Journal of Urban Health

, Volume 90, Issue 1, pp 41–55 | Cite as

The Association of Neighborhood Characteristics and Domestic Violence in Santiago, Chile

  • Huiyun Kim
  • Andrew Grogan-Kaylor
  • Yoonsun Han
  • Laura Maurizi
  • Jorge Delva
Article

Abstract

The growing tension between conservative attitudes and liberal policies on gender issues in Chile is reflected by the high rates of domestic violence juxtaposed by a strong governmental policy aimed at preventing this social problem. Attempts to understand factors associated with domestic violence in Chile, and in other countries as well, have not paid much attention to neighborhood-level factors. This manuscript examined the extent to which selected neighborhood characteristics were associated with domestic violence against women. Relying on theories of social disorganization and social stress, this study conceptualized residence in a disadvantaged neighborhood as a source of stress and examined the relationship between detrimental physical and social characteristics of neighborhoods and the chance of women experiencing domestic violence. Results revealed that a higher level of trash in neighborhoods was associated with increased rates of domestic violence above and beyond individual characteristics. Findings also suggested that the relationship between high levels of trash in neighborhoods and domestic violence was greater for women with higher levels of financial stress. Given the potential role of neighborhood environments in reducing domestic violence, a comprehensive approach incorporating both neighborhood- and individual-level factors may be critical in designing effective preventive interventions for domestic violence.

Keywords

Chile Domestic violence Neighborhood context 

References

  1. 1.
    Delva J, Horner, P., & Sanchez, N. Adolescent pregnancy in Chile: a social, cultural, political analysis. In: Dillon ACaM, ed. International handbook of adolescent pregnancy: medical, psychosocial, and public health responses. NYC: Springer Publishing Company; in press.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Franceschet S. Explaining domestic violence policy outcomes in Chile and Argentina. Lat Am Polit Soc. 2010; 52(3): 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ceballo R, Ramirez C, Castillo M, Caballero GA, Lozoff B. Domestic violence and women's mental health in Chile. Psychol Women Q. 2004; 28(4): 298–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Urzúa R, Ferrer M, Gutiérrez C. Detección y análisis. Prevalencia de la violencia intrafamiliar. Documento de trabajo. 2002.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Larraín S. Violencia puertas adentro: la mujer golpeada: Editorial Universitaria; 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ellsberg M, Jansen HAFM, Heise L, Watts CH, Garcia-Moreno C. Intimate partner violence and women's physical and mental health in the WHO multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence: an observational study. Lancet. 2008; 371(9619): 1165–1172.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fantuzzo JW, Mohr WK. Prevalence and effects of child exposure to domestic violence. Future Child. 1999: 21–32.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Foster H, Brooks-Gunn J. Toward a stress process model of children’s exposure to physical family and community violence. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2009; 12(2): 71–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Anderson KL. Theorizing gender in intimate partner violence research. Sex Roles. 2005; 52(11): 853–865.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Diez Roux AV, Mair C. Neighborhoods and health. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2010; 1186(1): 125–145.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yonas M, Akers AY, Burke JG et al. Perceptions of prominent neighborhood individuals regarding neighborhood factors and intimate partner violence. J Urban Health. 2011; 88:214–224.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sampson RJ, Morenoff JD, Gannon-Rowley T. Assessing" neighborhood effects": social processes and new directions in research. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2002; 28:443–478.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Small ML, Newman K. Urban poverty after the truly disadvantaged: the rediscovery of the family, the neighborhood, and culture. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2001; 27:23–45.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Larrañaga O, Sanhueza C. Residential segregation effects on poor’s opportunities in Chile. Santiago de Chile: Departamento de Economía, Universidad de Chile; 2007.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ureta S. Noise and the battles for space: mediated noise and everyday life in a social housing estate in Santiago, Chile. J Urban Technol. 2007; 14(3): 103–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cunradi CB. Drinking level, neighborhood social disorder, and mutual intimate partner violence. Alcohol: Clin Exp Res. 2007; 31(6): 1012–1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Benson ML, Fox GL, DeMaris A, Van Wyk J. Neighborhood disadvantage, individual economic distress and violence against women in intimate relationships. J Quant Criminol. 2003; 19(3): 207–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Browning CR. The span of collective efficacy: extending social disorganization theory to partner violence. J Marriage Fam. 2002; 64(4): 833–850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Miles-Doan R. Violence between spouses and intimates: does neighborhood context matter? Soc Forces. 1998; 77: 623–645.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    O'Campo P, Gielen AC, Faden RR, et al. Violence by male partners against women during the childbearing year: a contextual analysis. Am J Public Health. 1995; 85(8): 1092–1097.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Schaefer-McDaniel N, O'Brien Caughy M, O'Campo P, Gearey W. Examining methodological details of neighbourhood observations and the relationship to health: a literature review. Soc Sci Med. 2010; 70(2): 277–292.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shaw CR, McKay HD. Juvenile delinquency and urban areas. 1942; Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Aneshensel CS. Social stress: theory and research. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 1992; 18: 15–38.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pearlin LI. The sociological study of stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1989; 30: 241–256.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Latkin CA, Curry AD. Stressful neighborhoods and depression: a prospective study of the impact of neighborhood disorder. J Health Soc Behav. 2003; 44: 34–44.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Steptoe A, Feldman PJ. Neighborhood problems as sources of chronic stress: development of a measure of neighborhood problems, and associations with socioeconomic status and health. Ann Behav Med. 2001; 23(3): 177–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Laraia BA, Messer L, Kaufman JS, et al. Direct observation of neighborhood attributes in an urban area of the US south: characterizing the social context of pregnancy. Int J Health Geogr. 2006; 5(1): 11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Perkins DD, Meeks JW, Taylor RB. The physical environment of street blocks and resident perceptions of crime and disorder: implications for theory and measurement1. J Environ Psychol. 1992; 12(1): 21–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Umberson D, Williams K, Anderson K. Violent behavior: a measure of emotional upset? J Health Soc Behav. 2002; 43: 189–206.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Farrington K. The application of stress theory to the study of family violence: principles, problems, and prospects. J Fam Violence. 1986; 1(2): 131–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Thoits PA. Stress, coping, and social support processes: where are we? What next? J Health Soc Behav. 1995: 53–79.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sampson RJ, Raudenbush SW, Earls F. Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science. 1997; 277(5328): 918.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Groenewegen P, van den Berg A, De Vries S, Verheij R. Vitamin G: effects of green space on health, well-being, and social safety. BMC Publ Health. 2006; 6(1): 149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Leonard TCM, Caughy MO, Mays JK, Murdoch JC. Systematic neighborhood observations at high spatial resolution: methodology and assessment of potential benefits. PLoS ONE. 2011; 6(6): e20225. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020225.
  35. 35.
    Caughy MO, O'Campo PJ, Patterson J. A brief observational measure for urban neighborhoods. Health Place. 2001; 7(3): 225–236.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lozoff B, De Andraca I, Castillo M, et al. Behavioral and developmental effects of preventing iron-deficiency anemia in healthy full-term infants. Pediatrics. 2003; 112(4): 846.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lown EA, Vega WA. Prevalence and predictors of physical partner abuse among Mexican American women. Am J Public Health. 2001; 91(3): 441.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Straus MA. Measuring intrafamily conflict and violence: the conflict tactics (CT) scales. J Marriage Fam. 1979; 51: 75–88.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Agresti A. Analysis of categorical data: New York: Wiley; 1990.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Royston P. Multiple imputation of missing values. Stata J. 2004; 4: 227–241.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schafer JL. Multiple imputation: a primer. Stat Meth Med Res. 1999; 8(1): 3–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Viera AJ. Odds ratios and risk ratios: what's the difference and why does it matter? South Med J. 2008; 101(7): 730.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kessler RC, McLeod JD. Social support and mental health in community samples. In: Cohen S, Syme SL, editors. Social support and health. New York: Academic Press; 1985.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Leonard KE. Alcohol and intimate partner violence: when can we say that heavy drinking is a contributing cause of violence? Addiction. 2005; 100(4): 422–425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Jewkes R, Levin J, Penn-Kekana L. Risk factors for domestic violence: findings from a South African cross-sectional study. Soc Sci Med. 2002; 55(9): 1603–1617.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Academy of Medicine 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huiyun Kim
    • 1
  • Andrew Grogan-Kaylor
    • 1
  • Yoonsun Han
    • 1
  • Laura Maurizi
    • 1
  • Jorge Delva
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Social WorkUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations