Intimate Partner Violence after Political Conflict: A Qualitative Exploration of Risk and Protective Factors in Post-Genocide Rwanda

Background and Purpose

Risk and protective factors for intimate partner violence (IPV) are specific to local context, and it is important to understand the contextually relevant factors to develop effective policies and interventions (Watts & Zimmerman, 2002). A number of studies have concluded that individuals exposed to war or armed conflict are more likely to experience IPV, but there is limited qualitative research exploring context-specific factors for women in these settings (Clark et al., 2010; Gupta et al., 2010; Catani, 2010). In Rwanda, where nearly one million people lost their lives during the 1994 genocide, 56% of women have experienced physical or sexual IPV in their lifetime (Rwandan National Institute of Statistics, 2012). This study investigated factors that contribute to IPV in Rwanda 19 years after the 1994 genocide. The study explored the following questions: 1) How do male and female respondents describe the experience of intimate partner violence? 2) What factors are perceived to contribute to IPV? 3) What factors are perceived to enhance the ability to avoid violent perpetration of IPV?

Methods

Twenty-nine married men and 16 of their wives from rural and peri-urban communities of Rwanda completed semi-structured in-depth interviews. Married male and female partners were interviewed separately. The majority of respondents were purposively sampled as “success stories” from a local community agency that provides training and support for couples experiencing IPV. Interviews explored men and women’s personal experience as perpetrators and victims of IPV and the strategies and techniques participants had used to reduce marital conflict and violence. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed, and transcripts were used to code interview data into descriptive themes.

Results

Participants reported perpetrating and experiencing physical, emotional, sexual, and financial intimate partner violence. IPV was largely male-perpetrated, with some exceptions for emotional and financial violence. In addition to commonly studied factors such as alcohol use and patriarchal beliefs, respondents identified a number of risk factors for IPV unique to the Rwandan post-conflict setting. Participants reported that negative “social interference” related to ethnicity and neighborhood conflict exacerbated marital conflict, as did consequences of traumatic experiences during genocide. Anti-violence legislation, public shaming, and a desire to reduce poverty were noted as factors to prevent perpetration of IPV.

Conclusions

The findings indicate the presence of unique and important risk factors for IPV in post-conflict settings. These risk factors need to be considered in the development of policies or programs for IPV in these settings. The study findings may have implications for other populations affected by political or community violence in the United States or abroad.