Abstract
In India, physical and psychological abuse perpetrated by a mother-in-law against a daughter-in-law is well documented. However, there is a dearth of literature exploring the perceived frequency and acceptability of mother-in-law abuse or options available for survivors of this type of abuse. The goal of this qualitative study was to add to the in-law abuse literature by exploring men’s and women’s perspectives about physical and psychological abuse perpetrated by mothers-in-law against daughters-in-law in northern India. Forty-four women and 34 men residing in rural and urban areas of the Udaipur district in the northwest state of Rajasthan participated in semistructured interviews. Women, but not men, thought mother-in-law abuse was common in their communities. Psychological abuse was accepted in certain situations; however, few male or female participants agreed with physical mother-in-law abuse. Men were described as mediators in the context of mother-in-law abuse, and male participants thought that disrespecting a mother-in-law was a justifiable reason for a man to hit his wife. Both male and female participants described few options available for a woman experiencing mother-in-law abuse, apart from asking her husband to intervene or living as a separate, nuclear family. Grassroots initiatives and legislative policy should focus on addressing the immediate needs of women experiencing mother-in-law abuse and developing intergenerational interventions to educate men and women about the dynamics of law abuse.
Background
Domestic violence (DV), defined as any behavior within an intimate relationship that causes physical, psychological, or sexual harm to those in the relationship, is a common form of violence against women (Garcia-Moreno, Jansen, Ellsberg, Heise, & Watts, 2005; Heise & Garcia-Moreno, 2002). It is associated with multiple adverse health effects, including trauma, decreased self-worth, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, unwanted pregnancies, pregnancy loss, and sexually transmitted infections (Campbell, 2002; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2008; Chambliss, 2008). Therefore, preventing DV worldwide is critical for the safety, health, and well-being of women.
DV is a pervasive phenomenon among Indian families. The National Family Health Survey–3 (NFHS-3), a country-wide survey conducted by the Government of India, found that 30% of women have experienced physical abuse perpetrated by their husbands, with a prevalence as high as 56% in some states (Kishor & Gupta, 2009). In India, utilization of a traditional paradigm of DV (a man abusing his wife or female partner) does not provide a complete picture of violence women face in their homes (Fernandez, 1997). Abuse perpetrated by other members of the family, specifically a woman’s in-laws, has been described in the literature (Fernandez, 1997; Gangoli & Rew, 2011; Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005). In terms of prevalence, Raj et al. (2011) found that 26% of women residing in the city of Mumbai reported experiencing prenatal or postpartum in-law abuse, with 3.7% being physical abuse. In a recent study conducted in urban and rural areas of the northwest state of Gujrat, Kamimura, Ganta, Myers, and Thomas (2017) found that 20% and 22% of women reported psychological and physical in-law abuse, respectively. Multiple types of abuse have been described including isolation from friends and family, food denial, verbal abuse (such as yelling or cursing), scolding, and physical abuse such as hitting (Fernandez, 1997; Gangoli & Rew, 2011; Raj et al., 2011). Although any member of a husband’s family may be abusive, past work has highlighted that the mother-in-law is often the perpetrator of abuse (Gangoli & Rew, 2011; Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005; Rastogi & Therly, 2006). Studies have also shown that in-law abuse can occur concurrently with husband-perpetrated abuse (hereafter referred to as intimate partner violence; Babu & Kar, 2010; Kamimura et al., 2017; Raj et al., 2011). See Note 1 for an explanation of the various terms used in this article. 1
In-law abuse must be understood in the context of important constructs that frame the structure of a family within Indian culture. Indian culture is generally described as collectivist and interdependent, where individuals (especially women) are encouraged to base their actions not only on their own interests but also on familial and societal norms (Ahmed-Ghosh, 2004; Rastogi & Therly, 2006; Tichy, Becker, & Sisco, 2009). Furthermore, Indian culture places an emphasis on gender-specific roles dictating that a wife should be subordinate, obedient, and deferent to her husband and his family (Gangoli & Rew, 2011; Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005). Data from the NFHS-3 show that 85.6% of families in India define the man as the head of the household (International Institute for Population Sciences [IIPS] and Macro International, 2007) and Macro International, 2007. After marriage, many women move into their husbands’ homes and live with their in-laws, otherwise known as a joint or nonnuclear family. Traditionally, a woman’s in-laws, particularly her mother-in-law, play an authoritative role in her life after marriage, as a daughter-in-law is often seen as a child (Mitra & Singh, 2007; Rastogi & Therly, 2006). Despite the fact that some of these traditions have changed over time, gender inequities within the family unit combined with the importance of societal norms may impact how in-law abuse is understood and manifested in India.
Although past studies have described the prevalence and types of in-law abuse, several gaps exist in the literature. First, no studies have attempted to understand perceptions regarding when in-law abuse is deemed acceptable by the community. A few studies in India have shown that intimate partner violence is accepted in certain situations, such as in cases of suspected infidelity, if a woman is perceived to not be doing housework correctly, or if a woman is disrespectful toward her husband (Dalal, Lee, & Gifford, 2012; Go et al., 2003; Ragavan, Iyengar, & Wurtz, 2014). However, no such work exists in the context of in-law abuse. Second, although the extant literature has described options available for women experiencing intimate partner violence, no past work has looked at potential options for women surviving in-law abuse (Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005; Ragavan, Iyengar, & Wurtz, 2015; Visaria, 2008). Understanding community members’ perspectives regarding in-law abuse acceptability and options for survivors can both shed light on an understudied type of abuse and help advocates, health care providers, law enforcement, and policy makers support women experiencing in-law abuse. Finally, we have not found a study that compared men’s and women’s perspectives about in-law abuse, as the majority of past research has queried women. Men are an important part of the movement to end violence against women, so understanding their opinions is valuable in the context of initiative development and policy design (Barker, Ricardo, & Nascimento, 2007; Jewkes, Flood, & Lang, 2015).
Therefore, the goal of this qualitative study was to explore men’s and women’s perspectives regarding mother-in-law abuse in northern India. For this study, we decided to focus on the mother-in-law because past research has shown that the mother-in-law is a common perpetrator of in-law abuse (Gangoli & Rew, 2011; Rastogi & Therly, 2006). Our specific objectives included examining (a) the frequency of physical and psychological mother-in-law abuse in participants’ communities; (b) the acceptability of physical and psychological mother-in-law abuse, including the circumstances when abuse is considered justifiable; and (c) options available for women who are experiencing mother-in-law abuse.
Study Setting
This study was conducted in the Udaipur district, which is in the northwest state of Rajasthan. The Udaipur district includes the city of Udaipur as well as multiple surrounding villages, with a population of approximately 3.1 million. The languages spoken in this region are Hindi and a Hindi dialect called Mewari. This district is an important area to conduct research related to violence against women, as gender inequities in Rajasthan were reflected in both the 2011 Census of India and the NFHS-3. For example, Rajasthan reported literacy rates of 53% for women compared with 81% for men (Government of India: Ministry of Home Affairs, 2011). The percentage of women who have experienced physical intimate partner violence in Rajasthan is 40%, compared with a national average of 30% (Kishor & Gupta, 2009).
We conducted this study in affiliation with Action Research and Training for Health (ARTH), a nongovernmental organization located in the Udaipur district. ARTH focuses on improving reproductive and child health outcomes through community and hospital-based work. ARTH conducts projects in 49 villages and the city of Udaipur, serving a population of over 60,000. The organization operates three rural health centers and one urban health center, as well as village-based outreach centers.
Method
We conducted semistructured interviews with 44 women and 34 men who reside in rural and urban areas of the Udaipur district. The interviews were part of a larger qualitative study assessing perspectives on abuse perpetrated by a husband against his wife (intimate partner violence); full methods and data related to the larger study can be found elsewhere (Ragavan et al., 2014, 2015). During all portions of the study, we followed ethical precautions in accordance with the World Health Organization’s (WHO; 2001) safety recommendations for research on gender-based violence. Northwestern University’s Institutional Review Board and ARTH’s ethics committee approved all components of the study.
Designing the Interview Guide
We prepared the interview guide for women based on past literature (Gangoli & Rew, 2011; Kamimura et al., 2017; Raj et al., 2011). Prior to starting data collection, the guide was pilot tested with three women. Questions focused on participants’ perspectives regarding (a) the perceived frequency of mother-in-law abuse (e.g., Have you ever heard of a mother-in-law hitting her daughter-in-law), (b) perceived acceptability of mother-in-law abuse (e.g., Is there ever a situation when it is acceptable for a mother-in-law to hit her daughter-in-law?), and (c) options available for women experiencing mother-in-law abuse (e.g., What should a woman do if her mother-in-law is hitting her?). Two questions were asked for objective one, two for objective two, and three for objective three. We asked about two types of abuse: physical (defined as hitting) and psychological (defined as yelling, scolding, and not permitting a woman to visit her natal family as a proxy for isolation). We chose those specific definitions after discussions with both ARTH employees and the participants with whom we conducted pilot testing. See Table 1 for the initial women’s interview guide. Note that the full interview guide also explored perspectives about intimate partner violence, that data can be found elsewhere (Ragavan et al., 2014, 2015)
Initial Semistructured Interview Guide for Women.
After conducting about half of the women’s interviews, we designed the interview guide for men. This allowed us to use the content and themes collected from the women’s interviews to frame the men’s interview guide. The guide was pilot tested with four men prior to commencing data collection. As standard in qualitative research, the guide was reviewed after every 10 interviews and iteratively revised based on emerging codes. In addition, the interviews were semistructured as we often asked additional questions during interviews based on the participants’ responses (Patton, 2015).
Participant Recruitment and Data Collection
Participants were recruited either from ARTH health centers or village-based outreach centers operated by ARTH. The people who use these services are not different than the Udaipur district community at-large. We used a convenience sampling approach, stratified by rural versus urban residence, to account for fact that 75% of Rajasthan’s population resides in villages (Government of India: Ministry of Home Affairs, 2011). Inclusion criteria included being affiliated with ARTH (either as a patient or family member at a health center or as a participant at a village-based outreach center), between the ages of 18 and 60 years, and being able to converse in Hindi or Mewari.
Interviews were conducted by the first author (M.R.) and a trained interpreter (a female for women’s interviews and a male for men’s interviews). We conducted a two-step recruitment process. First, the interpreter approached the potential participant and asked if they would like to participate in an interview. Initially, the topic of the study was presented in a generic fashion (their experiences regarding life and marriage). Then, the interpreter brought the participant to a predetermined private space where the study was explained in more detail. This approach is aligned with the WHO’s guidelines for conducting gender-based violence research (WHO, 2001). Informed consent was obtained from each participant prior to starting the interview.
During the interview, the interviewer asked a question in English, which was translated into Hindi or Mewari by the interpreter. The interpreter then translated the participant’s answer into English. The interviews were semistructured, 30 to 45 min in length, and audiorecorded. We first inquired about intimate partner violence and then asked about mother-in-law abuse. The average time spent on abuse perpetrated by the mother-in-law was around 15 to 20 min per interview. Although we did not query participants about DV in their own homes, safety protocols were employed if a participant disclosed being a victim of any type of violence. Specifically, we offered the participant the opportunity to speak to a medical provider or an employee at an ARTH health center and explained that these individuals could provide resources and referrals. The interviews were completed from September 2011 to April 2012.
Data Translation and Analysis
We used an adaptation of Brislin’s seven-step model to transcribe and translate the audiorecordings (Lopez, Figueroa, Connor, & Maliski, 2008). A trained translator transcribed each audiorecording verbatim and then translated the transcripts from Mewari or Hindi into English. She then reviewed each translation with the authors to ensure conceptual and linguistic equivalence. Disagreements about language were discussed until a consensus was reached.
To analyze the data, an iterative, thematic analysis approach was used (Braun & Clarke, 2006). After the first 10 interviews were completed, the first author (M.R.) uploaded the transcripts into the Atlas.ti software package and coded each one line by line (Muhr, 2004). The first and second authors then discussed the emerging codes to discern core themes, began creating an iterative codebook, and reexamined the interview guide to see if changes were needed before the next 10 interviews. This process was repeated after every 10 to 15 interviews until data saturation was reached, when no new themes or concepts emerged (Guest, Bunce, & Johnson, 2006). After data collection was complete, the authors met to compare men’s and women’s perspectives and decide on key themes to include in this article.
During the data analysis process, we paid close attention to reflexivity, or the impact of knowledge construction, and how the researchers’ potential biases may have affected the way the data were understood (Patton, 2015). This was important as the interviews were conducted by a researcher of a different cultural background than the participants. We therefore solicited feedback from multiple ARTH employees who have been working with the community for years. In particular, they helped us refine both the list of emerging themes and the interview guides to ensure they reflected the voice of the participants. Engaging a variety of individuals helped us maintain an iterative and community-driven data analysis process.
Participants
Ninety participants were approached, 78 (87%) of whom chose to participate. Twelve people (eight women and four men) refused participation, 10 because they were busy, and two because they did not understand the study. No demographic information was collected on the individuals who refused participation. Of those who participated, 44 (56%) were women and 34 (44%) were men. The majority of the study participants were married and younger than 45 years old. Generally, male participants reported having completed higher levels of education and were more likely to be employed as compared with female participants. Table 2 provides sociodemographic information about the participants.
Sociodemographic Characteristics of Participants.
Due to rounding, for the women column, percentages add up to 101.
Due to rounding, for the women and men columns, percentages add up to 101.
Results
Six key themes related to men’s and women’s perceptions emerged from the interviews: (a) perceived frequency of mother-in-law abuse, (b) the acceptability of psychological mother-in-law abuse, (c) the acceptability of physical mother-in-law abuse, (d) the rights and responsibilities of a mother-in-law, (e) the husband’s role as a “mediator,” and (f) options available for women experiencing mothers-in-law abuse. Every participant discussed each theme at least once during the interview. Below, we describe each theme in greater detail and provide illustrative quotations from participants. As similar themes emerged from both men’s and women’s interviews, we present the two groups concurrently to easily facilitate comparison. During the analysis, we generally found few differences in perspectives based on education, age, whether a participant lived with her mother-in-law (or mother for men), or whether a female participant was a mother-in-law. Therefore, we will not include sociodemographic characteristics when highlighting individual participants’ quotations unless they are relevant to a particular theme.
Perceived Frequency of Mother-in-Law Abuse
The vast majority of women explained that abuse perpetrated by a mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law occurred in their communities. A woman said, “Yes, where I live they give a lot of trouble. Out of 100 mothers-in-law one is good and the rest are bad.” When asked about types of abuse, women described yelling, controlling behaviors, denying food, forced labor, and, less frequently, hitting, slapping, or beating. A woman stated, “Often, a mother-in-law will not give food to her daughter-in-law, or will just give her bad food and leftovers.” Another said, “They may yell at the daughter-in-law and say leave the home, you should do better work. Some are always angry and will also hit.” Only two women, both who lived separately from their mothers-in-law, thought that mother-in-law abuse did not exist. A woman stated, “No, in my community, the mother-in-law does not give trouble. They live happily together.”
In contrast, all of the men explained that in-law abuse does not happen in their communities. A man said, “I think this happens in some other households, but not in mine.” Another man stated, “I am not sure. I think I have read about this in the newspaper. But it doesn’t happen in my community.”
Acceptability of Psychological Mother-in-Law Abuse
Three types of psychological abuse were discussed with participants: yelling, scolding, and not permitting a daughter-in-law to visit her natal family (as a proxy for isolation). The majority of both men and women thought it was appropriate for a mother-in-law to scold or yell at her daughter-in-law if she makes a perceived “mistake.” The two most commonly cited perceived “mistakes” were being disrespectful (more commonly described by men) or not doing housework per the mother-in-law’s expectations (described by men and women). A woman stated, “If she makes a mistake, the mother-in-law can scold her or yell at her. If a woman has been sitting for a long time, then the mother-in-law can say ‘why aren’t you working.’ That is correct.” A man discussed situations of perceived disrespect toward the mother-in-law stating, “If a daughter-in-law disobeys or is not respectful, her mother-in-law has the right to scold and say ‘Do this, don’t do that.’” Another described, “The daughter-in-law should always obey her mother-in-law. If she doesn’t do this, it is her [the daughter-in-law’s] fault. In that circumstance, yelling is correct.”
The majority of men and women thought it was the mother-in-law’s right to scold or yell at her daughter-in-law. A woman stated, “The mother-in-law is older than the daughter-in-law and she should be able to say anything to the daughter-in-law. She deserves the respect of the daughter-in-law.” Another felt similarly, stating that a daughter-in-law is akin to a daughter: “Just like a mother can yell at her child, so too can a mother-in-law.” A man agreed stating, “Yes they can scold and yell. It is her right to yell at her daughter-in-law.”
Two women held a different perspective regarding the acceptability of scolding and yelling. One, a 23-year-old who does not live with her mother-in-law, thought a daughter-in-law could yell at her mother-in-law in certain circumstances. She said, “If we didn’t do something wrong and our mothers-in-law yell at us then we will become angry. If she is wrong, then we can yell also. If the mother-in-law can yell at us then we can yell at her.” Another woman, a 20-year-old who lived with her mother-in-law, was the only participant to state that a mother-in-law should never yell at or scold her daughter-in-law: “No, the daughter-in-law should be treated just like a daughter by the husband’s family. They should treat her well, what is the point of yelling?”
When asked about denying a daughter-in-law permission to see her natal family, the majority of women stated that this was never acceptable. A woman explained, “This is very wrong. What if it was her [the mother-in-law’s] daughter and she wasn’t permitted to visit her mother. How would she [the mother-in-law] feel then?” Men held a similar opinion; however, many added the caveat that it was acceptable to deny permission if a woman requested to leave for a long period of time. A man stated, “If she wants to go for 5 days, 10 days that is OK. How can she go for longer than this? That is not correct. In that situation, a mother-in-law can say no.”
Acceptability of Physical Mother-in-Law Abuse
One type of physical abuse (hitting) was discussed with participants. Unlike psychological abuse, the majority of men and women did not think it was appropriate for a mother-in-law to hit her daughter-in-law. A woman explained, “No, the mother-in-law should never hit her daughter-in-law. She can scold sometimes but never hit.” Another stated, “The mother-in-law should never raise her hand against a daughter-in-law. Just like it is wrong to hit your daughter, it is wrong to hit your daughter-in-law.” Men agreed with this sentiment, one saying, “No she does not have the right to hit her daughter-in-law. She can scold and teach her but cannot hit.” Many men added that while physical mother-in-law abuse is generally incorrect, it is important to determine the “reason” behind the physical violence. A man explained, “The husband should ask his mother, ‘What mistake did she make, why did you hit her?’”
A few participants disagreed, explaining they thought it was acceptable for a mother-in-law to hit her daughter-in-law in certain circumstances. For example, one woman stated that a mother-in-law had the right to hit her daughter-in-law because a daughter-in-law is a defacto daughter for the mother-in-law. She said, “Yes she can hit because the daughter-in-law is like her daughter and it is OK to hit your daughter.” Others thought hitting was acceptable when certain perceived “mistakes” were made. A woman described, “If she [the daughter-in-law] leaves the home without asking then she [the mother-in-law] can hit. If she doesn’t do work, then she can hit. If she doesn’t make food or bread well then she can hit.” A man agreed, “Like if the mother-in-law told her [the daughter-in-law] to clean something. If she does not clean, the mother-in-law may become angry and slap her.”
Rights and Responsibilities of the Mother-in-Law
Many participants discussed the distinct roles the mother-in-law and daughter-in-law play in the home. There was a sharp divide among female participants regarding the breakdown of household chores. There were no specific demographic differences between these two groups of women. About half of the women felt that it was the daughter-in-law’s responsibility to complete the housework on her own. A woman stated, “Yes, it is only the daughter-in-law’s job to do all of the work. If the mother-in-law doesn’t do any work that is fine, but if the daughter-in-law doesn’t do work that is very bad.” Other women felt differently, describing that work should be completed by both individuals. A woman explained, “The two should work together. It is bad if the mother-in-law does all of the work while the daughter-in-law is sleeping or taking rest. And sometimes the mother-in-law is resting and not helping. Neither of these are right.” Another woman, who was a mother-in-law herself, described a change in mentality between the previous and current generations: “If the mother-in-law makes the daughter-in-law do all of the work that is correct. But this doesn’t happen anymore. In the new generation, the work is shared.”
In contrast, the majority of men thought it was the responsibility of the daughter-in-law to do all of the housework. For example, a man stated, “After marriage, it is the daughter-in-law’s job to do the work. When a wife comes to her husband’s home, she must obey her mother-in-law.” Another held a similar opinion: “The wife is in the mother-in-law’s home. The wife should take care of the mother-in-law. She left her mother and father to go to this home, so she must take care of her mother-in-law.”
Husband as a “Mediator”
Both male and female participants discussed the role they thought the husband should play in circumstances when his mother was abusing his wife. Men described the husband as a mediator and felt his role should be determining fault and talking to whomever was perceived to be guilty to help them correct their actions. They often used the Hindi word samjhana, which translates to “making someone understand.” When asked about a situation where a mother-in-law was scolding her daughter-in-law for not completing household chores, a man stated, First, he should determine who is speaking the truth—his mother or his wife. If the daughter-in-law is indeed not working well, he should then make his wife understand that his mother is saying that you are not doing work well. If the mother-in-law is telling a lie then he should tell his mother “You told a lie, my wife is doing work well, why are you speaking to her like this.”
Another man stated, “The husband needs to do an examination to see what the situation is in the home. He should figure out what reality is. If his mother is right and his wife isn’t doing work, then he will scold her.”
The majority of men also thought it was acceptable for a husband to hit his wife if she had a conflict with her mother-in-law. This was particularly true in cases where the husband perceived his wife to be disrespectful or lacking obedience. Men generally thought hitting was acceptable only after a husband tried to make his wife understand (Hindi word: samjhana) that her actions were not correct. A man stated, “He should make her understand that if she obeys her mother-in-law, they will all live well together. If she does not understand, then he will hit his wife. And this is correct.” Another man felt similarly: “Fighting shouldn’t happen between the two [mother-in-law and daughter-in-law]. If it is the wife’s fault and if the mother-in-law didn’t make a mistake then he can hit [his wife]. He has to do something to make his wife understand.”
Women occasionally discussed how a husband should act if his wife is being abused by her mother-in-law. A few thought that a husband could serve as a potential mediator to resolve conflicts between a mother-in-law and daughter-in-law. A woman stated, “The man should intently listen to his wife and mother to see exactly what they are saying and then they should all sit and solve the problem together.” However, no female participant thought a husband should hit his wife due to disputes between a woman and her mother-in-law. A woman said, “No, this is very wrong. Why should he hit for this reason?” In fact, about half of the women described that it was common for a mother-in-law to instigate her son, resulting in intimate partner violence. A woman stated, “The husband often will hit his wife. He will say that my mom said you are doing this wrong. In many circumstances, the mother-in-law will complain about the daughter-in-law.” She went on to say that she did not agree with this practice: “It is wrong for him to hit for this reason.” Another woman agreed, “Mothers aggravate their sons and tell them that their wives are not working. If the mother-in-law says anything the son will believe it and will give trouble to his wife.”
Options Available for Women Experiencing Mother-in-Law Abuse
Men and women described few options available for women experiencing mother-in-law abuse. In some circumstances, participants thought the daughter-in-law should simply “bear” the abuse, both to prevent bringing shame upon the family and in situations where the abuse was in response to a perceived “mistake.” A woman described, We cannot do anything because if we do something then we will break up the home. A woman cannot spoil the home and break the relationship . . . people in the community will ask her “Why did you do that?”
Many participants thought that if the abuse continued for an extended period of time, the daughter-in-law could ask her husband to intervene. Women explained that this is only available in situations where the husband himself is not abusive. A woman said, “If the husband and wife love each other then it doesn’t matter. The husband will tell his mother to stop. If he doesn’t, it means the husband is also troubling [abusing] his wife.” All participants thought a woman should ask her husband to intervene rather than directly talking to her mother-in-law.
Another option described frequently by both male and female participants was that the couple could “live separately” as a nuclear family. A man explained what this means: “The husband and wife will leave the home of his parents and start a new home.” This was seen as an option to pursue only after other avenues had been exhausted. A woman stated, First, she should try to change her behaviors so her mother-in-law does not hit her. Then she should tell her husband what is happening and ask him to make his mother stop. Only if that doesn’t work, can they live separately.
Women reiterated that this option is only available if the husband himself is not abusive: “If the husband is kind, he will agree to live separately. If he is also troubling his wife, then he will not agree and there are no options available.” Participants, especially men, also noted that even if the couple lives separately, they would still visit the husband’s parents frequently. A man stated, “Yes, if they cannot all live together then they can live separately. But the visits will be the same and they will meet like they did before.” A few men also explained that living separately is only available if the family has enough money to move into a separate home. A man stated, “If the mother-in-law is hitting then they should live separately. But this can only happen if the husband makes enough money and has a job. Otherwise, how can this happen?”
Beyond asking the husband to intervene and living separately, a few additional options were described including living with the natal family and going to the police. About a quarter of the participants (both male and female) thought a woman should tell her natal family about mother-in-law abuse, and potentially live with them rather than with her in-laws. They saw this as the only option available in circumstances where the husband did not try to stop the abuse or was abusive himself. A woman stated, “If the natal family is good, she can go [live] with them.” A few women described this option to be impractical and not sustainable. A woman said, “How can she go to her natal family? There are a lot of expenses, so if she goes and brings her children it will be hard for the natal family.” Only three participants (one man and two women, all of whom received at least an eighth-grade education) brought up the police as a potential resource for women experiencing mother-in-law abuse. A man said, “I believe that the woman should go to the police.” However, he went on to state that utilizing the justice system may not stop the abuse: “But the police doesn’t give a big punishment, they just try to make the mother-in-law understand [samjhana]. They will threaten her but won’t arrest her.”
Discussion
In this article, we describe the perspectives of men and women residing in the Udaipur district of Rajasthan regarding psychological and physical abuse perpetrated by a mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law. Similar to past qualitative work, women described a range of mother-in-law abuse occurring in their communities, including verbal abuse, controlling behaviors, and, to a lesser extent, physical abuse (Fernandez, 1997; Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005; Raj et al., 2011). Unlike women, men did not think mother-in-law abuse existed in their communities. Although it was beyond the scope of this study to determine the prevalence of mother-in-law abuse in the Udaipur district, the pronounced difference between men’s and women’s perceptions regarding the pervasiveness of this type of abuse is a novel finding and may need to be contextualized within India’s patriarchal culture. Studies from India have shown that men and women often have defined and distinct roles, thus leading to daily activities being separated based on gender (Kishor & Gupta, 2009; Ragavan et al., 2014; Vindhya, 2007). Therefore, women, but not men, may be more aware of mother-in-law abuse. It is also possible that men are aware but either do not see mother-in-law abuse as negative or did not want to be perceived as speaking negatively about their communities. Further research should explore the multiple potential reasons why men and women have differing opinions about the pervasiveness of mother-in-law abuse.
This study is novel in that it examined perspectives regarding perceived acceptability of psychological abuse perpetrated by a mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law. Participants viewed psychological abuse, specifically yelling and scolding, to be acceptable when a woman is perceived to be acting disrespectfully toward the mother-in-law or not conducting household chores. Both of these situations highlight the patriarchal norms in the region where this study took place and the importance placed on the maintenance of traditional gender roles (Ahmed-Ghosh, 2004; Rastogi & Therly, 2006; Tichy et al., 2009). However, the heterogeneity in participants’ perspectives must be taken into account when considering these results. Some of this heterogeneity is related to gender. For example, woman did not agree with a mother-in-law forbidding a daughter-in-law from visiting her natal family, while men thought it was appropriate to deny permission for longer trips. Likewise, men, more so than women, agreed with psychological abuse in cases of disrespecting a mother-in-law. However, some differences were also noted among women, including a split in thoughts about the roles and responsibilities of the mother-in-law and daughter-in-law. The diversity in ideas about the acceptability of psychological abuse and the role of the daughter-in-law may demonstrate changing gender norms in this region. Future research should focus on exploring the heterogeneity in perspectives, as well as examining how these differences may impact options available to women experiencing psychological mother-in-law abuse.
This study is unique in that it explored a form of female-perpetrated DV in India, as most past literature has viewed DV through a male-perpetrator lens. Many participants viewed the daughter-in-law as a child, and, after marriage, a defacto daughter to her mother-in-law. Some participants used this argument to condemn mother-in-law abuse, and others to condone it. This suggests that perspectives regarding the acceptability of child abuse may be helpful in understanding the way that mother-in-law abuse is conceptualized in India. Physical and psychological child abuse in India, especially against girls, is common, generally considered acceptable, and, unlike intimate partner violence, is often perpetrated by the mother (Daral, Khokhar, & Pradhan, 2016). Thus, a deeper exploration of the mechanisms behind child abuse in India may be useful to better understand mother-in-law abuse. Furthermore, in India, children experiencing abuse are more likely to reside in homes where intimate partner violence is occurring (Hunter, Jain, Sadowski, & Sanhueza, 2000; Kamimura et al., 2017). However, little is known about the co-occurrence of child abuse and in-law abuse or how experiencing abuse as a child is associated with either perpetrating or surviving mother-in-law abuse as an adult. This study suggests that further research is needed to understand how these two forms of female-perpetrated DV are interwoven to design programs and policies to prevent both types of violence.
Unlike psychological abuse, participants generally thought that mothers-in-law engaging in acts of physical violence was unacceptable. This is different than intimate partner violence, where researchers have shown that both men and women perceive abuse to be justified in certain situations such as if a woman were having an affair or being disrespectful (Dalal et al., 2012; Go et al., 2003; Kishor & Gupta, 2009; Ragavan et al., 2014). However, despite their opinions that mothers-in-law should not physically abuse their daughters-in-law, male but not female participants described disrespecting or disobeying a mother-in-law as a justifiable reason for men to hit their wives. This highlights the complexity of DV in India, and suggests that in-law abuse and intimate partner violence should not be viewed as separate entities but rather as interwoven constructs that may occur concurrently. It also illustrates the pervasiveness of patriarchal attitudes in the communities where this study took place. In this study, women did not agree that men should hit their wives in circumstances of mother-in-law abuse, but instead thought a husband should try to stop the abuse. The difference in perspectives between male and female participants regarding the husband’s role in cases of mother-in-law abuse may suggest shifting beliefs about patriarchal attitudes and gender equity in India and merits further exploration.
Apart from asking their husbands for assistance, few perceived options exist for women experiencing mother-in-law abuse in the areas where this study took place. Returning to the natal family was described as initially beneficial but ultimately a temporary solution; this is similar to results from past studies looking at options for intimate partner violence survivors in India (Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005; Visaria, 2008). Previous work conducted by the authors found that there are formal resources available for DV survivors in Udaipur including a woman’s only police station and a DV shelter (Ragavan et al., 2015). However, participants in this study rarely mentioned these resources. The few participants who described the police as a potential option were all educated, suggesting that perhaps there is a lack of knowledge about support available for DV survivors in India. However, beyond a lack of awareness, past research on intimate partner violence in India suggests that formal resources such as police and counselors are viewed as inaccessible, unhelpful, and sometimes unsafe (Ahmed-Ghosh, 2004; Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005; Ragavan et al., 2015). This study suggests similar perspectives about the utility of formal resources for women experiencing mother-in-law abuse. Further research is needed to more closely explore help-seeking barriers in the setting of mother-in-law abuse in India.
An option described in this study, which has not been previously well documented, is living separately from the in-laws as a nuclear family. Prior literature has demonstrated that living as a joint family is associated with higher rates of in-law abuse, so this option may be helpful in certain circumstances (Raj et al., 2011; Vindhya, 2007). However, the ability to live separately was considered a potential option only if the husband himself was willing to move, disagreed with the ongoing mother-in-law abuse, and had the financial means to live independently. Intimate partner violence and in-law abuse often occur together, and experiencing one type of violence is associated with the other (Babu & Kar, 2010; Kamimura et al., 2017; Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005). Furthermore, unlike in-law abuse, living as a nuclear family does not always protect women against intimate partner violence (Allendorf, 2013). Therefore, living separately may be impractical for many women experiencing mother-in-law abuse and lead to a shift in who is perpetrating the abuse without ending the violence.
We recognize several limitations with this study. We interviewed participants residing in one district of India, and therefore, one should be careful about generalizing these results to regions outside of Rajasthan. We also utilized a convenience sampling methodology, recruiting participants affiliated with a health center, so it will be important to replicate this work in other populations. In particular, only a small percentage of women in this study identified as being a mother-in-law. Therefore, it may be helpful to replicate this study with a larger group of mothers-in-law as they may have different perspectives on these topics. We did not ask about participants’ personal experiences with in-law abuse; it may be useful to assess this in the future.
A strength of this study is we examined perspectives regarding both physical and psychological abuse; however, we defined psychological abuse as primarily yelling, scolding, and denying a daughter-in-law permission to see her natal family (as a proxy for isolation). Psychological abuse is complicated and nuanced, and may also include controlling behaviors, other forms of isolation, or humiliation (Garcia-Moreno et al., 2005; Heise & Garcia-Moreno, 2002). Further studies should focus on perceptions regarding these types of abuse to create a more complete picture of the way psychological mother-in-law abuse is understood in India. It was also beyond the scope of this study to examine abuse perpetrated by other family members (such as the father-in-law or husband’s siblings) or to talk to men experiencing violence in the home (either intimate partner violence or in-law abuse). Finally, despite our best efforts to translate the interviews accurately using an evidence-based translation technique, problems with our transcription and translation process might have occurred, especially with specific words that do not easily translate from Mewari or Hindi to English.
Recommendations
Despite its limitations, this study builds a foundation for future research and initiative development. This study should be repeated using quantitative methodologies with a larger sample size to try to uncover potential associations between perspectives about mother-in-law abuse and sociodemographic characteristics (such as education or socioeconomic status). Conducting research in other areas of India and exploring perspectives about abuse perpetrated by different types of in-laws (father-in-law, brother-in-law, etc.) is also important. As described above, examining the association between perceptions regarding child abuse and in-law abuse may be useful. Another area to study is examining the way childhood exposure to mother-in-law abuse may affect young women’s perspectives on both in-law abuse and intimate partner violence. Research has shown that a child in India exposed to intimate partner violence is more likely to experience abuse as an adult (Kishor & Gupta, 2009; Martin et al., 2002). Similar work examining mother-in-law abuse has not been conducted and may help better conceptualize the cyclic effects of DV.
The results of this study suggest a need for intergenerational initiatives that include multiple members of the family focused on addressing the spectrum of DV experienced by women in India. A few joint mother-in-law, daughter-in-law programs have been documented in the literature. For example, Krishnan, Subbiah, Khanum, Chandra, and Padian (2012) described an empowerment-focused initiative for prenatal women and their mothers-in-law, addressing the effects of violence on health and the importance of a violence-free environment for women and children. We recommend the development and evaluation of similar curricula for mother-in-law, daughter-in-law pairs, focused on promoting healthy conflict resolution and addressing the negative effects of both psychological and physical violence. As our study suggests that patriarchal attitudes are interwoven with in-law abuse, it may be necessary to include men in in-law abuse prevention initiatives. In addition, it may be helpful to engage unmarried men and women who are still living with their natal families, to begin discussing these topics and promoting the importance of violence-free environments before marriage. This study also suggests that living as a nuclear as opposed to joint family (living separately) may be the only option for a woman experiencing mother-in-law abuse. This may not always be possible due to familial (such as if the woman is also experiencing intimate partner violence), cultural, and socioeconomic factors. However, to our knowledge, few initiatives currently exist to support couples living separately. Programs that provide financial assistance, social networks, and support groups to couples living separately due to mother-in-law abuse may be helpful. Finally, we suggest initiatives focused on addressing the harms of psychological abuse, as in this study, yelling and scolding were described as both common and accepted.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the participants of this study for taking the time to share their perspectives. They also thank Pushpa Paliwal, Ramesh Paliwal, and Saraswati Sharma for their incredible work as interpreters and translators.
Authors’ Note
Portions of this article were presented at the 2012 Qualitative Health Research Conference in Montreal, Canada. Components of this article were also included in Maya Ragavan’s Master’s in Public Health (MPH) Culminate Experience thesis.
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: The authors received funding for this study through a Fulbright-Nehru Student Research grant (Grant Number 2011/ST/59).