Abstract
Cross-border marriages have been found to be associated with domestic violence due to the migration experiences of the couples concerned and the stress experienced before, during, and after migration, despite local and international legislation on domestic violence. A systematic review using the PRISMA Statement was conducted to examine the relationship between domestic violence and cross-border marriages among cross-border wives from Asian countries. Six databases—Taylor & Francis Online, Wiley Online, Scopus, Web of Science, Sage Journals, and Springer Online library, were used in the research which found 179 articles for eligibility and 58 articles were finally used in the review. To be included, studies must have addressed domestic violence and cross-border marriage among Asians, report qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods, addressed the RQs, been published in polished English between 2010 and 2020 and published in a reputable journal with high impact factor. The systematic review found that immigration status, citizenship, culture, language barrier, diversity/intersectionality, age, and economic dependence are the risk factors for domestic violence, which leads effects such as divorce or separation, racism, loneliness, loss of identity & inheritance, stigma, abandonment, and discrimination. Yet these cross-border wives resorted to NGOs, social & religious groups, and traditional beliefs as coping strategies. The review suggests that legislations on domestic violence should be amended to include a definition of the rights of immigrant women, and the plight of cross-border wives, which should be protected. It is also imperative to propose favorable laws and policies regarding immigration status and citizenship for these cross-border couples.
Marriage migration is a global phenomenon that has come to stay. Technology advancement and the increase in transnational migrations have led to the establishment of complex links and flow of migration between and within the regions of the world (Williams, 2010a), leading to marriage across borders. The term cross-border marriage was first used by Williams and yu (2006) to refer to cross-cultural and intra-cultural marriage across border due to migration. Cross-border marriage emphasizes the crossing of natural boundaries that differentiates this type of migration from political and economic across distance and not borders (Williams & yu, 2006). Cross-border marriage connects people through mobility across nation state borders and produce new intercultural and interethnic familial relations (Statham et al., 2020). Cross-border marriage has been argued to be used as an excuse for migration (Deniz & Özgür, 2021). Cross-border marriage in this study shall mean any international marriage relationship between a foreigner and a citizen of a particular country which results in one of the spouses migrating from their country of origin to the destination country. The word “cross-border wives” shall mean women married to a foreign national. The rapid expansion of globalization and transnationalism has made cross-border marriages a pervasive phenomenon (Chiu & Choi, 2020; Deniz & Özgür, 2021). Cross-border marriages have been plagued with domestic violence due to the migration experiences of the couples concerned and the stress they experienced before, during, and after migration. Marriage migration has become an increasingly prevalent phenomenon in Asia. As such, marriage migrants constitute an increasing share of Asian’s population (Yeung & Mu, 2020). This is because studies have shown that Asian men from Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan are seen to marry women from other Asian countries such as Vietnam, China, Bangladesh, and Indonesia. These women are believed to marry from those countries to improve their social and economic status and be able to fulfill their daughter duties in the families (Jongwilaiwan & Thompson, 2013). In 2017, of the 258 Million international migrants worldwide, 106 Million (41%) were born in Asia and 80 Million (31%) currently live in Asia (Yeung & Mu, 2020). Cross-border marriage is used as an excuse for migration (Deniz & Özgür, 2021). Since both citizenship and civil status is determined by state, cross-border marriage in this context is considered essentially different from other types of marriages (Jashari et al., 2021), but threatened by discrimination and regarded socially unacceptable due to differences in culture and social status (Ryabov & Zhang, 2019). Thus, as a form of exclusion, migrants were counted, registered, finger-printed, and deported enmassed in some countries (de Hart, 2019). Cross-border marriage occurs through the assistance of international marriage brokers or through social media networks (Murphy et al., 2011). Cross-border marriage has been part of women’s quest for personal happiness (Chang, 2016, 2020) and whether these cross-border wives ever get happiness is something different depending on their various experiences (Huang, 2020). Thus, combining business and network adds strain or tensions to these marriage relationships (Sha, 2020). Sense of belonging and seeking a future has been argued through qualitative data to contribute to stress and distress to women migrant (Straiton et al., 2017). According to United Population Fund, almost half the immigrants are women and girls forming a significant proportion of economic migrants (Statham et al., 2020). Studies reveal that they migrate to Western countries or developed Asian countries in search of lower occupations or marriage (Hoang & Yeoh, 2015; Pongthippat et al., 2020). Although migrant women engage in cross-border marriages to redefine themselves as wives and gain a respectable marital status, yet they go through a lot of domestic violence to maintain that status and strained situations like discrimination and continuous economic problems (Pongthippat et al., 2020; Statham et al., 2020). Constable, (2005) reported that in a transnational marriage, people imagine themselves as being in a different social geographical location leading to mental health problems (Straiton et al., 2017, 2019). Migration is associated with several stress factors such as inaccessibility to health care services, language barriers, discrimination, lack of social support, and employment opportunities (Deniz & Özgür, 2021; Tang & Wang, 2011; Williams & yu, 2006). Most women might not have known their spouses well before they got married hence increasing risk of domestic violence and mental health problems (Fernandez & Jensen, 2014). Destroying these women’s hopes and expectations in marriage leading to neglect constitutes domestic violence as it soon forces them into isolation (Anitha, 2019; Anitha et al., 2018). These cross-border wives are effectively stripped of their “social body” and expected to take on a completely new identity in which their old self has no part (Kapur & Zajicek, 2018).
Despite local and international legislation on domestic violence, the problem persists. Cases of domestic violence are a global phenomenon as it cuts across all nations of the world (Mazza et al., 2020; Tandon, 2020; vora et al., 2020). Even in Asian communities, domestic violence and its effects on victims are the same, especially involving cross-border relationships (Kapur & Zajicek, 2018; Raj & Silverman, 2002; Wagman et al., 2018). It is estimated that each year 1.3 million women in the United State had been battered, making it one in four women experiencing domestic violence in their lifetime (Kapur & Zajicek, 2018) and by their intimate partner, and a woman is killed by her intimate partner every 6 days (Roesch et al., 2020). Although the experience and effect of domestic violence are relatively similar for women worldwide, they are different for cross-border wives (Williams, 2010a; 2010b). This is because cross-border wives experience legal and financial constraint to obtain custody due to low paying job offered to them despite their educational qualifications (Kim, 2010, 2014; Kim et al., 2016). Research have revealed that these cross-border wives also experience uncertainties to citizenship both legal, grant of right to residence, work welfare, lack protection from state, and social citizenship (Tschirhart, Diaz, & Ottersen, 2019; Williams & yu, 2006). They are also vulnerable to abandonment (Roy et al., 2019; Sha, 2020), racism(Collet, 2012; Decimo, 2020; Tschirhart, Diaz, & Ottersen, 2019), they try their best to be responsible daughters to their families in their countries (Jongwilaiwan & Thompson, 2013; Straiton et al., 2019). They also risk revocation of their visa where the husband is the donor (Roy et al., 2019) and soon become homeless (Sha, 2020) hence prone to all manner of abuse which is a risk factor for them (Bélanger & Haemmerli, 2019; Moses & Woesthoff, 2019). Because they are far from home, they do not have a voice in the destination country as such when they are domestically violated, the citizens tend to overlook than help them (Carver, 2016; Williams, 2010b; Williams & yu, 2006). This research systematically reviewed the relationship between domestic violence and cross-border marriages amongst Asians, based on existing literature on the subject. Most of the literatures written and reviewed were empirically researched, and only a few used other methods apart from the qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods, documenting the lived experiences of the migrants or cross-border wives. Also, only a few of these studies explicitly focus on domestic violence in cross-border marriage as most of the studies examined issues of citizenship, migration, and diversity. In response to this, the focus of our study is specifically on domestic violence in cross-border marriages. A significant association has been found between domestic violence and cross-border marriage. This study will investigate whether domestic violence is related to cross-border marriage, factors causing domestic violence in cross-border marriages, how domestic violence affects spouses in cross-border marriages, and the best way to address the brutality. The study is significant because it is the first systematic review on domestic violence in cross-border marriage within Asian communities because it relates to the marriage between Asian women and other Asian men or even non-Asian men. Although domestic violence is a global phenomenon, this study will expose the fact that those most vulnerable are immigrant women in cross-border marriages and that the risk factors for domestic violence in cross-border marriage are different from the known risk factors for domestic violence. This study will instigate national and international concerns about the plights of cross-border wives. Policymakers would make favorable laws and policies on citizenship for cross-border couples in the future to help address the problem of integration (loss of identity and loss of inheritance) and for researchers to research more on the best way to help address the issue of integration, especially for children of cross-border couples in consideration of their marginalized position.
In doing so, the paper discussed a systematic review framework on domestic violence in cross-border marriages, the PRISMA method of data collection and analysis, the results (risk factors, effects, and coping strategies adopted), discussion, limitation, recommendation, and conclusion.
Method
The reviewers used the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) method adopted by Shaffril, Krauss and Shamsuddin (2018) and Felix and Lee (2019). PRISMA which includes resources from six data bases—Taylor & Francs online, Web of science, Wiley online, Sage, SpringerLink, and Scopus were used to run the systematic review, eligibility & exclusion criteria, steps of the review process, and data abstraction.
In this study, PRISMA was used for summary of “literature search strategy and outcome.” It was employed for rigorous research into articles related to domestic violence and cross-border marriages to determine the relationship between domestic violence and cross-border marriage among Asians either in relation to Asian women married to other Asian men who are citizens of a country other than those of the Asian women or Asian women married to men from the west and other parts of the world. Research questions were formulated as follows:
RQ1. What is the relationship between cross-border marriage and domestic violence?
RQ2. What are the characteristics of domestic violence among cross-border Asian wives?
RQ3. What are the effects of domestic violence on cross-border wives?
RQ4. How do the victims handle their situation?
Eligibility Criteria and Exclusion.
Also, four stages were used in identifying each article from September 2020 to December 2020, which were later included in the SLR. The first stage was the search stage to extract articles from journals and conferences from the databases using the search string. Certain keywords were employed for each of the databases used. Key words such as:
(Domestic violence OR partner violence OR partner abuse OR intimate partner violence OR violence OR abuse AND cross-border marriage OR international marriage OR mail-ordered marriage OR mail-ordered bride OR migrant marriage OR foreign bride OR cross-border wife OR foreign women OR marriage migration OR migrant wife OR migrant bride).
The second stage was the screening stage, where out of a total of 1959 articles gathered from the six databases, 854 articles were excluded, leaving a total of 1105 articles. The eligibility test was the third stage, where after a thorough and in-depth study of the selected articles, a total of 926 articles were excluded leaving a total of 179 articles that were considered eligible. Eligibility means articles that could address the research questions and address issues related to domestic violence and cross-border marriage. The last stage was the systematic review stage, where 58 articles were selected to be included in the SLR. These articles addressed issues of cross-border marriage, domestic violence, and they were related to Asian women either married to Asian men from an Asian country other than their country of origin or Western men or men from other countries. The data abstraction and analysis employed are illustrated in the PRISMA flow chart in Figure 1. PRISMA flow cart (summary of “literature search strategy and outcome”).
Quality Assessment
After the selection process, the articles that were selected had to be put under the Quality Assessment test (QA) to determine the quality of the reviewed articles. The purpose of the QA was to ensure that the selected articles related to domestic violence and cross-border marriage were of high quality and to avoid biased research findings. This would help other researchers to strive for high-quality publications. Through this QA, important information from the articles included in the SLR was established, which we used in the review. And the DARE criteria based on four QA questions were formulated as follows:
QA1. Are the SLR’s inclusion and exclusion criteria described and appropriate?
QA2. Has the literature effectively covered all the relevant parts of the study?
QA3. Does the study adequately deal with domestic violence in cross-border marriage?
QA4. Is the research published in a reputable journal with a high impact factor?
These questions were answered by assigning scores as follows: Yes (Y= 1); Partially (p = 0.5); No (N = 0). After the assessment, the mean quality score (MQS) which is calculated as the total QA for each year ÷ number of papers for the year was evaluated and presented in Figure 2. Mean quality score of the quality assessment.
The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Studies in Meta-Analyses.
Note. The NOS scale contains 8 items within 3 domains with a maximum of 9 score. The 3 domains are selection, comparability, and exposure. The score 7–9 has high quality, 4–6 high risk and 0–3 very high risk of bias. To determine the quality of the studies, the study must have theoretical or conceptual definition of the main variable, operational definition of the variable, definite research design, sample design and samples, reliability and validity evidence in quantitative studies or trustworthiness, credibility & dependability in qualitative studies, data analysis, implication for practice and policy with specific topic (Acosta et al., 2020; Appelbaum et al., 2018; Kazak, 2018; Levitt et al., 2018). Case controls were used. For selection to have a complete 4 stars, it must have included domestic violence as one of its main variables and for exposure to have complete 3 stars, the study must have specifically addressed implication for practice and policy as distinct topics.
Results
Findings Organized According to Themes and Sub-Themes.
Critical Findings.
Implications for Practice and Procedure and Research.
Risk Factor of Domestic Violence
Immigration Status/Citizenship
A total (n = 31) studies focused on institutional and legislative restrictions in immigration requirements and citizenship rights of immigrant spouses where it was reported to fuel aggressive behaviors, which creates tension and frustration leading to domestic violence or abuse in most cross-border marriages (Huang, 2020; Statham et al., 2020; Wemyss et al., 2017). Researchers opined that tension and frustrations caused fiction among couples and where the husband’s ego is challenged, violence ensured (Choi & Cheung, 2017; Deniz & Özgür, 2021; Rai & Choi, 2018). In Korea, for instance, a migrant woman must undergo a morality test to gain citizenship (Kim & Kim, 2020) and the interpretation of what constitutes morality became increasingly strict. Other studies disclosed that different test has been used by countries to determine genuineness of marriage for cross-border couples to grant citizenship. In Danish, 7 years (Fernandez, 2019; Fernandez & Jensen, 2014; Kim & Vang, 2020); in Canada, consummation (Challborn & Harder, 2019). This is because the naturalization status granted can be revoked upon divorce. As such, while the women struggle for immigration rights, the husbands and in-laws acted as informal gatekeepers in facilitating denial of cross-border wives’ access to Korean citizenship (Ryabov & Zhang, 2019; Zhang & Yeoh, 2020).
Studies also described other immigration policies and restrictions on citizenship rights such as right to residency status by country, Taiwan imposed 3 years of immigration restriction, United Kingdom 1 year, China 5 years, Korea 7 years upon being granted conditional residency status (Williams & yu, 2006; Yu & Chen, 2018); dependence status where a qualitative finding revealed that men use deportation as a threat to the woman and her children to cage her and make her more vulnerable to domestic violence (Raj et al., 2019; Raj & Silverman, 2002; Tang & Wang, 2014); immigration flows restrictions (Carver, 2016); minimum available amount in a bank account to obtain a dependent status; in America, a K–1 or fiancée visa is issued with the condition that the couple marries within 90 days (US Dept. of Homeland Security, 2017); citizenship after 3 years of residence for those married to American citizens and 5 years for those married to Americans holding legal permanent residency (de Hart, 2017; Stamper Balistreri et al., 2017) and policies of probationary visa all renders women prone to domestic violence in their marital homes (Akyuz & Tursun, 2019; Anitha, 2019; Anitha et al., 2018; Kim, 2010, 2014; Kudo, 2017; Qureshi, 2016).
Intersectionality
In this context, intersectionality is interpreted to include gender roles, sex, ethnicity, diversity, and patriarchy. Moreover, a total (n=23) article addressed intersectionality as a risk factor. Researchers claimed that the interaction between gender, race, and other categories of differences in life, social practices, institutional arrangements, and cultural ideologies and the outcomes of these interactions in terms of power breeds fiction amongst couple in cross-border marriages (Alexander, 2013; Belli & Loretoni, 2017; Jongwilaiwan & Thompson, 2013; Kwak, 2019). Other studies reported that intersectionality and the migration experience reduced the capacity of individuals to act independently making them vulnerable to different kinds of violence (Cheng, 2013; Chowbey, 2017; Hoang & Yeoh, 2015; Kim, 2010; Kudo, 2017; Statham, 2020). As such studies reported that negative attitudes towards migration and the violation of gender norms resulting from migration experiences of women often threatened the masculinity of men (Akyuz & Tursun, 2019; Chiu & Choi, 2020; Chowbey, 2017; de Hart, 2019; Fernandez, 2019; Jashari et al., 2021; Kapur & Zajicek, 2018; Statham, 2020; Statham et al., 2020; Wemyss et al., 2017) and when that happens, in other to protect their ego, men resort to domestic violence.
Language Barrier
A total of (n = 7) articles reported language barrier as a risk factor in cross-border marriage. Women in cross-border marriages often experienced language barriers when they arrive in the destination country. Studies found that lack of a common language or understanding of a new language affects communication between a husband and his wife and between the wife and the husband’s extended family whom she is expected to live with (Block, 2021a, 2021b; de Hart, 2017; Sha, 2020; Tschirhart, Diaz, & Ottersen, 2019; Williams, 2010b) and this communication gap leads to misunderstanding which give rise to domestic violence. Asian women have been reported to be shy and reserved and combined with language barriers, it makes them most vulnerable to domestic violence and affects their ability to seek medical care when the need arises (Straiton et al., 2019; Tschirhart, Diaz, & Ottersen, 2019). A qualitative study of Thai immigrants in Norway revealed that women have difficulty in accessing healthcare services due to language barrier and some husbands who offer to interpret demand something in return which often leads to abuse (Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019). Most often, couples did not speak the same language (de Hart, 2017), and due to this language barrier, women in cross-border marriages are silenced from reporting domestic violence (Chowbey, 2017). Sometimes the migrant wife would be asked to prove language proficiency before she is granted an entry visa despite being legally married to her foreign husband (Block, 2021a) and where she is unable to, she is denied visa thereby creating crack in the marriage which later results in violence.
Cultural Conflicts
Culture as a risk factor was discussed in (n = 24) articles. Value conflicts and cultural misunderstandings occurred in intra-cultural marriages yet were more likely to occur in cross-cultural marriages. This is because the expectation of adherence to traditional gender norms, which the wives initially hoped to escape by moving to modern, industrialized countries or never experienced while in their country of origin, now eluded them (Chaudhuri et al., 2014; Kapur & Zajicek, 2018; Kwak, 2019; Statham, 2020; Yeoh et al., 2013, 2017). Research had shown that women in cross-border marriages narrated how their husbands and sometimes marriage brokers taught them how to be good wives (Lin, 2018; Liu, 2019; Williams, 2010a, 2010b; Williams & yu, 2006), such as doing housework, cooking, learning and speaking the local language as well as managing family life. They were also taught not to have strong opinions, treat their husbands as the head of the household, and surrendering their rights as individuals in the marriage (Chatterjee & Desai, 2020; Jashari et al., 2021; Lin, 2018; Williams & yu, 2006). The cross-border wives went through domestic violence due to these cultural misunderstandings over her obligations as a “dutiful daughter” caring and providing for her family in her home country and how to include her children in this partnership (Statham, 2020). Research found that these cultural conflict and misunderstandings often results in divorce because men fail to understand why a Thai woman should send money to her home country (Straiton et al., 2019; Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019).
Racism
A total (n = 8) articles mentioned racism as a cause of domestic violence in cross-border marriages. Racism against members of a minority group of varying forms is a feature of every country which may manifest in the form of neglect when the majority population stereotypes domestic violence as “an inherent part” of its culture (Cheng, 2013; Kim, 2010; Shabbar, 2012; Williams, 2010a, 2010b). Studies reported that a cultural stereotype can allow the majority population to downplay the effects of domestic violence by assuming that the victims find it “normal” (Alexander, 2013; Collet, 2012; de Hart, 2019; Decimo, 2020; Fernandez, 2019; Kwak, 2019). It was found that the incidence of domestic violence is not necessarily greater in immigrant communities’ but that its effects are exacerbated by the marginal position of immigrant women (Williams & yu, 2006). As such, research found that both partners in the cross-border marriage relationship face racist ideologies about socially appropriate relationships (Alexander, 2013; Tang & Wang, 2011).
Financial and Economic Dependence
Financial and economic dependence was discussed in (n=11) articles as a cause of domestic violence in cross-border marriage. One of the ways used in oppressing cross-border women is through economic and financial abuse (Block, 2021a; Chatterjee & Desai, 2020; Chowbey, 2017; Statham, 2020; Statham et al., 2020; Zani, 2020). Research revealed most immigrants are unemployed despite their educational qualification which forces them to take up menial jobs hence heavily dependent on the men (Zani, 2019, 2020), stereotyping them as “dependent” (Tang & Wang, 2014). Studies reported that in the home, they were not only silenced in the spending and control of resources but also restricted to domestic work (Manassen & Verkuyten, 2018). Researchers opined that women’s economic exploitation is common in cross-border marriage relationship (Choi & Cheung, 2017; Kabir et al., 2019; Qureshi, 2016; Sha, 2020; Williams, 2010b). Studies found that where the woman becomes independent and hardworking, the men do not only refuse to contribute towards household expenses (Chowbey, 2017) but such women become victims of abandonment in the long run (Sha, 2020).
Age Difference
A total (n=12) articles mentioned age as a risk factor for domestic violence among cross-border couples. Researchers reported that the residential and economic dependence on these spouses made it extremely difficult for those who married older men to free themselves from domestic violence (Challborn & Harder, 2019; Chang, 2020; Chaudhuri et al., 2014; Choi & Cheung, 2017; Choi et al., 2020; de Hart, 2017; Jashari et al., 2021; Lorke, 2019; Statham, 2020; Statham et al., 2020; Williams, 2010b). As such, when these men domestically violate them, they have nowhere to run to and cannot challenge his authority as such they accept the violence as part of the bargain because they are afraid of being deported (Tang & Wang, 2014). Other studies reported that the age difference soon affects their emotional and sexual bond with time leading to conflict (Statham, 2020; Statham et al., 2020).
Effects of Domestic Violence on Cross-Border Wives
Divorce/Separation
A total (n=12) articles argued that divorce/separation is the effect of domestic violence in cross-border marriages. Researchers reported that maltreatment, verbal abuse, and discrimination by spouses and family members later results in divorce or separation in cross-border marriage (Block, 2021a, 2021b; Statham, 2020; Statham et al., 2020; Zani, 2019, 2020). It was found that Chinese women are independently hardworking but potentially vulnerable to divorce and abandonment in a cross-border marriage (Kim et al., 2017; Kim, 2014; Kudo, 2017; Sha, 2020; Yeung & Mu, 2020). Studies discussed the fact that restrictive visa and long-term residence restrictions, limitations on property ownership, and access to social health and welfare rights in the West for foreign brides created a barrier for couples to live together, leading to divorce (Statham, 2020). A survey found that most marriages in Yiwu ended up in separation, so cross-border wives concluded that cross-border marriages are full of uncertainties (Sha, 2020; Statham et al., 2020). It was argued by a researcher that immigration policies created barriers between migrants and citizens, such as family migration, mixed immigration status, family bias, fear of deportation all lead to separation (Griffiths, 2021). Studies also reported that where the man is the sponsor, the migrant wife is at risk of having her visa revoked by her foreign husband because of domestic violence (Anitha et al., 2018; Roy et al., 2019)). In South Korea, for instance, a study revealed that 19% of marriages between Korean husbands and foreign wives dissolved within 48 months of the marriage (Choi et al., 2020).
Loneliness
A total (n=6) articles mentioned loneliness as an effect of domestic violence in cross-border marriage. The isolation or loneliness of migrant women worked against their capacity to break free from abusive relationships. Researchers opined that abusive husbands often used isolation as a tool to control their wives by limiting her spatial mobility, denying her access to a bank account, creating all forms of financial dependence on him, and preventing her from contacting friends and families, even to the point of her being locked in her home (Huang, 2020; Statham, 2020; Tang & Wang, 2011; Tschirhart, Diaz, & Ottersen, 2019). Isolation, leading to loneliness, researchers say is the most challenging difficulties or effects of domestic violence faced by cross-border wives and other vulnerable immigrants, making it difficult for support services to reach these women because they are not known but become known only after they have committed suicide (Lin, 2018; Williams, 2010b; Williams & yu, 2006). Studies have shown that culture shock like the new culture, language, food, people, and climate make these cross-border wives feel isolated (Tang & Wang, 2011). Other studies report that stigma also led to isolation by cross-border wives (Huang, 2020; Huang & Yang, 2018). Studies had revealed that despite cross-border wives desires for a fulfilling life, they experienced deep psychological anxieties and feelings of loneliness due to the pressures they faced daily to mediate and manage competing demands of their family in their home country and western husbands (Kanchanachitra & Chuenglertsiri, 2020; Statham, 2020).
Loss of Identity and Inheritance
The loss of inheritance was reported in (n=17) studies as an effect of domestic violence. Migrant women who choose to leave the marriage following severe domestic violence, the sanction hits harder on them not only because of their marginal position but because of the absence of family and community to support and argue their cases (Choi et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2017; Kwak, 2019; Manassen & Verkuyten, 2018; Williams, 2010a, 2010b; Williams & yu, 2006; Yeoh et al., 2017). In addition, other researchers reported that when a woman loss her right to reside in the country of destination upon determination of her legal status before divorce/separation, she risk rejection going back to her country of origin (Block, 2021a; Cheng, 2013; Chiu & Choi, 2020; Haile et al., 2020; Kanchanachitra & Chuenglertsiri, 2020; Kim & Kim, 2020; Lorke, 2019; Statham, 2020; Statham et al., 2020; Zhang, 2020). Hence, they face marginalization from both sides because cross-border marriages is condemned also by peers (Kim et al., 2017), with uncertain of citizenship after having been rejected by both countries. Studies reported that these women lose bargaining power and become outsiders without local knowledge with a suspected loyalty to their country of origin (Kim & Kim, 2020).
Loss of Inheritance
Loss of inheritance was reported in (n=18) articles as an effect of domestic violence. Cross-border women lose their inheritance rights to the lands they moved away from and often found it difficult or shameful to go back once deported. And even when they summed up courage to return, studies reported that there would be the problem of re-integration, especially when they return with foreign children whose father no longer want them or had refused custody (Kim, 2010; Kim & Kim, 2020; Kim et al., 2016). Researchers report that these women had to face double trauma, one of re-integration and the other accepting their children (Carver, 2016; Kim et al., 2016; Zani, 2020). These women, after being divorced, mostly become homeless (Haile et al., 2020) mostly because of poverty, domestic violence, and lack of access to housing due to their uncertain legal status (Block, 2021a, 2021b; Haile et al., 2020; Kanchanachitra & Chuenglertsiri, 2020; Kim & Kim, 2020; Lorke, 2019). Some researchers posit that once homeless, there are negative and positive experiences these women undergo (Haile et al., 2020; Williams, 2010a, 2010b; Williams & yu, 2006; Yeung & Mu, 2020) leaving them psychologically traumatized even after the violence have ended. Also, some countries upon divorce or separation revoked migrant women’s citizenship even after legally acquiring it. The minister of justice in Korea explained that the rationale for revoking automatic citizenship for migrant women was “to prevent foreign women from using marriage to Korean men as an easy way to gain Korean citizenship” (Kim & Kim, 2020, p. 429).
Stigma/Stereotype
A total of (n=6) articles discussed stigma/stereotype as an effect of domestic violence. Studies have shown that one of the most violent practices of discriminating marriage-related bordering practice is cultural and gender stereotypes, leading to a denial of migration and settlement of South Asian women in Britain as they are forced to undergo the “virginity test” to be accepted as brides (Cheng, 2013; Hoang & Yeoh, 2015; Huang, 2020; Jashari et al., 2021; Wemyss et al., 2017). Judges also viewed marriage migrants through the lens of marriage criminality binary and imposed stricter sexual moral rules on marriage migrants (Kim & Kim, 2020). They are stereotyped as mail-ordered brides, sex workers, or as a social problem, especially Thai women (Hoang & Yeoh, 2015).
Discrimination/Marginalization/Oppression
A total of (n=25) articles agreed that discrimination, marginalization, and oppression are the effects of domestic violence in cross-border marriage. Discrimination and exclusion had existed since time memorial (Griffiths, 2021). Discrimination was reported by researchers to affect social integration (Carver, 2016; Kim et al., 2016). A cross-border wife must learn the basic German language or the destination country’s language to obtain a visa to improve integration. Studies posited that immigrant women face discrimination in terms of employment, which force them to seek low paying jobs despite their educational attainment (Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019b). For Asian migrant women married to Norwegian men, they had to keep improving their Norwegian and job prospects to integrate reported de Hart (2017). Studies have also revealed that the quest for citizenship by naturalization for migrant wife in Korea leads to discrimination by locals against both mother and child (Kim et al., 2016, Kim et al., 2017), and the discrimination later leads to health challenges because of her inability to access health services like the locals (Straiton et al., 2019; Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019).
Abandonment
Only (n=4) articles reported abandonment as the consequence of domestic violence faced by migrant women in cross-border marriages. Abandonment means a situation where women were refused visas to return to their husbands’ country of residence or where the migrant women come into the destination country only to discover the marriage was a sham (Anitha et al., 2018; Roy et al., 2019). Studies revealed that in cross-border marriages, couples must wait a long time before obtaining a spouse visa to join their partner’s abroad (Roy et al., 2019). Usually, the waiting period is so long that it threatens the union hence leading the husbands sometimes to abandon the wives with their parents and never come back and even discontinue the visa process (Chaudhuri et al., 2014). Research reveal that these women later seek ex-parte divorce to free themselves from further violence from the husband’s family because some women reported sexual violation from elder men from the husband’s family, beaten, locked up, and denied the right to see their parents (Anitha et al., 2018; Chaudhuri et al., 2014; Roy et al., 2019).
Coping Strategies Adopted by Women in Cross-border Marriages
Non-profit Organizations (NGO’s)
A total of (n=3) articles reported non-profit organizations as a coping strategy provided for victims of domestic violence in cross-border marriages. Studies revealed that these NGOs are established, managed, and staffed by the local community where the immigrant live but are expected to serve as a man of providing welfare and social services to victims as well as help safe turbulent marriages from collapse (Lin, 2018). Researchers posited that Non-profit organizations (NGO’s) catered for the needs of immigrant women in areas such as the necessary cultural and sensitive services, language services, outreach, traditional homes, counseling, pro bono immigration services, and policy advocacy (Kapur et al., 2017; Kapur & Zajicek, 2018). Studies have opined that NGOs empower and integrate foreign brides into the destination countries (Williams, 2010a; Williams & yu, 2006) and that through them, foreign spouses learned from adaptation classes about education on local culture and lifestyle, language lessons, vocational training, and child-rearing as perceived by the destination country (Lin, 2018). They also provide multiculturalism in education, tourism, and daily life, all in a bid to address the problem of integration but unfortunately achieve “strangeness” as these cross-border women (Lin, 2018). However, unless the victims approach them or the NGOs use religious, cultural, and other identity groups to reach out to victims, silence and cultural and language barriers have been hindrances (Kapur et al., 2017, p. 3, p. 3)
Social Group or Women Social Support Service Centers
A total of (n=3) articles reported social groups or networks as a coping strategy adopted by migrant wives. Anitha (2019) explained that the works of women organizations in the United States support South Asian victims of domestic violence by effectively raising awareness, outreach, education, and political advocacy. These women groups and social workers were also found by researchers to produced publicity materials and developed partnerships with community organizations and statutory agencies as well as provide information and support services to women directly (Anitha et al., 2018; Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019; Williams & yu, 2006). Piper (2003) demonstrated that the self-help groups that have emerged in Japan as a response to the needs of immigrant women and cross-border wives have been important in stimulating the growth of the women’s refugee movement, and their empowerment has benefited society significantly (Williams & yu, 2006). Local authorities set up centers, for instance, in Taiwan, new migrants centers or multicultural centers have been set up to provide occupational training, language learnings, cross-cultural communication, and source of support for women, their husbands, and families, and they posed no threat to the marriage institution but provide effective advocacy and lobbying for women’s rights (Chee et al., 2014; Williams, 2010b; Yeoh et al., 2013, 2017). Other studies advocated that social networks are a source of advice, practical help, and emotional support for cross-border wives to help them cope with their domestic violence experience (Statham, 2020). They help support victims of abandonment in the quest for justice against their husbands since most of these women are poor without financial independence (Roy et al., 2019).
Religious Groups
A total of (n=3) articles mentioned religious groups as another coping strategy adopted by migrant women facing domestic violence. These studies reveal that some women resorted to religion to get away from domestic violence in their marriages since they are far away from home and help, being cross-border wives. Kudo (2017) opined that Japanese woman married to Pakistani men became Muslims and, in turn, organized religious meetings in mosques to share their newly acquired religious identity. For Thai women in France and Britain, research have shown that the domestic violence experiences pushed them to become close to their fellow Thai women and by reworking through marriage migration as a coping strategy where gender interact with their social class (Fresnoza-Flot, 2017). Thai women were further reported to use their Buddhist cognitive thinking and Thai cultural practices to cope with domestic violence (Fresnoza-Flot, 2021). Studies have reported that Buddhist temples are not only used by Thai women a place of worship but also for social activities such as centers for learning, worship, language school, legal and visa support services as well as shelter home for those fleeing domestic violence (Fresnoza-Flot, 2017, 2021). They have been reported to use their Thai music, massage, TV show, and movies a healing mechanism from domestic violence (Fresnoza-Flot, 2017, 2021). This informal network became an important source of mutual help in overcoming the difficulties they encountered in their marriage.
Cultural/Traditional Beliefs
A total (n=19) articles stipulated those cultural beliefs are another coping strategy. It has been internationally recognized that Buddhist religion and local Thai temples act as an important resource for Thai marriage migrants to address their mental health needs and often the site of recruitments for these studies. The Thai cross-border wives also modulated their emotional response through avoidance coping strategies responses such as distraction or drinking and active strategies such as utilizing Thai lifestyle, cognitive thinking, and Buddhist philosophy (Chaudhuri et al., 2014; Leinonen & Pellander, 2014; Straiton et al., 2019; Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019; Yeung & Mu, 2020). Activities such as watching Thai TV programs, listening to music, and singing karaoke, and gardening were some examples of their coping strategies. Others had chosen separation and re-migration to another country as a coping strategy for domestic violence (Chowbey, 2017; Fresnoza-Flot, 2021; Manassen & Verkuyten, 2018; Pongthippat et al., 2020; Straiton et al., 2019). In Sweden for instance, Asian cross-border wives visit temples which serve as places of worship and as community centers, language school, legal and visa support, and even shelters for women fleeing domestic violence (Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019).
Discussion
This study reviewed systematically domestic violence in cross-border or international marriage among Asian women. Cross-border marriages is the marriage relationship between two national which is different from other type of marriages between persons from the same national but from different ethnic group called international and transnational marriage, respectively (Anitha et al., 2018; Buvinic et al., 2013; Roy et al., 2019). The rigorous review from six databases resulted in 58 articles related to cross-border marriage among Asian women. The result indicated a connection between domestic violence and cross-border marriages. Within the scope of the review, three themes and 18 sub-themes merged. Risk factors for domestic violence, effect of domestic violence on cross-border wives, and the coping strategies adopted by the victims.
Migration puts women in a marginalized position where they become powerless and unable to defend themselves or speak out against domestic violence. Migration has its’ odd and constitute a major factor for increased coercion (Anitha, 2019; Anitha et al., 2018; Tang & Wang, 2014; Williams, 2010a) resulting in the loss of status and security as women lose their independence and social and economic place. This is because they are at risk from patriarchal, cultural/religious belief systems. They are invincible from protective agencies and social services (Williams, 2010a) due to institutional and legislative restrictions leading to their experiences of domestic violence. Even when they face domestic violence, research revealed that they are unable to report to the police until several years into the violence and even after they report, some respondents say no action is taken against the perpetrators despite legislations against domestic violence in those countries (Kalunta-Crumpton, 2017; Roy et al., 2019; Tang & Wang, 2014; Williams, 2010a). As such, the migration experience alone puts them in an increased position of vulnerability (Kapur et al., 2017; Kapur & Zajicek, 2018). Based on the studies reviewed, various stressors ranging from immigration status to citizenship, language barriers, culture and cultural demand, age, financial dependence, and intersectionality fuel domestic violence in cross-border marriages. Immigration status was found to be a complex structural procedure for immigrants compared to non-immigrant (Kapur et al., 2017). Also, this study found that the reasons why most women migrate and enter cross-border marriages are to upgrade their social status, financial considerations, poverty or running away from family conflicts, and obnoxious cultural practices as such when they encounter domestic violence they are unable to speak out instead remain in the abusive relationship and some consider it as the price of migration (Chaudhuri et al., 2014; Kapur et al., 2017; Kapur & Zajicek, 2018; Tang & Wang, 2014). Some women were found to be gullible, and the men use religion to cage them in abusive relationships even when they have been legally divorced (Chaudhuri et al., 2014; Kapur & Zajicek, 2018). For Thai women, cross-border marriage is a means to challenge and/or refuse the gender ideas of their country (Fresnoza-Flot, 2021). It is also a means to improve their living conditions and lifestyles and maintain vital relationships with relatives by sending economic and financial support home to their relatives (Jongwilaiwan & Thompson, 2013; Stamper Balistreri et al., 2017; Straiton et al., 2019). Hence, their cultural expectations of being a dutiful daughter, caring mother, kind to relatives, and being a giving person make them more vulnerable in their country of residence as they struggle under all odds to fulfill the obligation (Pongthippat et al., 2020).
These cross-border wives were found to have problem with access to legal and other social services due to their marginalized positions, language, and cultural barriers yet others are unable to access because of ignorance and unfamiliarity with the legal system of the destination country (Kapur et al., 2017). Thus, Asian women face prejudices and discrimination in Western societies and even amongst their own Asian countries (Kanchanachitra & Chuenglertsiri, 2020). For the immigrant wife to obtain citizenship in the destination country, she must pass the consummation and continual contact with her spouse test (Challborn & Harder, 2019). The language barrier, cultural differences, lack of legitimate legal status to give cross-border wives rights, racism being although the experience and effect of domestic violence are relatively similar for women worldwide, they are being tagged “the other woman” or “dependent”(Tang & Wang, 2011; Williams, 2010a; Williams & yu, 2006), age gap—usually the men are older than these women and exercise so much dominion on the cross-border wives making them total dependent increasing their vulnerability to domestic violence (Chaudhuri et al., 2014; de Hart, 2017, 2019; Lorke, 2019; Statham, 2020; Statham et al., 2020; Tang & Wang, 2014).
Spouses face documentation difficulties leading to refusal or denial of visa’s where the spouse’s identity cannot be sufficiently authenticated. To be entitled to citizenship, the migrant women must be legally married (Statham, 2020). Hence the male citizens’ spouses in some cases where they are the sponsors, threaten the women with deportation and some fragmentally challenge the status quo of both family migration regulations and the rights attached to citizenship (Alexander, 2013; Liu, 2019). Cross-border husbands held certain beliefs that cross-border wives could be easily manipulated and controlled, which later turns out to be the opposite. As such resort to domestic violence to assert masculinity (Liu, 2019). A case study showed how a marriage failed because the Chinese wife married for freedom, and the UK-based husband married her to find a traditional submissive wife (Constable, 2005 p. 176 – 80). Having to come to terms with their expectations and roles as wives in the new country, those cultural and value elements, they experienced usually caused conflicts and concerns for first-time mothers. This study found that Asian women are usually shy and do not want to elaborate, especially with language barriers and perceptions of their cultural trait, it makes them vulnerable and most times unable to seek health care services when the need arise because of the complex procedures and the need for interpreters for immigrant wives (Tschirhart, Diaz, & Ottersen, 2019) as well as the inability to report domestic violence. These cultural conflicts and misunderstandings often end in divorce/separation because the men failed to understand why a Thai woman should send money home (Fresnoza-Flot, 2021, 2017; Tang & Wang, 2011). All these increases cross-border wives’ vulnerability (Bélanger & Haemmerli, 2019) and constitute risk factors of domestic violence discovered in the review. This vulnerability faced by migrant women in cross-border marriages in areas of uncertain citizenship both legal—grants of rights to full rights of residence, work welfare, citizenship, and protection of state and social citizenship—which allows people to participate fully as active and independent agents in the society of the country of residence soon negatively affect them. East Asian migration policy makes marriage to citizens the only way for women to get full citizenship conferred to these “new brides” by the country (Williams, 2010a, 2010b), crates the avenue for abandonment, divorce/separation. Hence, women who are brave to migrate from their own country of origin often find themselves in a marginalized position in their new country of residence or marriage.
Cross-border wives vulnerability led to several consequences such as re-integration difficulties for returnees to their country of origin (Zani, 2020). Reason being that, as soon as they step out of their country of origin, most of these women lose their inheritance to obtain another identity in their country of residence where their husbands live (Chaudhuri et al., 2014). Hence, their home countries treat them as strangers. As such, going back becomes difficult because they are seen not to be trustworthy as such do not belong anywhere. “Belonging” can be understood as a deep emotional need of people (Williams & yu, 2006) the shared beliefs or identity that ties the individual to a political community, classically the nation. As such, when “belonging” is missing, the immigrants become traumatized both within their own country and abroad. The moment they step out of their country of origin, they lose everything. When they arrive at the destination country of marriage, some countries even demand the denial of their previous nationality as a basis of obtaining a new one for naturalization. In Malaysia, where dual citizenship is not recognized, cross-border wives lose both identity and inheritance (Chee et al., 2014; Tang & Wang, 2011; Yeoh et al., 2017). Also, a study of Bangladeshi returned migrants (Bélanger & Haemmerli, 2019) and Nepalese women reveals that they are stigmatized and marginalized upon their return to their country of origin because of the gendered attitude that women’s place is in the home. It thus affects their re-integration.
These women also experience the loss of a familiar social world and the ability to keep in contact with their natal home this is because such rights significantly depend on the husband and his family’s attitude (Anitha, 2019; Chaudhuri et al., 2014; Roy et al., 2019; Tang & Wang, 2014). Cross-border wives soon discover they had exchanged one set of traditional roles for difficult and hurting ones without the benefit of familiarity (Williams & yu, 2006). Unease caused by local women affects cross-border wives’ prospects of employment (Zani, 2019), thereby resulting in discrimination, oppression, and marginalization against the migrant wives and being tagged “marriage migrant” (Zhang, 2020; Zhang, 2020; Zhang & Yeoh, 2020). Therefore, these women confront bordering practices from the moment they start envisaging joining their spouse abroad, and it continues even after they cross the physical border (Block, 2021a, 2021b).
This study further reveals that these cross-border wives have a limited social network and spend most of their time with their husbands and their family members at home while in the destination country. Their husbands have more power, take major decisions at home, and decide when and where the wives could go. Women are not necessarily liberated from traditional gender roles due to East to West migration. They continue to play the roles of housewives and caregivers (Fresnoza-Flot, 2017, 2021; Kanchanachitra & Chuenglertsiri, 2020). Moreover, when they are unable to acquire legal status, the decisions made for themselves, and their children is made from the position of vulnerability. The moment these cross-border wives arrive, the State expects them to become integrated into local society, resolve value conflict that may arise on their own throughout their lifetime without assistance from the state. Research has revealed that neither there are allowances for personal heritage nor will the aspirations of these women be considered in the process. Due to their vulnerability, they are prone to increasing domestic violence and all manner of stressors associated with spousal abuse and conflict government of the country of residence for migrant women (Kudo, 2017, Tschirhart, Diaz, & Ottersen, 2019a, 2019b). The status of these “mixed-race children” is obvious. Although it had been argued that studies have yet to prove that the level of mixed-race children’s educational attainment is at a disadvantaged position and what they would become is lacking, the psychological trauma these children grow to face knowing their mothers were never accepted in the community they leave in greatly affects them during adulthood. More so, there is no opportunity of promoting the mother tongue, language learning, and the mother’s culture, ethnic identity, and heritage. As such, both mothers and their children do not enjoy such privileges. Asian immigrant women in cross-border marriages tend to stay in abusive relationships for a long time due to their desire to uphold their traditional values of glorifying suffering, valuation of family, and negotiation of their interest in favor of family interests (Buvinic et al., 2013; vora et al., 2020).
Domestic violence in cross-border marriage led to a high rate of divorce/separation, racism stereotype, loneliness, loss of identity, and abandonment. To manage these stressors and handle their domestic violence experience, these cross-border wives marriages manage these stressors, this study revealed that they adopted various coping strategies from seeking support from NGO’s and women groups to adherence to their religious and cultural/traditional beliefs. Thai women use their Buddhist temples as worship centers and centers for social activities. They gather around the temple and use it as community center, language school, legal and visa support service centers and even shelter homes for those fleeing domestic violence (Fernandez, 2019; Fresnoza-Flot, 2021, 2017; Kapur & Zajicek, 2018; Lin, 2018; Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019). Some Thai women also resorted to self-reliant and self-supporting mechanisms to cope with domestic violence. Some engage in massage sops, other took to drinking while yet others engage in Buddhist cognitive thinking, Thai cultural practices, Thai TV shows, Thai music, and comedies a mean of healing from mental and psychological trauma faced (Fresnoza-Flot, 2021; Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019).
Although NGOs established by government of the country of residence for migrant women (Kudo, 2017; Straiton et al., 2019; Tschirhart, Diaz, & Ottersen, 2019; Tschirhart, Straiton et al., 2019) women groups, social networks or organizations, religious gatherings and cultural/traditional beliefs have been helpful and used as coping strategies by cross-border wives, yet the services provided by the NGO’s and support groups are inadequate.
Footnotes
Author Note
The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the National University of Malaysia(UKM)
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: This study was supported by GGPM-2018-021, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.
