands as well. This was followed by securing a good education for the children, namely university education, or miscellaneous schooling fees, such as transportation and uniforms. All women participating in this group had their children in public schools and universities, and all of them had sold their jewelry (offered by the husband upon marriage in Lebanese tradition) to meet a financial need, such as university fees or health care costs of an ill family member.
The results of the one-on-one interviews were different from the focus group findings. In the face-to-face interviews, all women, regardless of their social class, said that their income goes first to purchasing children’s items, stating that these items may not always be necessary. They also reported that they frequently contributed to food and daily family expenses, such as paying electricity or water bills. Two women of middle-income families said that their husbands do not contribute to the household expenses unless there is a large bill to be paid, which most often would be related to their children, such as school fees. Only one woman said that she keeps money for herself to be used in case of emergency and one (from the higher income bracket) said that sometimes she contributes to her parents’ and siblings’ income. All women interviewed declared that they occasionally use their money for the purchase of comfort and leisure items. Two out of seven women had to sell their jewelry to pay household expenses.
Almost all men reported that their wives contribute to the daily household expenses, including children’s essential needs. For them, a woman contributes to the expenses of the household by meeting the occasional extra expenses or by attending to her own needs. Seven men argued that women can help with the household expenses by economizing and restraining their shopping habits. Four of the men interviewed complained about their wives’ unnecessary spending. Three men commented that a woman’s jewelry can be sold to meet a family’s financial needs, because in marriage “we’re talking about the same pocket.”
Commenting on cases they encountered, social workers observed that the majority of working women’s income would be usually spent on “nonvisible expenses like food, clothes . . . while men tend to spend their money on more tangible things like land, houses. So ultimately, many women would find themselves owning nothing.” They have encountered several cases in which working women contributed to the costs of the family home, but this contribution never translated into property ownership. Women would feel intimidated to demand their name be placed on property or asset deeds.
The social workers noted that most women lacked power and control not only over their earnings, but also in everyday life. Moreover, they noted that economic abuse is frequently encountered in their daily practice. They commonly came across women whose husbands either did not allow them to work because they want to stay in control, or would request or even force them to leave work if their income was considered unnecessary to meet family expenses. Most social workers agreed that “most men would not approve of their wives’ work if they are not getting financial gain out of it.”
Social Factors
Participants identified several social factors that are conducive to economic abuse, among them: “deteriorating financial situation” in the country at large, “marriage for exchange of benefits,” and established traditional gender roles favoring male supremacy. Participants in the FGDs agreed that, “Men are considered powerful because they are the breadwinners, but even in families where the woman is the sole breadwinner she is not given the power.” At the same time, women are expected to be submissive, and economic independence might change this by empowering them: “When the woman becomes financially independent and secure, she will be rebellious.” Women are also expected to make sacrifices to protect their families: “She has to do this to keep the family intact,” “she will be blamed for breaking her family because of material things.” Furthermore, there was the issue of social pressure placed on men for working at home or for not being able to provide for the family, and the blame on women for not caring enough for their children or family. Moreover, there is a social stigma labeling women as over-spenders. Women are also considered unable to manage financial matters. Religious or cultural norms contribute to economic abuse by denying equal inheritance or equal resource distribution to men and women.
Implications for Practice
The majority of the participants recognized that economic abuse is a difficult problem with few solutions. Although most participants stated that it is the duty of men to support household expenses and women to contribute in case of need, they also agreed that when a woman is not working, “she has to seek work, if working then she needs to get stronger, and becoming more assertive.” Women may face a number of complications to resisting economic abuse. First, they may face divorce, and are likely to be blamed for the divorce as “money is not a good reason to break a family” according to prevailing cultural norms. Second, women generally do not have evidence to prove that they were abused and may also lack the financial means to hire lawyers for legal representation. Therefore, the solutions that have been provided to women who are subjected to economic abuse revolve around, to a great extent, empowering women and acquiring skills that would assist in self-development and confidence-building. Those skills need to be developed through women’s personal effort. None of the participants suggested that changes should be implemented at the community level, while almost all participants questioned the presence of resources or organizations that would address economic abuse. Also, a few were skeptical about the effectiveness of these organizations.
Discussion
To our knowledge, this study is the first to address the issue of economic abuse in Lebanon. Almost all behaviors reflective of economic abuse that were reported by the participants were mentioned in Adams et al.’s (2008) article, which also included several other behaviors that were not mentioned by our study participants. These other forms of abuse included demanding to know how money was spent, demanding receipts and/or change when money is spent, and keeping the person from having access to his/her personal bank accounts. These behaviors could have either been missed by the women interviewed or interpreted as the socially legitimized role and responsibility of men toward household financial management, and therefore were not recognized as abusive behavior.
On the other hand, there is value in assessing many of the behaviors reported here through a local, contextually appropriate lens. In Lebanon, traditional social practices prescribe that women need not participate in paid work, but if they do paid work, there is a social expectation, or even a sense of entitlement, that they will keep all of their earnings, while men are expected to financially support the entire family without question. Not surprisingly, the relationship between family dynamics and responsibilities and economic abuse was the most mentioned issue by both male and female participants. As shown by participant responses, women and men often had a different view of women’s economic participation and its financial value to the family unit. In fact, they often acknowledged the importance of financially contributing towards general household expenditures, especially for education and daily spending on household needs.
Economic abuse in the Lebanese context may better be defined as an arrangement where conflict arises because either partner contravenes the fair social expectations regarding the management of money or labor force participation as outlined earlier. One example highlighted in the text was that of a husband who purchases assets solely in his name, despite the fact that his wife regularly contributes to household income. This qualifies as abuse because it fails to acknowledge the wife’s contributions through the provision of a reciprocal stake in family assets. This might also manifest, alternately, if a working woman refuses to contribute her financial earnings to her family when they are in need or if a wife patronizes her husband for his inability to secure a high-earning job. This conception of economic abuse is somewhat different than typical formulations that state gender equity as men and women sharing an equal stake in work and financial responsibilities, as well as other household decision-making.
Still, this study supports the assertion that Lebanese social practices engender patriarchal norms, ones that scholarship points to as persisting within religious institutions, state laws, and other social institutions, despite the massive entry of women into the labor force (Faour, 1989; Habib, Nuwayhid, & Yeretzian, 2006; Shehadeh, 1998). The culture, faithful to traditional social and gender relations, still encourages women to bear the majority of household chores (Moghadam, 2001). Accordingly, as found by Beneria nearly 30 years ago (Beneria & Sen, 1981, 1982), the participation of women in household expenses has merely shifted their social and family status from the solely reproductive role to both reproductive and productive roles. As a result, women bear the double burden of work outside and inside the household (Habib, Myntti, Nuwayhid, & Merhi, 2008; Habib et al., 2006).
The prevailing social and cultural norms prescribe men’s domination of women’s financial resources. In many countries in the Arab region, male authority and control over resources are regulated and enforced by law, as in the case of marriage, divorce, and inheritance laws (WHO, 2005b). What is also particular, although not unique, to the Arab region is the male preferential inheritance of property and other goods. Although this may be dictated by religious laws in some situations, cultural norms also play a role in determining these social practices. For instance, Lebanese society expects women (both Muslim and Christian) to give up their inheritance— especially land assets—to their male relatives or husband. Such practices jeopardize women’s economic development and contribute to a status of financial dependency and poverty.
Regarding laws governing financial relations of the couple, almost all laws, civil or religious, agree that the husband should assume financial responsibility for the household, while the wife should help in case of need or the husband’s sickness or disability. In the latter instance, her financial contribution is considered a debt to be fulfilled by the husband when possible. These laws seemingly protect women from abuse, but they are difficult to implement. Many women are not aware of these laws, and women’s contributions to the household are often not documented, while social pressures may forbid them from claiming debts. Empowering women by making them aware of their rights and simplifying court procedures to encourage greater exercise of the legal system may help reduce the severity of economic abuse. Moreover, certain laws that enable economic abuse may need to be amended, especially inheritance laws, which presently do not recognize inheritance debts owed to women or women’s rights to property acquired by their husbands during marriage.
Women accept economic abuse for many reasons, many of which relate to their perceptions of their role in society and in their relationships. Studies in other parts of the world reveal that working class women are more likely to give priority to family matters over paid work, while professional and managerial women see work as more central to their lives (M. L. Anderson, 1993; Gerson, 1985). In our sample, almost all women, regardless of their career path, gave priority to their family by expressing guilt if they were working for a career or self-accomplishment. For many women, work is an obstacle to their duty as a homemaker. At the same time, a social worker noted the trivialization of women’s role in household chores; this professional believed that nonworking women developed a lower perception of their own worth, predisposing them to spousal abuse. As a result, women’s organizations may implement awareness campaigns that stress the importance of domestic work, its contribution to the family economy, and its role in enabling other family members to participate in the labor force.
Most solutions to this problem require large-scale social change, such as the shifting of gender roles, but Lebanese men seem to be resistant to this change. Many men consented to have their wives work only if they are able to manage their time or when children are older than 12 years, though few admitted forcing their wives to quit their jobs. As one social worker suggested, it may be necessary to start teaching gender equality in schools, showing pictures of men changing diapers on infants and doing housework, so that the next generation of men starts sharing household responsibilities. Evidence from the literature suggests that another approach might involve educating men about the value of having women take part in the decision-making process in households (Becker, Fonseca-Becker, & Schenck-Yglesias, 2006).
Addressing economic abuse may also require changes in values and practices of women. Too many women seem to acquiesce to a role of self-sacrifice dictated by society. As previously pointed out, the culture of devotion to the will of one’s husband and to the family’s well-being has not faded completely from beliefs and family practices (Jamali, Sidani, & Safieddine, 2005; Omair, 2008). Some women accept economic abuse because they believe that their roles as a wife and a mother requires them to make such sacrifices. Moreover, they believe that their family may appreciate them more when they fulfill these societal expectations. Compliance with socially expected roles should be respected, though it is also important to reflect on these roles and their negative consequences, so that they may be improved. As mentioned earlier, women may not be able to walk away from abusive relationships and may be forced to leave their jobs. If they do walk away, they may not receive any financial support from the partner—as husbands are often the perpetrators of this violence—and these women may have to bear the entire responsibility of supporting their children (WHO, 2005b). This may force female survivors of violence deeper into poverty and also create a cycle of poverty so as to gain their family respect (WHO, 2005a).
Finally, this study tackles an important issue concerning GBV by highlighting some avenues for assisting women subjected to economic abuse. It is highly recommend that laws be enacted with special remedies regarding GBV (UNICEF, 2000). There are a number of remedial orders that are used in many countries, including the “protection” and “bound over” orders, whereby a person informs a judge that he/she is exposed to violence and the abuser is then “bound over” to stop such behavior. Failure to do so is considered a criminal act for which the offender can be arrested (UNICEF, 2000). Moreover, women have to be aware of their constitutional rights to be able to make the optimal decision with regard to their status. Being aware of rights regarding financial status, dowry, marriage, and divorce can often protect women from exposure to all types of violence at home (Magar, 2003), including economic abuse. Nongovernmental organizations play a major role in redefining women’s traditional understanding of their roles in society, in addition to their human rights (Magar, 2003).
It was not surprising to find that the resources and organizations addressing economic violence are very few, since this issue has not received attention in Lebanon. Only recently has family violence gained attention. Even if these resources become available, many barriers stand in the way of women seeking help. Women are likely to face other forms of abuse in addition to economic abuse, all of which have tremendous negative effects on the psychological, mental and physical well-being of women. In such situations, women may accept economic abuse to prevent other types of abuse and, as discussed by some participants, women may agree to give up their financial rights to avoid conflicts with their partner or physical attacks. In addition, the presence of other abuses may cause feelings of depression, powerlessness, and helplessness, discouraging women from taking actions against economic abuse. Therefore, addressing women’s psychological health and empowering women may be an important first step prior to addressing economic abuse.
Limitations
There are several limitations to this study. The sample of FGD participants was drawn from the Lebanese Ministry of Social Affairs Centers and most were from similar socioeconomic backgrounds, thus limiting the spectrum of experiences of economic abuse. Furthermore, because of the convenience sampling of men and women for the interviews, participants may have been of similar backgrounds, which may have limited the pool of responses in the study. In addition, the men were interviewed individually, and their opinions were not subject to group discussions, which might have offered different insights. On the other hand, given the sensitivity of the topic, interviewing men individually might have resulted in more truthful responses. A further limitation of this research is the potential lack of disclosure of economic abuse, especially among those interviewed in public places.
Conclusions
GBV is a public health concern and a human rights violation and it negatively impacts both the mental and physical health of women (Humphreys, 2007). This study sheds light on economic abuse among Lebanese women, a problem that has serious implications for women’s sexual, physical and psychological health. Since the population sampled came from a Middle Eastern cultural background, it would be interesting to conduct further research to develop scales of economic abuse specific to this culture, since many of the Western definitions of economic abuse were not mentioned by the participants.
This study lays the foundation for further research to understand how economic empowerment of women could predispose them to economic abuse. Other potential studies could include exploring economic abuse frequency and levels among women based on workforce participation, identifying the potential relationship between women’s income and economic abuse, and exploring additional risk factors for economic abuse. In addition, future research should be designed to obtain more personal experiences of economic abuse, which may give more in-depth information about economic abuse.
Despite the skepticism that the participants showed concerning the role of nongovernmental organizations, their role in primary prevention of economic abuse should be emphasized. Governmental and nongovernmental organizations should take responsibility for helping women facing violence at home. NGOs can help in empowering women by raising awareness, providing them with information about their rights, and training them on how to document expenses. Premarital counseling is another valuable service that may enable women individually or couples together to initiate conversations about financial dynamics and decision-making before entering into marriage or other serious relationships. NGOs also have a role in advocating for changes to local laws so that they include articles specific to economic abuse, such as the establishment of fair arbitration proceedings. These organizations can also work with men to change their perceptions of women’s role in maintaining household resources and living expenses. Abusive men should be made aware of the detrimental effects of economic abuse on women’s mental and physical health, and also of its effect on the stability of the family unit.
In exploring women’s and men’s understanding of economic abuse in Lebanon, this study paves the way for future research and offers steps for both governmental and nongovernmental entities. Greater knowledge of this understudied topic is necessary not only to understand the prevalence and types of economic abuse, but also to understand its real-world implications and develop concrete solutions for women.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the Population Council for funding this research.
Authors’ Note
Kafa (Enough Violence and Exploitation) organization assisted in data collection for this research. The authors thank RouhamYamout, ZeinaGhantous, Mary Sweidan, and Marwan Khawaja for their contributions at various stages of the study, or comments on previous drafts of this article.
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) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The authors acknowledge the Population Council for funding this research.