Socio-Economic Dynamics of Intra-Familial Elder Abuse in Baringo County, Kenya

Consolata Jepkemei Chesang, Samuel M Mwangi, Parvin Moloo
{"title":"Socio-Economic Dynamics of Intra-Familial Elder Abuse in Baringo County, Kenya","authors":"Consolata Jepkemei Chesang, Samuel M Mwangi, Parvin Moloo","doi":"10.35942/ijcab.v5i4.202","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Until the emergence of policies and legal frameworks to address domestic violence -including intimate partner and child abuse- in the last decades of the 20th century, abuse of the older people had persisted as a private matter that was accorded little public attention. Even so, intra-familial elder abuse (IFEA) has been acknowledged globally as a pervasive problem, associated with overwhelming distinct consequences, outcomes, and societal expenses. With an overall increase in the older persons’ populace, IFEA is expected to become a more pressing issue, affecting masses of older individuals globally. Kenya is experiencing population aging at a high rate, which implies that, with it, elder abuse, and particularly IFEA is anticipated to become a more pressing problem, distressing millions of older individuals countrywide. IFEA refers to as a type of family violence has been defined as a sole or repeated mistreatment and/or abusive action, which can be an act of commission or omission, intentional and unintentional, towards older persons within the family context. The definition, conceptualization, and perceptions of intra-familial elder abuse vary across societies and culture, because, what may be deemed abusive in one society might not be the case in another, thus making the whole issue of elder abuse and particularly IFEA dynamic, with variations across boundaries, religions, economic, and social settings. This study sought to explore the socio-economic dynamics of IFEA in Baringo County. The study objectives were to profile the dominant types of IFEA, to examine the dynamics of IFEA in relation to the associated socio-economic risk factors, and to assess the dynamics associated with reporting and disclosure of IFEA, guided by Homan’s Social Exchange theory. The study embraced a cross-sectional analytical survey design to collect both qualitative and quantitative data. The study was conducted in Baringo County. The respondents of the study were older persons in the area who were aged 70 years and older; 226 older persons from two purposively sampled sub counties were sampled for the study. The study also targeted key informants including local authorities, health care authorities, adult protection agency representatives and law enforcement. Semi-structured interviews, key informant interviews, and focus group discussion guides were used in data collection. Quantitative data was analyzed using the SPSS 21.0 to generate both descriptive and inferential statistics such as chi-square tests. Qualitative data was analyzed thematically. The study established that most prevalent form of intra-familial abuse reported in the study was psychological abuse (79.2%) while sexual abuse was the least (19.9%) prevalent type of IFEA. The study found out that gender of the victim, victim dependence and vulnerability, living arrangements, trust relationships, social isolation and financial dependency on the older person influenced the older persons’ experiences with the different types of abuse reported in the study. Based on the reported dynamics of IFEA in relation to reporting, the study concluded that given the right platforms, older persons are more likely to report incidences of abuse. The study concludes that IFEA is a dynamic social problem, which varies across cultural contexts, perceptions, socio-economic risk factors, as well as in its reporting and disclosure. The study recommends education, sensitization, and public awareness campaigns at the community level as preventive strategies aimed at informing members of the society about IFEA, what it constitutes, and how it can be addressed.","PeriodicalId":119984,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Current Aspects","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Current Aspects","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35942/ijcab.v5i4.202","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Until the emergence of policies and legal frameworks to address domestic violence -including intimate partner and child abuse- in the last decades of the 20th century, abuse of the older people had persisted as a private matter that was accorded little public attention. Even so, intra-familial elder abuse (IFEA) has been acknowledged globally as a pervasive problem, associated with overwhelming distinct consequences, outcomes, and societal expenses. With an overall increase in the older persons’ populace, IFEA is expected to become a more pressing issue, affecting masses of older individuals globally. Kenya is experiencing population aging at a high rate, which implies that, with it, elder abuse, and particularly IFEA is anticipated to become a more pressing problem, distressing millions of older individuals countrywide. IFEA refers to as a type of family violence has been defined as a sole or repeated mistreatment and/or abusive action, which can be an act of commission or omission, intentional and unintentional, towards older persons within the family context. The definition, conceptualization, and perceptions of intra-familial elder abuse vary across societies and culture, because, what may be deemed abusive in one society might not be the case in another, thus making the whole issue of elder abuse and particularly IFEA dynamic, with variations across boundaries, religions, economic, and social settings. This study sought to explore the socio-economic dynamics of IFEA in Baringo County. The study objectives were to profile the dominant types of IFEA, to examine the dynamics of IFEA in relation to the associated socio-economic risk factors, and to assess the dynamics associated with reporting and disclosure of IFEA, guided by Homan’s Social Exchange theory. The study embraced a cross-sectional analytical survey design to collect both qualitative and quantitative data. The study was conducted in Baringo County. The respondents of the study were older persons in the area who were aged 70 years and older; 226 older persons from two purposively sampled sub counties were sampled for the study. The study also targeted key informants including local authorities, health care authorities, adult protection agency representatives and law enforcement. Semi-structured interviews, key informant interviews, and focus group discussion guides were used in data collection. Quantitative data was analyzed using the SPSS 21.0 to generate both descriptive and inferential statistics such as chi-square tests. Qualitative data was analyzed thematically. The study established that most prevalent form of intra-familial abuse reported in the study was psychological abuse (79.2%) while sexual abuse was the least (19.9%) prevalent type of IFEA. The study found out that gender of the victim, victim dependence and vulnerability, living arrangements, trust relationships, social isolation and financial dependency on the older person influenced the older persons’ experiences with the different types of abuse reported in the study. Based on the reported dynamics of IFEA in relation to reporting, the study concluded that given the right platforms, older persons are more likely to report incidences of abuse. The study concludes that IFEA is a dynamic social problem, which varies across cultural contexts, perceptions, socio-economic risk factors, as well as in its reporting and disclosure. The study recommends education, sensitization, and public awareness campaigns at the community level as preventive strategies aimed at informing members of the society about IFEA, what it constitutes, and how it can be addressed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
肯尼亚巴林戈县家庭内虐待老人的社会经济动态
直到20世纪最后几十年出现处理家庭暴力(包括亲密伴侣和儿童虐待)的政策和法律框架之前,虐待老年人一直被视为私事,很少得到公众关注。即便如此,家庭内虐待老人(IFEA)已被全球公认为一个普遍存在的问题,与压倒性的明显后果、结果和社会费用有关。随着老年人人口的总体增加,预计IFEA将成为一个更加紧迫的问题,影响全球的老年人群体。肯尼亚正在经历人口老龄化,这意味着,随着它,老年人虐待,特别是IFEA预计将成为一个更紧迫的问题,困扰着全国数百万老年人。IFEA指的是一种类型的家庭暴力,它被定义为在家庭范围内对老年人的单独或反复的虐待和/或虐待行为,可以是故意或无意的行为或疏忽。家庭内虐待老人的定义、概念和看法在不同的社会和文化中有所不同,因为在一个社会中可能被视为虐待的行为在另一个社会中可能并不如此,从而使整个虐待老人的问题,特别是IFEA问题,随着边界、宗教、经济和社会环境的变化而变化。本研究旨在探讨巴林戈县IFEA的社会经济动态。在Homan的社会交换理论的指导下,本研究的目标是分析IFEA的主要类型,研究IFEA与相关社会经济风险因素的动态关系,并评估与IFEA报告和披露相关的动态。该研究采用了横断面分析调查设计,以收集定性和定量数据。这项研究是在巴林戈县进行的。调查对象为该地区年龄在70岁及以上的老年人;该研究从两个有目的的抽样县抽取了226名老年人。该研究还针对关键举报人,包括地方当局、卫生保健当局、成人保护机构代表和执法部门。数据收集采用半结构化访谈、关键信息提供者访谈和焦点小组讨论指南。定量数据使用SPSS 21.0进行分析,生成描述性统计和推理统计,如卡方检验。对定性数据进行专题分析。该研究确定,研究中报告的最常见的家庭内部虐待形式是心理虐待(79.2%),而性虐待是最不常见的(19.9%)。研究发现,受害者的性别、受害者的依赖性和脆弱性、生活安排、信任关系、社会孤立和对老年人的经济依赖影响了老年人对研究报告中所述的不同类型虐待的经历。根据报告的IFEA与报告相关的动态,该研究得出结论,如果有合适的平台,老年人更有可能报告虐待事件。该研究得出结论,IFEA是一个动态的社会问题,它因文化背景、观念、社会经济风险因素以及报告和披露而异。该研究建议在社区一级开展教育、宣传和公众意识运动,作为预防策略,旨在使社会成员了解IFEA、它的构成以及如何解决它。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sustainability Business and Its Impact on Project Performance In the mining Industry in Kenya: A case of Tata Chemicals Magadi, Kenya Project Management Practices and Implementation of Somali Humanitarian Fund Projects by Local Non-Governmental Organizations in Mogadishu, Somalia Physical and Environmental Factors Influencing Accessibility to Sanitation and Hygiene Services Among People Living with Disabilities in Kitui County, Kenya Social-Economic Factors Affecting Accessibility to Sanitation and Hygiene Services Among People Living with Disabilities in Kitui County, Kenya Exclusive Breastfeeding and Its Determinants Among Adolescent Mothers in Kibera Informal Settlement, Nairobi County, Kenya
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1