Unemployment, Gender and Domestic Violence Trends
August 15, 2013
Employed men are more likely to be abusers. Employed women are less likely to be abused. Read more here. Why do you think this might be? Is this an important article for law enforcement and criminal justice professionals?
16 Comments
leave one →
CJS-360 Diversity Issues 
If a woman is employed, then she spends little time at home. Therefore, she is less likely to be abused than a woman who spends most of her time at home. This could be an oversimplified answer, nonetheless it makes sense that if a woman is not around an abusive man then she will not be abused. And, it can be assumed that a woman who is working would be less likely to be abused because she is more independent and would not fall into the patriarchal family system. As for the men, stress might be a determining factor in the workplace, inevitably leading to a hostile home environment. Monetary issues are commonly linked to domestic altercations so if the man works and the woman does not work it might cause some issues to arise. Nevertheless, any answer would undoubtedly be a correlation because there is not one factor that is the sole cause for this domestic violence. Having a high unemployment rate in any society is not a good thing.
While I do agree that financial stress can be a contributing factor to domestic abuse, I don’t think it is the only factor. I think there are many factors that contribute to the abuse cycle. Do you agree with the cycle of abuse? And if so do you think other outside factors, such as stress or money exacerbate the cycle?
To a certain extent, I believe the financial stress can add a new dimension to the domestic abuse.In order to break the cycle of abuse, the abused ones must take an action . I had seen women who were counciled and supported to get out of an abuse relationship but because of the psychological scars they remained shackled to that violent relationship.
I think the main aspect of men being more likely to be an abuser would absolutely come from the stressors of life and the build up agression that cannot be exposed or brought out in the work environment. This could also be an action caused by financial difficulties or jealousy of not being the “bread winner” in a family lifestyle. But nonetheless an employed women would not really have the time to be able to be the abuser, realistically after a woman works she has arrands and chores to do at home which will take up a majority of the time that they have before ending the night in abusing their significant other.
I agree with Jonathan Wadsworth’s theory about this study: he thinks that unemployed men tone down abusive actions to sway their partner into staying (so they can keep some type of income), while unemployed women are more likely to put up with abuse from a partner to keep a source of income. The unemployed woman (likely) no longer has the means to leave an abuser, while the unemployed man tones it down to keep their partner around. It makes a lot of sense to me, as people often put up with negative things in order to survive. Someone in a desperate situation will put up with more abuse and negativity to remain in a home where there is some money. I found it interesting how a small shift in unemployment rates can create a large shift in abuse rates. However, it makes sense. Money is a big cause of fights in relationships, especially when it is lacking. It affects every person uniquely, but can create strain in a relationship, and those with abusive tendencies might take it out on their partner.
Another point I found interesting is how at the end of the article it states that this information is from the United Kingdom, and likely will not be the same as results from a similar study from the Middle East or Africa (if/when there are studies similar available). It shows how different cultures are affected very diversely by unemployment. It mentions how in the Middle East/Africa, women are typically employed significantly less than men and also that it is much less acceptable to leave a partner. Unemployed, abused women are more likely to stay with a partner but maybe not because they need the income; their cultures are also much less accepting of divorce. They have less of a choice to leave than their counterparts in the U.K. It’s eye-opening to realize how much cultures differ from area to area, and the effect it has on abuse in the area. I think that small point at the end would also help people in Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice; it would show them that not all people have the views they have, and cultural views might prevent someone from leaving an abuser, or even from seeking help for it. I think it’s a good point, as people will stop and think about a person of a different culture before making assumptions about why they act the way they do and consider it might be a cultural difference.
I think this article is important for people in criminal justice and law enforcement because it can show them a correlation to keep in mind while they are helping an unemployed woman or dealing with an abusive person. It might make them think twice about why the woman has not left, or why a man has suddenly stopped abusing. Keeping up on studies and new information that relate to these fields is very important as it provides valuable insight into the people they deal with daily. It is very applicable to law enforcement or criminal justice professional-it might change how they view or act towards certain people they deal with, or help them better understand a victim of domestic violence or any type of abuse.
I don’t think there is any one factor that causes a man to be abusive or a woman to be abused. I think there are many factors that can contribute to this. The main cause is learned behavior. We have all heard of the cycle of abuse. When a boy grows up in an abusive household, whether he sees it or experiences it he is more likely to be an abuser when he gets older. When a girl is in an abusive household she is more likely to be abused by a partner when she gets older. There is also the factor of stress at home. Whether only the male works, or the female works, or they both work there is stress. Money, kids, chores, work, life, all of these things cause stress and sometimes it becomes overwhelming and abuse starts. Though every case of abuse is different, this article is good for people in the criminal justice field to understand the different causes of abuse. Domestic abuse can be very tricky to deal with and as professionals in the field we all need to be aware of new research, new laws, and ways to help the abusers and abused.
I can see the rationality behind the theory Wadsworth mentions. To me it makes sense that a man who typically (historically) is the financial head of the household over a woman would rein back any violent or abusive tendencies if he was in fear of losing the financial leadership he had possessed. I also believe that a woman who is being abused is more apt to staying with the man that is abusing her if she is financially dependent on that man. However I would also like to point out the fact that financial stress is not the only factor that contributes to whether domestic abuse occurs. Likewise financial stability is not the only factor that contributes to whether a victim stays with an aggressor in a domestic violence situation.
Like was mentioned by Megan in the previous comment, some cultures do not believe in divorce. Also fear of retaliation or further/worse violence may be a contributing factor. I feel that in order for this study to be truly effective one must first realize the experiment samples must come from all cultures, ethnicities, and backgrounds in order to get an adequate sample of why the abuse occurs.
Another factor to consider is whether or not domestic violence is more likely to occur under the influence of alcohol or drugs. If a man is not working and either cannot afford alcohol nor fears he would be unable to obtain a job if he had to pass a drug screening or similar exam for a conditional job offer they may be less likely to use the substances that cause them to be abusive.
I believe it is very important for all people in Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice to understand domestic violence is a very unique crime. Due to the nature of the victim being a close family member or spouse and the typical factors that constitute domestic violence it is important to realize its not the same as a simple assault between two strangers. Also I feel it is important for members of the criminal justice system to realize that although a victim may avidly advocate they want to stay with the abuser there may be a hidden reason not recognizable and I feel as criminal justice professionals it is important to work with victims to ensure they know the options to break the cycle of domestic violence.
Also in this study it talks about domestic violence between spouses. This would make sense in the financial aspect however is it possible that when unemployment rates in men rise and domestic violence rates in partnerships lessen because the abusive behavior is directed elsewhere such as pets, children, other family members? I am curious to hear what the CJS community thinks of this question.
I can see that this statistics being right. I mean if the male is an abuser and he provides for his family and the women does not work they will most likely stay in an abusive relationship because they are not financially stable to leave the situation. It makes sense that if the unemployment rates go up then there is less abuse. the male who is bringing in the money to the household might lose his job he is probably worried that the female in the relationship will not stay because he cannot support them anymore. And I can see if a women starts to work after not working they might hold resentment towards their abuser and maybe even abuse back in some way maybe not physically. This is a good article there could be more in depth about what else happens with unemployment rates changing. I would never have even thought about this topic and the outcome of domestic violence and unemployment rates. We also have to realize that there are female offenders too, they are not just the ones being abused. In the article it states that a third of the 5% of people being abused is males.
F.Barukzoy
Sept 9, 2013
I think, there are psychological and economical reasons behind these two statements : Employed men are more likely to be abusers. Employed women are less likely to be abused.
The psychological reason is that men would consider themselves as the heads of the household which gives them a leverage over women who don’t work . Men feel empowered and they’d naturally feel motivated to limit women’s autonomy. In today’s economy, it would be a difficult task for a woman to leave an abusive husband in spite of how often or how severely she’s abused. It’s easy to pass a judgement by saying ” well, why she doesn’t leave him”. It’s extremely difficult for an unemloyed woman to shatter the vicious cycle of domestic abuse . The employed women , on the other hand, feel free to make a decision in perhaps leaving their abusive partners, significant others or their husbands.
The financial stability can psychologically be empowering for a woman to leave and live a prosperous and abuse-free life. Therefore, a woman who works hard and have a solid employement may not allow herself to be abused. There are, however, women who are work full time but still living with abusive partners. Hence, we can not state with certainty that women who are employed are not being abused .
This article can be very instrumental to the law enforcement and criminal justice system to implement policies to improve a woman’s life against abuse through some forms of counseling designed by the city, county and federal. The employement office can work with the law enforcement communities to set up seminars, conferences , and meeting in the neighboorhoods.
I agree with Erin Spinks that the stress of life does build up in men. I think partially because it kills their manhood. I believe the violence could also stem from the lack of available jobs, education or opportunities that men face. Because discrimination and bias that are in our society that makes it that much harder for men that would be considered in different classes.
For men to see their wife, girlfriend or the baby momma go to work every day does something to their mental state. I also believe that domestic violence is a learned behavior. It is learned but seeing it done as a child – father violent against mother or parent against child. Children are what they learn and violence is frequent in and around the child, the child will think that is the way people are treated, therefore, growing up doing the same thing. I do think an employed woman can also be an abuser.
There are communication differences between men and women. If domestic abuse decreases when unemployement rates for men increases that might mean that the man and woman are communicating differently versus a woman being unemployed. I find that women verbally communicate more than men so if the women is unemployed maybe she has more negative verbal communication which might upset the man causing higher rates of abuse, and the man might feel like he is providing for the household (in a power role) therefore does not take preventative steps to keep his family together (it is a given she will stay).
Not saying this is the right way to handle things but I grew up in an abusive home myself so this is what I saw first hand.
The reason employed men are more likely to be abusers and employed woman are less likely to be abused in my opinion is simply because of power. Men who are the head of the house hold feel that they are in control. When the woman relies on his income she is subject to the abuse. Women who are employed don’t rely so much on the men. Men then rely on the women. They are less likely to abuse the woman working because that could jeopardize the income coming in.
This is a very interesting topic, but sadly this makes sense. A man that is working may feel powerful and therefore may feel he has the power to aduse his love ones as well. Perhaps he feels he has the right to abuse his loved ones because he is bringing money home to the family. The man of the home that is working hard for the money to suport his family may reseint the family for spendy his money.There are many different reasons as to why abuse happens in a home, but some men tend to want to be in control of their work life and home life.
Also men are more likely to aduse their family if they group up seeing it with in their child hood. the social learning theory explains that actions and beliefs are learned from the people children look up to. also children notice if an action is punished or rewarded. for example a father hits his wife and no one does anything about it this would seem to a chlld as an normal punishment on is mothers part. the child does not know the action on his fathers part is wrong and unethical.
employed women are less likely to be abused because they are contributing to the homes finantial needs. Women who work may have more of a sense of being an equal to the man of the home which gives them a sense of power and control.
I can agree on this. I can see men being less abusive when unemployed than a man working. A man would be nicer or at least try not to make things bad with his wife to keep the relationship as peaceful as he could while unemployed. A women unemployed I can see her being more abused than a women working. Some men feel like they can do as they please because they know the wife/woman won’t leave because she needs to be taken care of. Some women leave but there is others that don’t and will just put up with it. This is important because we have remember that this also happens in the USA as well.
These finding are particularly interesting because they contradict figures I read in a family violence class. The class I took had figures that were older but they essentially states that the home is more volatile when the male is unemployed because of the shift in power dynamic. The crux of the argument does seem to have validity since it makes sense, hence the saying “don’t bite the hand that feeds”. I’m sure there is more to the issue of domestic violence than unemployment but it is likely to affect trends, I wonder what a house of two unemployed individuals would be like? I would caution people from assuming correlation equals causation because there might be many factors that affect the data when the economy shifts.
I totally agree with Wadworth’s theory, how unemployed men will stay with employed women so that they can have a source of income and same goes for a woman. One thing I will add is that sometimes a woman might not leave the man also because she is scared of what that man could do to her if she did leave. If the woman isn’t home and is at work she will be away from the abuse, but when she returns home she will still be abused. Once a man is an abuser he will always be an abuser. Many couples have distress in their relationships mainly because of financial reasons, yes everyday life stress does happen, but if you struggle to make ends meet financially that will always be an argument ignitor. I agree with what bebe1958 said about how domestic violence is a learned behavior because it really is. If a young boy sees his father abusing his mother or grew up in a violent household, he will only grow up to believe that is how to treat a woman and will also create a violent household for his family. Many psychologist’s have stated that children are not born to be bad and abusive they learn to be bad and abusive.