Violence against Women Policy and Practice in Uganda - Promoting Justice within the Context of Patriarchy

The goal of this study was to understand how and whether policy and practice relating to violence against women in Uganda, especially Uganda’s Domestic Violence Act of 2010, have had an effect on women’s beliefs and practices, as well as on support and justice for women who experience abuse by their male partners. Research used multi-sited ethnography at transnational, national, and local levels to understand the context that affects what policies are developed, how they are implemented, and how, and whether, women benefit from these. Ethnography within a local community situated global and national dynamics within the lives of women. Women who experience VAW within their intimate partnerships in Uganda confront a political economy that undermines their access to justice, even as a women’s rights agenda is working to develop and implement laws, policies, and interventions that promote gender equality and women’s empowerment. This dissertation provides insights into the daily struggles of women who try to utilize policy that challenges duty bearers, in part because it is a new law, but also because it conflicts with the structural patriarchy that is engrained in Ugandan society. Two explanatory models were developed. One explains factors relating to a woman’s decision to seek support or to report domestic violence. The second explains why women do and do not report DV. Among the findings is that a woman is most likely to report abuse under the following circumstances: 1) her own, or her children’s survival (physical or economic) is severely threatened; 2) she experiences severe physical abuse; or, 3) she needs financial support for her children. Research highlights three supportive factors for women who persist in reporting DV. These are: 1) the presence of an “advocate” or support 2) belief that reporting will be helpful; and, 3) lack of interest in returning to the relationship. This dissertation speaks to the role that anthropologists can play in a multi-disciplinary approach to a complex issue. This role is understanding – deeply and holistically; and, articulating knowledge generated locally that provides connections between what happens at global, national and local levels.

The Influence of Pre-Migration Factors and Post-Migration Climate of the Receiving Community on the Psychological Distress of Latino Immigrants

Over forty million foreign-born residents currently live in the United States. Latinos make up the largest population of immigrants living in the U.S. Previous research suggests that Latino immigrants often experience pre-migration stressors, such as traumatic experiences, political upheaval, and unplanned migration. These stressors may have a negative impact on immigrants’ post-migration mental health. Research also suggests that the post-migration climate of the receiving community may inform the connection between pre-migration experiences and post-migration mental health. The current study examined the relationship between Latino immigrants’ reasons for migration, migration planning, and pre-migration experience of political and/or interpersonal violence, and post-migration symptoms of psychological distress. In addition to examining the effect of these pre-migration factors, the current study also examined the community “climate” experienced by Latino immigrants post-migration by assessing the influence of three post-migration factors: 1) community support and engagement, 2) discrimination, and 3) employment. The study was a secondary analysis of data collected for the National Latino and Asian American Study, which focused on the mental health and service utilization of Latinos and Asian Americans. Participants included 1,629 Latino immigrants from across the United States. Results indicated that pre-migration experience of political and/or interpersonal trauma, post-migration experience of discrimination, and female sex were positively associated with psychological distress. Post-migration employment was negatively associated with psychological distress. In addition, discrimination modified the association between unplanned migration and psychological distress; the relationship between unplanned migration and psychological distress decreased for participants who reported more discrimination. Furthermore, employment modified the association between political and/or interpersonal trauma and psychological distress; the connection between trauma and psychological distress increased among those who reported having less employment. Recommendations for further research were presented. Policy and clinical practice implications were discussed, particularly given the current climate of high anti-immigrant sentiment and hostility in the U.S.