Young people’s attitudes towards wife-beating: Analysis of the Ghana demographic and health survey 2014

Abstract

Introduction Intimate Partner Violence is a global public health problem. Attitude towards wife-beating is a major determinant of both intimate partner violence perpetration and victimization. However, little is known about the attitudes of Ghanaian young people towards wife-beating. The objectives of this study were to assess young people’s attitudes towards wife-beating, and identify salient factors influencing young people’s acceptance of wife-beating. Methods Data used in this study were obtained from the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey. The survey was nationally representative and provides estimates for population and health indicators across the former ten regions of Ghana, including rural and urban areas. Data were analyzed with Stata/SE version 16. Results We found that 32% of young women and 19% of young men accepted wife-beating. Among young women, acceptance of wife-beating was significantly influenced by younger age, wealth index, low educational status, religion, the region of residence, ethnicity, frequency of reading newspaper and frequency of listening to radio (p < 0.05). Among young men, acceptance of wife-beating was significantly influenced by wealth index, the region of residence and frequency of reading newspaper (p < 0.05). Conclusion This study demonstrates that a substantial proportion of young people in Ghana accept wife-beating. Young women were more likely to accept wife-beating compared to young men. Acceptance of wife-beating was influenced by socio-demographic and behavioral factors. Efforts to end violence against women and girls in Ghana should focus on promoting girl education, economic empowerment of women and public education on laws that prohibit Intimate Partner Violence.

Socio-economic inequalities in intimate partner violence justification among women in Ghana: analysis of the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey data

“…Between 2003 and 2008, Doku and Asante 13 found that 39% of Ghanaian men approved of at least one kind of domestic violence against their wives. In 2014, another study by Anaba et al 7 found that 32% of young women justified wife-beating.…”

“…7 IPV is a major public health concern in Ghana. 7 There is evidence that at least one form of domestic physical intimate partner abuse was experienced by 27.7% of women in Ghana in 2016. 8 Economic violence was the most common form of domestic violence reported by women, followed by social C. Adu violence, psychological violence, physical violence and sexual violence.…”

“…Previous studies in Ghana have focused on women's experiences with intimate partner economic abuse, 14 women's approval of domestic physical violence against wives, 13 understanding the endorsement of wife-beating, 4 as well as young people's attitudes toward wifebeating. 7 There is a dearth of research on the socio-economic inequalities in IPV justification in Ghana. Using data from the 2014 Ghana Demographic and Health Survey (GDHS), this study examined the socio-economic inequalities in the justification of IPV among women in Ghana.…”

“… 6 Men have historically been the primary perpetrators of IPV against women, regardless of their religious, social or cultural affiliations. 7 IPV is a major public health concern in Ghana. 7 There is evidence that at least one form of domestic physical intimate partner abuse was experienced by 27.7% of women in Ghana in 2016.…”

Impact of socio-demographic and economic factors on intimate partner violence justification among women in union in Papua New Guinea

“…The prevalence of IPV justification among women in PNG was 68.9%, comparable to the higher prevalence of IPV justification (76.6%) reported by a previous study in Mali [ 39 ]. In contrast, lower rates of IPV justification have been found by previous studies elsewhere in Turkey (15%) [ 42 ], Georgia (19%) [ 43 ], and Ghana (32%) [ 44 ]. It is plausible that the differences in socio-demographic and economic indicators between countries could explain the observed differences in IPV justification.…”