An Ecological Family Systems Model of Violence Against Afghan Women across Migratory Contexts

Background and Purpose

Situated within a complex geo-political and historical context complicated by international intervention, Afghanistan reports the highest rates of past-year physical, emotional, and sexual IPV against women among low- and middle-income countries. Forced migration and resettlement add further complexity to family dynamics and relational structures across contexts. This study sought to address persistent gaps in research and practice focused on intimate partner violence (IPV) in populations affected by war, political instability, and forced migration. The analysis drew from ecological systems theory in pursuit of a single aim: To delineate multi-level distal factors indicative of risk in the social ecologies of women who experienced severe forms of violence spanning migration from Afghanistan to the U.S.

Methods

The study received Institutional Review Board approval, adhered to global ethical standards, and was conducted in partnership with two community partners to further enhance the safety, privacy, and well-being of participants. The purposive sample included 19 adult women who originated from Afghanistan and ultimately resettled in the U.S. Eleven women had traveled to the U.S. with their spouse, while others arrived separately or without their spouse. All 19 women experienced severe IPV and most experienced in-law abuse. The framework analysis, an approach similar to thematic analysis, involved identifying inductively- and deductively-derived codes, and charting women’s descriptions of characteristics and conditions indicative of distal risk factors at different socio-ecological levels.

Results

The analysis generated an ecological family systems model of violence perpetrated against Afghan women in the home. The data illuminated over 40 distinct distal factors indicative of risk at the following levels (sub-levels/relationships): individual (female and male spouses), family (woman’s natal family, between-families, spousal family, mother-in-law and son, between spouses), and community/society. Several factors appeared at multiple levels, including IPV acceptance, interpersonal conflict, lies and deceptions, misalignments, and serious mental health problems. The analysis generated evidence of the ways in which risks of experiencing violence were shaped not only by women’s husbands and their ensuing relationships, but also by their own family circumstances, interactions between natal and spousal families, and perhaps most significantly, conditions and characteristics of the families into which women married, and husbands’ relationships with mothers. At all levels, distal factors appeared relatively static between Afghanistan and the U.S., highlighting their enduring nature.

Conclusions and Implications

Findings have broader implications for understanding, theorizing, and researching violence against women by situating IPV within complex family systems. By highlighting the salience of family in understanding IPV risk in Afghan communities across contexts, the results raise important questions about the degree to which this field of study acknowledges and addresses family systems. Even in highly individualist societies, people retain ties and allegiances to their natal families, and often gain connections, loyalties, and responsibilities through long-term intimate partnerships and formal marriages. It follows that natal and spousal family systems play a role in intimate partnerships marked by violence, and that these broader systems and dynamics warrant further attention and study in IPV research and practice, across populations and contexts.