TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE

1-17
Violence Against Women in Turkey: ª The Author(s) 2018
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
A Social Ecological Framework DOI: 10.1177/1524838018781104
journals.sagepub.com/home/tva
of Determinants and Prevention Strategies

Kader Tekkas Kerman1,2 and Patricia Betrus1

Abstract
Violence against women (VAW) in Turkey is concerning, and to develop and implement effective prevention strategies for
addressing it, careful consideration must be given to the factors that influence it. In this review, we synthesized the body of
literature on VAW in Turkey according to a social ecological framework, which is a theoretical model considering the complex
interplay between individual, relationship, community, and societal factors. Consistent with this framework, we obtained research
articles and commentaries in Turkish and English from a variety of national and international databases and websites regarding risk
factors, cultural practices violating women’s rights, and trends and current practices, including prevention efforts. Our review
revealed that factors influencing VAW are marriage at young age, lower education level, alcohol abuse, and childhood trauma or
abuse history for individual level; having multiple partners, low relationship satisfaction, and forced marriage for relationship level;
poverty, lack of social support, and lack of employment opportunities for community level; cultural acceptance of men’s
superiority and dominance over women, acceptance of violence, cultural practices, and weak legal sanctions for societal level.
Additionally, we reviewed multilevel prevention strategies in the extant literature on effective prevention and intervention efforts
according to social ecological framework and proposed research, practice, and policy implications derived from this framework.

Keywords
domestic violence and cultural contexts, domestic violence, cultural contexts, anything related to domestic violence, predicting
domestic violence

Violence against women (VAW) includes any acts of behaviors
by partner, family, or community that cause physical, psycho-
logical, or sexual harm to women (Krug, Mercy, Dahlberg, &
Zwi, 2002), and it is regarded as one of the most pervasive, yet
underestimated, social, and public health problems worldwide.
It affects all countries of the world and is estimated to exist in
15–71% of them, including Turkey (Ellsberg, Jansen, Heise,
Watts, & Garcia-Moreno, 2008; Krug et al., 2002). The fre-
quency of VAW varies considerably among provinces in
Turkey. From 14.4% to 93% of women have experienced
VAW at some point in their lives (Karaçam, Çalışır, Dündar,
Altuntaş, & Avcı, 2006; Mayda & Akkuş, 2005; Tokuç,
Ekuklu, & Avcioglu, 2010).
Intimate partner violence, one of the most common forms of
VAW, refers to any behavior within an intimate relationship
that causes physical, psychological, or sexual harm to those in
the relationship (Krug et al., 2002). According to the first-ever
comprehensive Turkish nationwide survey on the prevalence of
VAW, 42% of women aged 15–60 years had suffered some
physical or sexual violence by their husbands or partners. The
same study asserted that 18% of the women in rural and 14% of
the women in urban areas experienced sexual violence (Turkish
Republic Prime Ministry Directorate General on the Status of
Women, H. U. I. o. P. S., ICON-Institute Public Sector GmbH,
& BNB Consulting, 2009). A different nationwide survey
showed that 34% of women throughout Turkey had been sub-
jected to physical violence by their husbands in their lifetime,
and this number increased to 40% for women from the Eastern
part of Turkey (Altinay & Arat, 2009). We may assume that
actual sexual violence rates are higher than reported in this
survey (Altinay & Arat, 2009) because women in Turkey, like
their counterparts in Western nations, find it hard to report
sexual violence; and victims of the most serious sexual offenses
often never tell anyone about it.
In addition, femicide, another form of VAW, in Turkey is
endemic. In 2009, the Republic of Turkey Ministry of Justice
stated that the rate of murdered women increased by 1,400%
between 2002 and 2009 (Karal & Aydemir, 2012). After this
1
University of Washington School of Nursing, Seattle, WA, USA
2
Koc University School of Nursing, Istanbul, Turkey
Corresponding Author:
Kader Tekkas Kerman, Koc University School of Nursing, Maltepe Mh.,
Davutpasa Cd. No: 4 Topkapı, Istanbul 34010, Turkey.
Email: ktekkas@ku.edu.tr
2 TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE XX(X)
report, the Turkish government stopped releasing VAW statis-
tics, and nongovernment organizations started to keep and
share the records of VAW. According to Independent Commu-
nication Network statistics compiled from national and local
newspapers, news websites, and agencies, in Turkey during
2016, men killed at least 261 women, raped 75, harassed
119, injured 348, and sexually abused 417 girls (Talhaoglu &
Baki, 2017).
VAW is a violation of human rights, including the right to
equality and nondiscrimination; the rights of life, liberty,
autonomy, and security of the person; the right to privacy; and
the right to an accessible standard of health (Baldez, 2011).
VAW affects not only individuals but also the whole family
and wider community; such effects may include long-term
harm to children and for women, lost work, and homelessness
(Kimerling et al., 2009; Lawrence, Orengo-Aguayo, Langer, &
Brock, 2012). Children from violent families can have beha-
vioral, emotional, and schooling problems, and they might not
receive health care (Almeida, 2013). The effects of witnessing
violence may diminish in time, but the impact can continue
through adulthood. Children may develop depression, anxiety,
and trauma-related symptoms; and the risk that they will per-
petrate or experience violence as adults is increased (Wareham,
Boots, & Chavez, 2009).
In terms of the effects of VAW on women, those who are
physically, sexually, or psychologically victimized are more
likely to miss work or be unemployed (Kimerling et al.,
2009; Lawrence et al., 2012). According to Macmillan
(2000), one in two women who experienced sexual assault had
to quit or were forced to leave their jobs in the first year after an
assault because of their severe reactions. VAW causes home-
lessness as well. Goodman, Fels, and Glenn (2006) showed that
half the homelessness among women and children is caused by
their attempt to escape violence in the home (Goodman, Fels, &
Glenn, 2006).
VAW also severely damages the physical, sexual, reproduc-
tive, emotional, mental, and social well-being of women
(World Health Organization [WHO], 2010). Many short- and
long-term health outcomes are associated with violence,
including physical injury, unwanted pregnancy, abortion, gyne-
cological complications, sexually transmitted infections
(including HIV/AIDS), post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety,
and depression (Ellsberg et al., 2008). Additionally, exposure
to violence during pregnancy is associated with miscarriage,
premature labor, and low birth weight (James, Brody, & Hamil-
ton, 2013). The victims of VAW are also more likely to engage
in high-risk behaviors such as smoking, substance abuse, and
unsafe sex (WHO, 2010).
Designing effective VAW prevention programs involves
identification of risk factors. Studies in various countries have
identified a range of factors that influence VAW risk
(Abramsky et al., 2011; Ellsberg et al., 2008; Jewkes, Levin
& Penn-Kekana, 2002). However, the issue of VAW and its
underlying social determinants of VAW in Turkey remain lim-
ited. It is important to consider several factors including Turk-
ish family structures and cultural practices such as the bride’s
Figure 1. The social ecological model diagram.
price, forced marriages, honor killings, and virginity testing
(Dinc & Sahin, 2009; Marshall & Furr, 2010; Sev’er & Yurda-
kul, 2001; Zeyneloğlu, Kısa, & Yılmaz, 2013). Although VAW
is a widespread concern, prevention programs are few and far
between in Turkey. Some studies have explored certain aspects
of VAW such as the role of culture, laws, or prevention pro-
grams, but a systematic and comprehensive consideration is
still needed (Altinay & Arat, 2009; Ilcan, 1994; Karal & Ayde-
mir 2012; Sev’er & Yurdakul, 2001). For this reason, the pur-
pose of this review is to examine the body of literature on VAW
in Turkey to determine influencing factors and propose poten-
tial prevention strategies and areas of future research, using a
social ecological framework, which is a theoretical model con-
sidering the complex interplay between individual, relation-
ship, community, and societal factors. This review will begin
with a brief description of the social ecological model used in
VAW research, continuing with description of the method of
the review and a synthesis of the literature to identify the
determinants of VAW in Turkey. And then prevention strate-
gies at individual, relationship, community, and societal levels
will be presented.
Social Ecological Model
The social ecological model is a theory-based framework for
understanding the interactive effects of individual and environ-
mental factors that influence attitudes and behaviors. Factor
interactions are considered at four levels, equal importance
being given to factors within a single level. This model looks
at the complicated interactions among four nested levels—indi-
vidual, family, community, and society (Bronfenbrenner &
Morris, 1998; Heise, 1998)—and regards VAW as resulting
from the interaction of factors at each level of the social envi-
ronment. A number of risk and protective factors have been
identified within each of these levels (Mamdouh et al., 2012).
More specifically, this model may be visualized as four
concentric circles (Figure 1). The innermost circle, the individ-
ual level, represents an individual’s biological and personal
history. The second circle, the relationship level, represents the
immediate context in which abuse takes place, usually within
the family or other close relationships. The community level,
which is the third circle, involves social structures and
Tekkas Kerman and Betrus
institutions, whether formal or informal, in which relationships
are embedded. The fourth and outermost circle, the society
level, represents the social, cultural, and political environment,
including cultural norms, laws, and policies (Heise, Ellsberg, &
Gottemoeller, 1999).
According to the social ecological approach, no single factor
can explain why some women are at higher risk of experiencing
violence than others (Heise, 1998; Jewkeset al., 2002), given that
the risk is influenced by interactions among individual, relation-
ship, community, and societal factors (Centers for Disease Con-
trol and Prevention [CDCP], 2009). However, women with
certain risk factors are more likely to become victims of VAW.
Although these factors may not directly cause VAW, they are
correlated with a greater likelihood of violence victimization or
perpetration. Thus, the preferred terminology is risk factors,
rather than causes, for a variety of reasons including the exis-
tence of findings using different methodologies and sampling
techniques (Ansello, 1996; Schiamberg & Gans, 1999).
Method
Social, legal, anthropological, and medical literature—primar-
ily on VAW in Turkey—was reviewed. Research articles and
commentaries written in Turkish and English were found
through searches in a variety of databases: Academic Search
Premier, CINAHL, PubMed, PsycINFO, Elsevier, and the
ULAKBiM Turkish National Database; websites maintained
by the United Nations, United Nations Population Fund, WHO,
and other national and international health organizations were
explored; and newspaper articles obtained. Search terms were
violence against women, intimate partner violence, domestic
violence, spouse abuse, female homicides, murder of women,
women battering, wife abuse, and Turkey. Many of these terms
relate specifically to violence experienced by married and het-
erosexual women. Because violence is not limited to married
couples, however, the broader term violence against women is
used in this review. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were
applied to narrow the articles to those most relevant to the
study. Studies emphasizing the relationship between VAW and
risk factors for experiencing or using violence, cultural prac-
tices violating women’s rights, and contemporary prevention
effort conducted in Turkey were included in this review. The
studies were identified using the following inclusion criteria:
(a) a clear description of the association between the risk fac-
tors and violence outcome, (b) the sample consisting of women
between the ages of 15 and 59, and (c) being conducted in
Turkey. Exclusion criteria for the studies were as follows:
(a) performed in a sample with a specific limitation (psychia-
tric, forensic, or emergency medicine), (b) based on work-
place violence that women face, (c) unpublished studies
(thesis, oral, or poster presentations), and (d) conducted with
children participants. Studies with adolescent samples aged
15–20 years were included if they were combined with adult
samples. Using this approach, 1,706 articles were narrowed to
51 articles, reports, and commentaries published between
2001 and 2017 (Figure 2).
3
Determinants of VAW in Turkey Based on
the Social Ecological Framework
Understanding and identifying risk factors associated with
VAW is critically important for informing strategies and pro-
grams to reduce risk and designing interventions. The reader
should be aware of the fact that the risk factors and implemen-
tation strategies described throughout this review do not imply
that responsibility of preventing VAW falls on women and that
when implementing victim-focused prevention programs, cau-
tion should be exercised in order to avoid victim blaming.
According to the WHO (2010) report on preventing VAW,
more than 50 risk factors have been identified for VAW in the
ecological model. Because the social ecological framework is
used here to help rationalize and integrate findings relating to
VAW from many disciplines, only those factors in each social
ecological level that have the strongest reported effect or are
consistently reported across Turkish research are included in
this review (Figure 3). Determinants of VAW are organized
and presented according to the individual, relationship, com-
munity, and societal levels of the ecological framework
(Table 1).
Individual Level
The biological and personal history factors that may increase a
person’s risk of being a victim or perpetrator of violence con-
stitute the individual level (CDCP, 2009; Garcı́a-Moreno, Jan-
sen, Ellsberg, Heise, & Watts, 2005; Mamdouh et al., 2012).
Salient factors in Turkey include age, education, alcohol or
other substance use, and childhood history of abuse or trauma.
Age. Young age has been a consistent risk factor for being both
perpetrator and victim of VAW (Agcay, Inanici, Colak & Inan-
ici, 2015; Başkale & Sözer, 2015; Harwell & Spence, 2000;
Romans et al., 2007), including marriage at a young age for
women (Marshall & Furr, 2010; Sahin et al., 2010; Tokuç et al.,
2010). Whereas the median age at first marriage is 20.8 years,
39.7% of women marry before turning 18 (Hacettepe Univer-
sity Institute of Population Studies, 2008). The legal marriage
age is 17 for both sexes, but courts can grant permissions for
adolescents aged 15–17 years to marry because of inconsisten-
cies in legal regulations about the minimum age for the mar-
riage in Turkey: The minimum age for girls is 15 years
according to the Turkish Penal Code, 17 years (for both sexes)
according to the Turkish Civil Code, and 18 years according to
the Child Protection Act (Güler & Küçüker, 2010). Adding to
the complexity of understanding marital traditions in Turkey,
many young women marry only within a religious ceremony
and do not go through any legal marriage ceremony. The mar-
riage is then off the record and hence not included in the sta-
tistics (Cakmak, 2009). Therefore, it is difficult to determine
the exact number of childhood marriages in Turkey.
Women marry at an early age for many reasons: father’s
death, being one of a large number of daughters and/or chil-
dren, poor financial circumstances, or lack of other
4 TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE XX(X)
Figure 2. Flowchart of article identification, screening, and inclusion
_
opportunities (Iltaş, 2016). Decisions about a woman’s mar-
riage belong to the family, not just the woman herself. When
the family needs money, the father/family can decide to marry
daughters off at an early age (Sev’er & Yurdakul, 2001). Thus,
a young age at marriage is associated with power dynamics in
the family, leading to increased exposure to violence owing to
the husband’s perceived superiority over women and increased
authority (Yuksel-Kaptanoglu, Turkyilmaz, & Heise, 2012).
Education. Research has indicated that women with lower levels
of education are at greater risk for experiencing violence
(Abramsky et al., 2011; Boyle, Georgiades, Cullen, & Racine,
2009; Koenig, Stephenson, Ahmed, Jejeebhoy, & Campbell,
2006), whereas women with a higher level of education and
married couples with relatively equivalent education levels are
less likely to experience violence (Abramsky et al., 2011;
Dalal, Rahman, & Jansson, 2009; Ellsberg et al., 2008). Studies
from South Africa, India, and Turkey have all shown that
completing secondary school is a protective factor for women,
reducing the likelihood of experiencing violence (Altinay &
Arat, 2009; Jewkes et al., 2002; Koenig et al., 2006; Sen &
Bolsoy, 2017; Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al., 2012). In Turkey,
women typically have an educational level equal to or lower
than their husbands’. If women are more educated than their
husbands, they are less likely to experience violence (Altinay
& Arat, 2009; Balci & Ayranci, 2005; Efe & Ayaz, 2010;
Kocacık, Kutlar, & Erselcan, 2007; Yuksel-Kaptanoglu
et al., 2012). Thus, education may have a role in empowering
women and serving as a gateway to other opportunities
including greater access to resources in society, higher self-
confidence, better employment, and higher income (WHO,
2010).
Employment, which is directly linked to education, can
empower women as well. Whereas working females who grad-
uated from high school had an average annual job income of
16,124 Turkish Liras (TL) in 2015, women who had not
Tekkas Kerman and Betrus
Figure 3. A social ecological model of determinants of violence against women in Turkey.
completed any school had average annual job income of 8,528
TL (Turkish Statistics Institute, 2016). According to a study
from Yuksel-Kaptanoglu, Turkyilmaz, and Heise (2012),
women who did not have an income or whose husbands earned
more than they were at greater risk of violence, suggesting that
economic dependence may increase the risk of violence.
Alcohol use. The evidence is strong that alcohol use is both a
risk factor for and an outcome of VAW (Gil-Gonzalez, Vives-
Cases, Alvarez-Dardet, & Latour-Pérez, 2006; Smith, Hom-
ish, Leonard, & Cornelius, 2012; Stuart et al., 2003). In
reviewing 12 of the possible causes of VAW, the European
Commission (2010a) found that 95% of respondents indicated
that alcoholism was the most frequently indicated cause,
while an additional 92% regarded drug addiction as a cause.
In the United States as well, the National Epidemiologic Sur-
vey on alcohol and related conditions found that alcohol and
cocaine abuse were most strongly associated with violence
perpetration by spouses (Smith et al., 2012). A study in Tur-
key that interviewed women with a history of being assaulted
by their spouses found similar results. Eighty percent of
women’s husbands had at least one “bad habit” such as alco-
hol use or gambling (Balci & Ayranci, 2005). Additionally, in
a study conducted to determine the prevalence of VAW in
Ankara, the capital of Turkey, alcohol use was cited as a
reason for husbands’ violence against their wives (Akar,
Aksakal, Demirel, Durukan, & Özkan, 2010).
Childhood history of abuse or trauma. A childhood history of
abuse or trauma increases the likelihood of children’s experi-
encing or perpetrating violence in the future (Hines & Sau-
dino, 2002; Sahin et al., 2010; Wareham et al., 2009). In a
study of child marriages in Turkey, 25% of women stated they
were already victims of violence before they got married, and
5
after marriage, their exposure to violence by their husband
doubled (Haber Sol, 2012). A nationwide study in Turkey
also showed that women who witnessed their own mothers’
abuse are 1.59 times more likely to be abused by their
spouses. Similarly, men who witnessed their fathers abusing
their mothers during childhood were 1.71 times more likely to
abuse their wives (Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al., 2012). The rela-
tionship between the childhood trauma and the risk of vio-
lence in adulthood is not well understood. From the social
learning theory perspective, violence could be learned and
accepted as a normal means of punishment (Wareham et al.,
2009). Alternatively, the power struggle and person’s pain
avoidance push them to use violence, and the violent activities
might be used as an inappropriate response to stress or conflict
(Chapple, 2003).
Relationship Level
At this level, a person’s closest friends, partners, and family
members, as well as marital household issues, can influence
their behavior and contribute to their range of experiences
(CDCP, 2009; Mamdouh et al., 2012). Factors associated with
VAW victimization/perpetration include the man having mul-
tiple partners, conflict or dissatisfaction in the relationship, and
forced marriages.
Multiple partners. Women’s perceived infidelity and multiple
sexual partnerships by their partners are strongly associated
with physical or sexual violence (Abrahams, Jewkes, Hoffman,
& Laubsher, 2004; Chan, 2009; Dalal et al., 2009; Koenig
et al., 2006). It has been estimated that with multiple partners,
the risk of perpetrating violence increases 1.5 times in India,
1.5 times in Uganda, and 2.4 times in Vietnam (Jewkes et al.,
2006; Koenig et al., 2006; WHO, 2010). In Turkey, women
6 TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE XX(X)

Table 1. Determinants of Violence Against Women in Turkey Based on Social Ecological Framework.

Social Ecological Level Determinants Summary of Findings

Individual level Age Young age at marriage leads to an increased exposure to violence due to husband’s
perceived superiority over women.
Education Women with lower levels of education are at greater risk of experiencing violence.
Alcohol use Alcohol use is both a risk factor for and an outcome of violence against women.
Childhood history of abuse A childhood history of abuse or trauma increases the likelihood of children’s
or trauma experiencing or perpetrating violence in the future.
Relationship level Multiple partners Multiple sexual partnerships by women’s partners are strongly associated with intimate
partner violence or sexual violence.
Relationship satisfaction Low relationship satisfaction is a risk factor for VAW for both men and women.
Additionally, traditional involvement of in-laws in the marital life of young couples
increase marital conflicts and the risk of violence.
Arranged or forced Arranged or forced marriages are associated with increased risk of experiencing
marriages violence against women.
Community level Poverty Women living in poverty are at a greater risk for experiencing violence.
Social support Lack of social support from natal family and removal from previous social networks
make women more vulnerable to experiencing violence.
Employment opportunities Insufficient employment opportunities in rural areas put women at risk of experiencing
violence against women.
Societal level Men’s superiority and Women growing up in the Turkish culture that normalizes men’s superiority over
dominance over women women put themselves at greater risk of violence.
Acceptance of violence Attitudes and social norms about acceptance or approval of violence normalize and
facilitate violence.
Cultural practices Honor killings and virginity testing are the most common cultural practices in Turkey to
violate the human rights of women.
Laws and policies Laws and policies related to gender equality and violence against women, greatly assist
with protection from violence. However, acceptance and implementation of the laws
and legal framework are lagging.
Note. VAW ¼ violence against women.

whose husbands were having multiple partners had a 1.8-fold
greater risk of violence (Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al., 2012).
Given the cultural circumstances, it is thought that men may
seek out multiple sexual partners as a source of peer status and
self-esteem. Thus, they may relate to their female partners
impersonally and without appropriate emotional bonding
(Abrahams et al., 2004; Jewkes, 2002; Jewkes et al., 2006),
which results in higher levels of violence. Additionally, having
multiple partners may influence the risk of violence by increas-
ing marital conflict or by decreasing women’s autonomy in the
family settings (Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al., 2012).
One factor relating to multiple partners in Turkey may be
the difference between civil and religious marriage. Standards
for civil marriage are set by the Turkish legislation and regu-
lations. Couples can have a religious ceremony, if they wish, in
addition to the civil one, but religious marriage has no legal
standing. Thus, in Turkey, some men marry a woman in a civil
marriage and then take several other wives—but only in a
religious marriage because polygamy was abolished in 1926
(Tekeli, 2010).
Relationship satisfaction and marital conflict. Low relationship
satisfaction is a risk factor for VAW for both men and women
(Jewkes, 2002; Slep, Foran, Heyman, & Snarr, 2010; Stith,
Green, Smith, & Ward, 2008; Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al.,
2012). Disagreements fueling the discord include differences
concerning gender roles, status differences (e.g., income, edu-
cation, or age), and sexual behavior or unwillingness to grant
sex. Violence is then typically resorted to as a way of dealing
with conflict or resolving the disagreement (Jewkes, 2002;
Stith et al., 2008; WHO, 2010; Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al.,
2012). Ackerman and Field (2011) examined the association
between VAW and relationship satisfaction among victims,
finding a negative association between victimization and rela-
tionship satisfaction, which was substantially stronger for
women than for men. Similarly, in a meta-analysis examining
the relationship between marital satisfaction/discord and VAW
in heterosexual relationships, Stith, Green, Smith, and Ward.
(2008) found that decreased marital satisfaction was associated
with increased marital conflict and violence in intimate rela-
tionships. In Turkey, an additional factor may be that some
marriage traditions also influence the risk of male VAW in
marital relationships. The traditional involvement of in-laws
in the marital life of young couples, for example, increases
marital conflicts and the risk of violence (Karaoglu et al.,
2006; Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al., 2012). Even though urbaniza-
tion in Turkey has led to an increasing number of couples living
in nuclear families, couples are expected to involve the whole
family in their decision-making process (Karaoglu et al., 2006).
The parents, in-laws, and other relatives may intervene in
childcare, housework, business decisions, and social life. Some
couples are expected to share the most intimate details of their
Tekkas Kerman and Betrus
lives with their parents and in-laws. The customs dictate obey-
ing parents and in-laws, but such interference by the family
may lead to conflict between partners (Karaoglu et al., 2006).
Arranged or forced marriages. Arranged and forced marriages are
still an important concern that should be addressed legally and
culturally in Turkey to reduce VAW. According to Sahin et al.
(2010), Turkish women in arranged or forced marriages are 1.6
times more likely to experience violence during the marriage.
An arranged marriage is not the same as forced marriage. How-
ever, they are treated as interchangeable terms in literature. In
arranged marriages, the family or other relatives play a signif-
icant role in finding a marriage partner for the woman or man
(Ilkaracan, 2001). According to a Turkish Statistics Institute
(2016) report, 52% of young females aged 15–24 years meet
their spouses through their families and relative networks. Both
parties are mostly free to choose whether or not to enter into
that marriage. However, in many cases, even if women are
consulted about the choice of a husband, they cannot exercise
their right of consent to the full because of a high degree of
social control. They accept the marriage and often marry with-
out having established a long-term relationship (Ilkaracan,
2001). In forced marriages, women have no influence over the
choice of their prospective husband and are frequently married
against their will (Ilkaracan, 2001). When young girls are per-
ceived as an economic liability, their marriage may form part of
a family’s survival strategy. Families negotiate the bride-price,
and the husband’s family must pay. In this old tradition, the
family of the bride states a price and asks the groom or groom’s
family to pay a certain sum of amount in order to complete the
marriage. Arranged or forced marriages frequently take place
at an early age based on the decisions of the family, usually
because of poverty or economic problems. Although the bride-
price is illegal, it is still a common practice in some regions of
Turkey. Families sell young daughters to support their families’
economy (United Nations Population Fund, 2014). Addition-
ally, some families regard their daughters as a socioeconomic
burden, and marrying off them as early as possible means “one
less mouth to feed” (United Nations Population Fund, 2014).
According to a child-bride study conducted in 2012 in Diyar-
bakir, a city located in the southeastern Anatolia region in
Turkey, 91% of 300 women had nine or more siblings when
they got married (Haber Sol, 2012).
Community Level
Community level consists of the settings in which social rela-
tionships occur (e.g., schools, workplaces, and neighborhoods).
Researchers focusing on this level attempt to identify the con-
textual characteristics relating to victims or perpetrators of
VAW (CDCP, 2009; Mamdouh et al., 2012). These character-
istics have included poverty and lack of social support and
employment opportunities.
Poverty. Although there is evidence that VAW occurs in all
socioeconomic groups, women living in poverty are at a greater
7
risk for experiencing violence (Heise, Ellsberg, & Gottmoeller,
2002; Jewkes et al., 2002). The literature does not provide a
definitive explanation for why poverty increases the risk of
VAW. One hypothesis is that the relationship between violence
and poverty is mediated by masculine identity. According to
this hypothesis, men living in poverty have difficulty living up
to their culturally expected role as providers, which produce
extreme stress and can lead them to become perpetrators (Jew-
kes, 2002). Other explanations have suggested that various
factors accompanying poverty (e.g., overcrowding or hopeless-
ness) contribute to VAW (Jewkes, 2002). Whatever the expla-
nation, the association between poverty and VAW has been
demonstrated in several studies (Jewkes et al., 2002; Tsai,
2013; Uthman, Moradi, & Lawoko, 2009); and according to
the European Commission (2010a) report, living in poverty is
the third most commonly cited cause (77%) of the 12 included
in the report.
It may be useful to analyze the relationship between poverty
and VAW in terms of community versus individual poverty. In
community poverty, the neighborhood is an important context
in understanding the prevalence of VAW. Significant neigh-
borhood influences include low per capita income, high unem-
ployment rate, resource deprivation, and concentrated
disadvantage. According to Benson, Fox, DeMaris, and Van
Wyk (2003) and Li et al. (2010), neighborhood instability is
strongly associated with elevated risk of VAW. Most research
done in Turkey, however, has measured individual- or
household-level poverty variables rather than community-
level poverty variables (Agcay et.al., 2015; Akar et al., 2010;
Başkale, & Sözer, 2015; Dindas & Ege, 2009; Kocacık et al.,
2007; Tokuç et al., 2010; Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al., 2012).
Individual or household poverty variables include employment
status, personal income or household income, number of
household members, property owned, health, and nutritional
status. Women from poorer households are at greater risk of
experiencing violence than women from better-off households
(Yuksel-Kaptanoglu et al., 2012). Similarly, Akar, Aksakal,
Demirel, Durukan, and Özkan (2010) found that Turkish
women whose monthly household income is about $250 were
3.16 times more likely to experience violence than women
whose monthly household income is US$500. Other poverty-
related risk factors were a higher number of people living in the
house and a lower level of income for the women (Akar et al.,
2010). According to one hypothesis, poverty and economic
distress comprise objective and subjective aspects of employ-
ment and income. Objective conditions, such as being unem-
ployed or having insufficient income to meet the needs of one’s
family, indicate economic distress that may lead to feelings of
frustration that find expression in physical aggression (Benson,
Fox, DeMaris, & Van Wyk, 2003).
Social support. The transition to marriage for adolescent girls is
often associated with limited access to knowledge, lack of
autonomy, removal from previous social networks, entering
into hierarchical and patriarchal family patterns, and experien-
cing sometimes abusive relationships (Haberland, Chong, &
8 TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE XX(X)
Bracken, 2003; Mathur, Greene, & Malhotra, 2003). In some
families in Turkey, a woman goes to live with her husband’s
family after getting married, and the marital family may limit
her contact with her own friends and family (Jensen & Thorn-
ton, 2003; Mathur et al., 2003). Thus, the social support from
her family and friends, education, labor force options, and
power in decision-making are all curtailed (Jensen & Thornton,
2003; Mathur et al., 2003). Such situations threaten women’s
empowerment and increase the likelihood of VAW.
Living in a hierarchical and patriarchal family pattern makes
women more vulnerable to violence. In such societies, a
woman is considered to leave her family behind for the hus-
band’s family. Even if she is exposed to violence, her family
might not accept or support her because she belongs to her
husband’s family (Ilcan, 1994). These families still adhere to
the old saying, “A woman leaving home with a wedding gown
can only come back in a shroud,” meaning that women’s family
neither supports her when she is alive nor accepts her back
unless she is dead (Sugur, 2009).
Employment opportunities. According to studies conducted in
Turkey, women’s unemployment contributes to their experien-
cing violence (Akar et al., 2010; Kocacik & Dogan, 2006;
Kocacık et al., 2007; Tokuç et al., 2010). Unemployed women
are 1.38 times more likely to experience violence than
employed women (Akar et al., 2010). The employment status
and occupational status of women are polarized in Turkey.
Only one third of married women declare themselves to be
employed, and among the women in the workforce, many of
the women work as unpaid family workers, which refers to
working without pay in a family business or in a family farm
(Gedikli, 2014). Although female employment has increased in
urban Turkey, principally owing to new policies that include
mass schooling, women who live in rural areas have fewer
opportunities, especially in Eastern Turkey. About a quarter
of the Kurdish and Arabic women in Eastern Turkey do not
speak Turkish and thus have difficulties getting economic
opportunities (Ozbay, 1995). Consequently, these women are
still controlled by their families and patriarchal traditions and
values, which limit their power to manage their own lives and
make these women vulnerable to violence.
Societal Level
The societal level includes the social and cultural norms and
policies that may contribute to or protect against the perpetra-
tion and victimization of VAW (CDCP, 2009; Mamdouh
et al., 2012). These factors include inequitable social norms
such as men’s superiority and dominance over women, accep-
tance of violence, cultural practices, and weak legal sanctions
against VAW.
Men’s superiority and dominance over women. Research has
shown a positive correlation between women’s obedience and
husband’s withdrawal patterns from family conflict and vio-
lence (Hortaçsu, Kalaycioĝlu, & Rittersberger-Tilic, 2003;
Sagrestano, Heavey, & Christensen, 1999). Women who ordi-
narily accept male superiority are more likely to conform to
patriarchal demands and to suffer violence from men (Marshall
& Furr, 2010). In the Turkish family, men are expected to have
control of the home (Sakalli-Ugurlu & Beydogan, 2002). The
husband is culturally accepted as the ruler of the family and is
regarded as the formal authority, which the wife and children
must ultimately obey (Hortaçsu et al., 2003; Sakalli, 2001).
Men believe that they have the right to control and comment
on women’s behavior in public (Sakalli-Ugurlu & Beydogan,
2002; Sev’er, 2012). No written or legal rules govern where
women can go or visit, but most women implicitly know that
some places in the city are closed to women (Kadin Dayanisma
Vakfi, 2008). Unwritten rules control women’s behavior, and it
is these unwritten cultural rules that can cost women their lives.
Even something as simple as wearing the wrong dress or talk-
ing with someone viewed as inappropriate can be cause for
punishment, often leading to violence. In one study conducted
in Turkey, women’s disobedience, inappropriate attire, unde-
sirable friends, and bad habits (substance abuse and gambling)
were accepted as provocations for men to use violence
(Hortaçsu et al., 2003).
Because the Turkish culture normalizes men’s superiority
over women, the latter’s risk of violence from their husbands is
greater (Hortaçsu et al., 2003; Tokuç et al., 2010). The results
of a study conducted in Edirne, Turkey, indicated that 22% of
women accepted as standard that men make important familial
decisions; 15% that men are cleverer than women; and 24%
that a woman must not discuss anything with her husband if she
does not agree with him (Tokuç et al., 2010). Some researchers
say that women accept the idea of their husbands’ superiority
because of the Turkish patriarchal structure in which they have
grown up (Tokuç et al., 2010). However, it is also possible that
women are scared to challenge their husbands over matters of
opinion because they fear violence. For this reason, they let
men make the important decisions. In a study of 24,647 people
in Turkey, 8% of women said that their spouses respond to
disagreement with force. According to the same study, even
the disagreements would not end in violence, husbands would
raise their voices (66.2%) or leave the house (9.5%). Rest of
them talk to each other and resolve disagreement (Ministry of
Family and Social Policies, 2006).
Acceptance of violence. Beliefs, attitudes, and social norms also
affect the acceptance of violence (Haj-Yahia, 1998a, 1998b;
Haj-Yahia & Uysal, 2008; Witte & Mulla, 2012). Studies
examining violence within marriage in India, Turkey, Iraq, and
Ethiopia have found that women in these cultures have a broad
acceptance of spousal abuse (Abeya, Afework, & Yalew, 2011;
Altinay & Arat, 2009; Linos, Khawaja, & Kaplan, 2012; Rani,
Bonu, & Diop-Sidibe, 2004). For many years, VAW was
viewed as a family matter. A man was expected to keep what
happened in his household within the family. Many of the
married women experiencing violence accepted their partners’
assaults. They expressed their feelings with statements such as
“He is my husband, so he can both love me and hit me” or
Tekkas Kerman and Betrus
“Beating comes from heaven” (Dinc & Sahin, 2009; Tas, Uya-
nik, & Karakaya, 1997). Such beliefs and acceptance have
facilitated and even perpetuated the violence, although
women’s perspectives and beliefs have started to change (Alti-
nay & Arat, 2009).
Cultural practices. Various types of harmful cultural practices
worldwide constitute VAW and a violation of women’s per-
sonal dignity and human rights such as female genital mutila-
tion, acid attacks as means to deform women’s faces and
bodies, stove burning that refers to a woman being burned alive
in a gasoline stove, breast ironing, in which the breasts of
pubescent girls are pressed flat as a means of delaying their
development and protecting them from unwanted male atten-
tion, honor killings, virginity testing, and stoning as a punish-
ment of adultery (Greiff, 2010; Innocent, Ndonko, Ngoo,
Soares, & Macassa, 2012; Monagan, 2009; United Nations
ESCAP, 2007; UN Women, 2009; Varol, Fraser, Ng, Jaldesa,
& Hall, 2014). Honor killings and virginity testing are the most
common in Turkey; the others mentioned above are not com-
mon (Dinc & Sahin, 2009; Marshall & Furr, 2010; Sev’er &
Yurdakul, 2001).
Honor killings, the most serious form of VAW in Turkey,
occur when a woman is killed for stepping outside of her
socially prescribed role as wife or daughter and is thus deemed
to have shamed the family (e.g., by engaging in extramarital
sexual relationship or interacting with men outside the family).
A male member of the family usually carries out the killing
(Dinc & Sahin, 2009; Sev’er & Yurdakul, 2001). In a culturally
traditional society, honor means everything, and loss of honor
affects not only a person but the whole family or community. If
a man’s honor is lost through the behavior of a female relative,
he can restore his own reputation and that of the family through
killing the woman. According to Independent Communication
Network statistics, at least 1,134 women were murdered in
2010–2015 and 6.2% of those women were killed in honor
killings (Ulukaya, 2015). However, it is impossible to obtain
accurate statistics on the number of honor crimes in Turkey
because authorities do not systematically prosecute them.
Virginity testing in some regions of Turkey, which involves
vaginal exams, relates to family honor as well. Young women
suspected of premarital sex are forcefully taken to hospitals by
their families. If the young women’s hymen is ruptured, regard-
less of the reason, the family has it surgically repaired, thus
“re-establishing her virginity” (Zeyneloğlu et al., 2013).
Many young women are now requesting a virginity test to
prove they are intact to prospective men, and requests for
hymen repair are increasing. Sometimes, the surgery is done
in secret prior to marriage because the women fear that if it is
ruptured, their husband or his family will honor kill them
(Zeyneloğlu et al., 2013).
The government has issued a decree to clarify the difference
between virginity testing and the medically necessary vaginal
and anal exams required by law (Aygun, 2016) and has banned
forced virginity testing. Nonetheless, it continues to be wide-
spread as the government has been slow to implement or
9
enforce the law, and the practice is endorsed by some govern-
ment officials in parts of Turkey (Zeyneloğlu et al., 2013). Nor
do Turkish laws prohibit hymen repair for family honor (Zey-
neloğlu et al., 2013).
Laws and policies. Laws and policies related to gender equality
and VAW greatly assist with protection from violence (Ells-
berg et al., 2015; Michau, Horn, Bank, Dutt, & Zimmerman,
2015). Policies helpful to victims of VAW are those who
inform women about accessible resources, help them leave
abusive environments, and provide them with services to treat
physical and psychological trauma (e.g., community awareness
and advocacy, crisis services, and medium- and long-term psy-
chological consultation services; Ofstehage, Gandhi, Sholk,
Radday, & Stanzler, 2011). Important legal reforms might
include strengthening women’s civil rights, sensitizing and
training police and judges about VAW, and strengthening and
expanding laws defining rape and sexual assault within mar-
riage (WHO, 2010). A new Turkish law passed in 2012, “Law
for the Protection of the Family and Prevention of VAW-Law
No: 6248,” seeks to protect women as well as all family mem-
bers who are victims of violence and offers financial aid, psy-
chological and legal guidance, and support services (Hacettepe
University Institute of Population Studies, 2014). The law also
requests violence prevention and monitoring centers to act as
shelters for victims, since there are only 103 women’s shelters
in all of Turkey for a population of 77.6 million (Women
Against Violence Europe Network, 2012). Women can now
obtain protection orders; and according to the new law, if the
perpetrator violates the protection order, he will be jailed for
the first offense for 3 days.
Despite these laws as well as positive developments in the
legal framework, acceptance and implementation are lagging.
For example, in 2014, many women were killed by their abu-
sive husbands even after applying for police protection because
judges sent the women back home. Additionally, judges in
Turkey tend to ignore laws in support of women, instead mak-
ing their decisions based on certain legal texts that benefit men
(Alat, 2006).
Prevention Strategies for VAW in Turkey
Based on the Social Ecological Framework
Prevention policies and programs for addressing VAW in Tur-
key need to address the four levels of the social ecological
framework (societal, community, relationship, and individual)
holistically because such an approach is more likely to sustain
prevention efforts over time compared to any single interven-
tion. The unequal power relations attached to VAW manifest
among individuals, but they arise from power relations
embedded the broader society. Thus, the discussion of preven-
tion strategies for VAW in Turkey in terms of research, prac-
tice, and policy will be in reverse order to the discussion about
factors, beginning with society at large (Table 2 summarizes
implications for practice, policy, and research for preventing
VAW). It should be noted that when implementing victim-
10 TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE XX(X)

Table 2. Implications of the Review for Practice, Policy, and Research in Turkey.

Social Ecological Level Implications

Societal level  Mobilizing community, social marketing campaigns, and public education should be used as strategies to raise
awareness about violence against women and to change societal norms.
 Regulations on reducing alcohol use should be monitored and enforced.
 Social awareness must be raised for local governments and public officials, and they should set an agenda for
addressing early marriages.
 Government should consistently enforce laws relating to VAW.
Community level  Economic opportunities need to be created to increase employment status of women living in rural areas of
Turkey.
 Distinct community strategies should be formulated for urban and rural settings.
 Schools should be built to rural regions or school transportation should be provided to students.
 Childcare support should be provided to workingwomen.
 Social networks and recreational opportunities should be created for victimized women.
Relationship level  Women should be empowered with education and employment to have a voice at home and to participate
decision-making.
 Communication skills training programs focusing on culturally appropriate conflict management should be
designed for couples.
 Young people should be educated through youth work, schools, and outreach projects about forced and
arranged marriages.
Individual level  Researchers should conduct more research to explore men and masculinity. Men and boys engagement
programs should be designed to promote gender equality and to prevent VAW.
 BIPs can be implemented with the theory- and evidence-informed approaches for studying their effectiveness in
a different context.

focused prevention programs, caution should be exercised in
order to avoid victim blaming or implying that women carry the
responsibility of preventing VAW.
Societal Level
Addressing risk factors at the societal level may be a lasting
way to reduce VAW. At the societal level, prevention strategies
should be based on transforming societal norms, laws, and
policies. A 2013 survey of policies on VAW across 70 coun-
tries over 40 years shows that feminist civil society activism
has achieved the most in evoking government action (Michau
et al., 2015). In places where honor and shame shape societal
norms, social campaigns should aim to dishonor and shame a
man who is abusive. Societal acceptance of VAW must change
primarily among men. In Turkey, the media are increasingly
employed to reach larger groups, but “social marketing” needs
to involve individuals as well. Currently, protesters are mostly
women, and the number of protests is limited. No empirical
evidence suggests that social communication programs alone
can prevent violence in high-income countries; nonetheless,
community mobilization programs in low- or middle-income
countries seem to have brought about significant changes in the
knowledge and use of services, attitudes toward gender, and
acceptance of VAW and girls (Ellsberg et al., 2015). For exam-
ple, a community mobilization approach to prevent VAW in
Kampala, Uganda, has shown highly promising results by
reducing physical VAW by 54% (Michau et al., 2015).
In terms of harmful alcohol use associated with violence
perpetration, we may suggest that reducing access to alcohol
and its harmful use through the laws and regulations will lead
to reductions in VAW. The results are mixed on whether stra-
tegies for reducing alcohol consumption are effective in pre-
venting VAW, but reducing alcohol availability and regulating
alcohol prices have shown some promise (WHO, 2009). For
example, restricting the hours of sale of alcohol in one town in
Australia may have reduced the number of VAW victims pre-
senting to the hospital (Douglas, 1998). An economic modeling
study in the United States estimated that a 1% increase in the
price of alcohol may decrease the probability of violence
toward women by about 5% (Markowitz, 2000). In Turkey, a
government prohibition on alcohol sales after 10 p.m. has led to
an underground alcohol market in which couriers deliver drinks
to people’s homes (Kizilkaya, 2013). Hence, policies on reduc-
ing alcohol availability and regulating alcohol prices should be
monitored and enforced.
As indicated earlier, inconsistencies concerning the legal
minimum age for marriage in Turkey should be eliminated and
the end of childhood specified as age 18 to fight against early
marriages. Delaying the age of marriage requires working with
communities to question, challenge, and change such norms.
“Girls Not Brides” is a global partnership of over 800 civil
society organizations that aims to end child marriage by raising
awareness of the scale and impact of the problem and mobiliz-
ing the support needed to end it (Svanemyr, Chandra-Mouli,
Christiansen, & Mbizvo, 2012). The “Child Brides” project in
Turkey is part of this movement. Early results from this project
in 2010–2011 revealed that Turkey has no agenda for addres-
sing early marriages and that local government and public
officials lack awareness (Flying Broom, 2012). Besides raising
social awareness regarding the harms of early marriages, pun-
ishments must be intensified for people who victimize children.
Tekkas Kerman and Betrus
Although laws have been adopted to prevent marriage under 18
years of age, they are often not well enforced.
Community Level
Prevention strategies at the community level should focus on
creating economic and educational opportunities for women,
increasing support and options for women to combine work-
ing outside of the home and childcare, and creating social
networks for victimized women. Women’s empowerment via
employment can be a key strategy in reducing violence (Ells-
berg et al., 2015). For example, a clustered randomized trial
that combined microfinance with participatory training and
skills-building sessions on HIV, cultural beliefs, communica-
tion, and violence showed a 55% reduction in women’s report
of physical or sexual violence (Kim et al., 2007). Many
women in rural areas of Turkey still lack the opportunity to
work in paid jobs. A limited number of companies, lack of
education, inability to speak Turkish (for 1 in 25 women;
Gündüz-Hoşgör & Smits, 2008), and hindrances from social
norms are the main obstacles for rural women. Interventions
should increase the educational attainment of women, estab-
lish language outreach, increase employment opportunities
outside of the family, and work on gender equality. In cities,
a business improvement district to increase employment
opportunities for women should be established.
Despite increasing opportunities owing to economic growth
and higher female education attainment in urban settings in
Turkey, women’s participation in the labor force is low and
decreasing: It decreased from 34.3% in 1988 to 27.5% in 2015
(Turkish Statistics Institute, 1988, 2015). Given that the major-
ity of urban women (71%) are housewives (Ozbay, 1995), one
reason for their nonparticipation in the workforce is lack of
support in terms of combining work outside of the home with
housework and childcare (Ozbay, 1995). Preschool enrollment
and childcare centers for children under the age of 5 are priva-
tized; thus, only high-income and high-education families can
take advantage of these services. Because workplaces with
fewer than 150 women employees are not required to provide
childcare options, employers may try not to hire more than
_
150 women to avoid the obligation (Ilkkaracan, 2012). Steps
should be taken to eliminate this bias and to monitor work-
places for it. Childcare centers are also urgently needed in the
communities for women with low education and income.
A low level of schooling is both a reason for and conse-
quence of early marriages and VAW (Cin & Walker, 2016;
_
Iltaş, 2016). Therefore, the law should require girls to attend
school. Compulsory education in Turkey was extended from 8
to 12 years of age as of 2012–2013 (Gün & Baskan, 2014).
Despite improvements, the current education system in is not
entirely functional, and changes are needed to increase level of
education for girls in some communities. Such educational
interventions as building secondary schools in rural regions
or providing public transportation to schools, as well as
improving the quality of education, may also have beneficial
indirect effects concerning violence, abuse, and early
11
marriages (WHO, 2009). Financial or material incentives such
as school uniforms, livestock, or cash transfers have been used
with promising results for keeping girls in school and unmar-
ried until the age of 18 years (Duflo, Dupas, Kremer, & Sinei,
2007; Michau et al., 2015).
Lastly, social networks should be created for victimized
women. Being in a violent relationship limits women’s partic-
ipation in social networks and makes them more vulnerable and
socially isolated (Choi, Cheung, & Cheung, 2012). Victimized
women, starting with those at risk, need recreational opportu-
nities because such activities may assist the women in famil-
iarizing themselves with the surrounding community and local
resources, thus helping to create the social networks needed.
Relationship Level
Primarily, the unequal position of women in marriage and such
marriage traditions as the involvement of in-laws in the marital
life of young couples put women at risk of violence. Rather
than being subject to parents and in-laws, women should make
their own decisions and, through education and employment,
become empowered to have a voice at home. Another preven-
tive measure may be communication skills training, which
focuses on culturally appropriate conflict management skills
(Oetzel & Duran, 2004). Group-based training interventions
have also been shown to empower women and girls through
interventions relating to cognitive and noncognitive life skills,
as demonstrated through significant improvements in reduction
in violence (Ellsberg et al., 2015).
Although Turkey has legislation on forced marriages, it is inef-
fectual and unenforceable. Even worse, a law was proposed in
2016 (and stopped through nationwide protests) that would allow
men who sexually abused girls under the age of 18, and subse-
quently married them, to have their convictions overturned or
avoid prosecution (Agerholm, 2016). The government, first,
should combat forced marriages rather than protecting the perpe-
trators. Second, access to services relating to forced marriages
should be increased, as they are currently limited. Third, education
and training on forced marriage and VAW should be provided to
parents through community work, religious bodies, and outreach
projects (WHO, 2009). Programs in India and Ethiopia have
demonstrated the efficacy of community conversations, mentor-
ship, and community service activities to encourage parents to
keep girls in school and to delay marriages. The results showed
success in delaying marriage (by 1þ years) by way of addressing
several drivers of early or forced marriages. Girls involved showed
increased knowledge and skills and changes occurred in commu-
nity attitudes toward child marriage (Erulkar & Muthengi, 2009;
Pande, Kurz, Walia, MacQuarrie, & Jain, 2006).
Individual Level
Prevention strategies at the individual level should focus on
changing attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. To prevent VAW,
each individual must be seen as a member of the community
and society and, supported to be, a potential agent of change.
12
The key role that men and boys play in changing social norms
and power balance and empowering women and girls to
achieve gender equality has been addressed in recent years in
a series of milestone international meetings and documents
(European Commission, 2010b; UNFPA, 1994). Young men
with education and support have the ability to be agents of
change in their own and loved one’s lives. However, research
on males is relatively new in Turkey; thus, no men’s or young
boy’s gender engagement program has been implemented to
promote gender equality and to prevent VAW. Such programs
from other countries could be used as a foundation, but pro-
grammatic interventions need to be customized, using knowl-
edge of individual factors for young men in Turkey to
transform gender–power imbalances for a peaceful coexis-
tence. Yaari Dosti, a program in India, demonstrated that young
men in the intervention groups were about 5 times less likely to
report having perpetrated violence in the previous 3 months
than were young men in the comparison sites (Verma et al.,
2008). Similar programs implemented in the Balkans, Brazil,
and Ethiopia show promise in changing young men’s attitudes
toward gender equality and violence (Pulerwitz & Barker,
2008; Pulerwitz et al., 2010).
In Turkey, the few studies on these issues focus mostly on
women’s empowerment or interventions with victims of vio-
lence; no research aims to change abusers’ cognitions, ideolo-
gies, or behaviors. Nor does Turkey have laws that mandate
men who have committed VAW to participate in an interven-
tion program. The current law mentioned previously puts men
in prison only if they violate a protection order. VAW needs to
be regarded as a serious crime, and the government should
consistently enforce laws relating to VAW.
Batterer intervention programs (BIPs), widely used in high-
income countries (Ellsberg et al., 2015), have proven moder-
ately successful at preventing VAW in the United States
(Gondolf, 2004) and minimally effective on recidivism
(Babcock, Green, & Robie, 2004). Certain “principles of effec-
tive intervention” have been demonstrated to markedly reduce
recidivism into BIPs (Radatz & Wright, 2016). Nonetheless,
evidence on the effectiveness of the BIPs in middle- or low-
income countries remains scarce. Thus, it is recommended that
BIPs be implemented with the theory- and evidence-informed
approaches used in other countries for studying their effective-
ness in a different context.
Conclusion
The problem of VAW is urgent, making development of pol-
icies and preventive strategies a priority. Careful consideration
of the factors that influence VAW through the social ecological
framework is essential for creating and sustaining effective
prevention strategies. This overview of VAW determinants in
Turkey, along with prevention strategies at every social level,
demonstrates that VAW should be a part of the public health
agenda in Turkey. Comprehensive, multisectorial, long-term
collaboration between governments and civil society at all lev-
els of the ecological framework is necessary (Garcı́a-Moreno
TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE XX(X)
et al., 2015). Eliminating VAW is achievable, but it will not
be quick or easy. Promoting social and economic empower-
ment of women and girls, building evidence base for advo-
cacy and awareness, reforming civil and criminal legal
frameworks, and engaging men and boys to promote non-
violence and gender equality show promise as effective pre-
ventive strategies for Turkey.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. Nancy Woods, Dr. Jon
Conte, and Dr. Shawn Elmore for their comments on an earlier version
of this review.
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) received no financial support for the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.
References
Abeya, S. G., Afework, M. F., & Yalew, A. W. (2011). Intimate
partner violence against women in western Ethiopia: Prevalence,
patterns, and associated factors. BMC Public Health, 11, 913.
Abrahams, N., Jewkes, R., Hoffman, M., & Laubsher, R. (2004).
Sexual violence against intimate partners in Cape Town: Preva-
lence and risk factors reported by men. Bulletin of the World
Health Organization, 82, 330–337.
Abramsky, T., Watts, C. H., Garcia-Moreno, C., Devries, K., Kiss, L.,
Ellsberg, M., . . . Heise, L. (2011). What factors are associated
with recent intimate partner violence? Findings from the WHO
multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence.
BMC Public Health, 11, 109.
Ackerman, J., & Field, L. (2011). The gender asymmetric effect of
intimate partner violence on relationship satisfaction. Violence
Victims, 26, 703–724.
Agcay, G., Inanici, S. Y., Colak, B., & Inanici, M. A. (2015). Risk
factors for violence against women by intimate partners in
Sakarya, Turkey. Journal of Forensic and Legal Medicine, 36,
37–42.
Agerholm, H. (2016). Turkey child rape protests: Thousands take to
streets against law that would let men off if they marry victim,
Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/
world/europe/turkey-child-rape-protest-thousands-law-men-freed-
marry-victim-istanbul-ankara-izmir-akp-erdogan-a7428166.html
Akar, T., Aksakal, F., Demirel, B., Durukan, E., & Özkan, S. (2010).
The prevalence of domestic violence against women among a
group woman: Ankara, Turkey. Journal of Family Violence, 25,
449–460.
Alat, Z. (2006). News coverage of violence against women: The Turk-
ish case. Feminist Media Studies, 6, 295–314.
Almeida, T. (2013). Violence against women, the health sector
responds. Retrieved from http://seedstheatre.org/violence-against-
women-the-health-sector-responds/
Tekkas Kerman and Betrus
Altinay, A. G., & Arat, Y. (2009). Violence against women in Turkey:
A Nationwide study. Istanbul, Turkey: Punto. ISBN: 978-975-
01103-7-5.
Ansello, E. (1996). Causes and theories. In L. A. Baumhorer & S. C.
Bell (Eds.), Abuse, neglect and exploitation of older persons: Stra-
tegies for assessment and intervention (pp. 7–30). Baltimore, MD:
Health Professions Press.
Aygun, A. (2016). Genital Muayene Sucu [Crime of genital examina-
tion]. Turkiye Adalet Akdemisi Dergisi, 7, 377–394.
Babcock, J. C., Green, C. E., & Robie, C. (2004). Does batterers’
treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence
treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1023–1053.
Balci, Y. G., & Ayranci, U. (2005). Physical violence against women:
Evaluation of women assaulted by spouses. Journal of Clinical
Forensic Medicine, 12, 258–263.
Baldez, L. (2011). The UN Convention to Eliminate All Forms of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW): A new way to mea-
sure women’s interests. Politics & Gender, 7, 419–423.
Başkale, H., & Sözer, A. (2015). Eşinden/partnerinden şiddet gören
kadınların şiddet algısı ve mağduriyet nedenleri [Violence percep-
tion and victimization reasons of women exposed to spouse/partner
violence]. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin, 14, 468–474
Benson, M. L., Fox, G. L., DeMaris, A., & Van Wyk, J. (2003).
Neighborhood disadvantage, individual economic distress and vio-
lence against women in intimate relationships. Journal of Quanti-
tative Criminology, 19, 207–235.
Boyle, M. H., Georgiades, K., Cullen, J., & Racine, Y. (2009). Com-
munity influences on intimate partner violence in India: Women’s
education, attitudes towards mistreatment and standards of living.
Social Science & Medicine, 69, 691–697.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (1998).The ecology of develop-
mental processes. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner, (Eds.), Handbook
of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development
(pp. 993–1028). New York, NY: Wiley.
Cakmak, D. (2009). Turkiye’de cocuk gelinler [Child brides in Tur-
key]. Retrieved October 4, 2014, from http://www.umut.org.tr/
HukukunGencleri/TamMetinlerSunular/DirenCakmak.pdf
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009). The social-
ecological model: A framework for prevention Retrieved July
20, 2013, from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/overview/
social-ecologicalmodel.html
Chan, K. L. (2009). Sexual violence against women and children in
Chinese societies. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 10, 69–85.
Chapple, C. L. (2003). Examining intergenerational violence: Violent
role modeling or weak parental controls? Violence Victims, 18,
143.
Choi, S. Y., Cheung, Y.-W., & Cheung, A. K. (2012). Social isolation
and spousal violence: Comparing female marriage migrants with
local women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 74, 444–461.
Cin, F. M., & Walker, M. (2016). Reconsidering girls’ education in
Turkey from a capabilities and feminist perspective. International
Journal of Educational Development, 49, 134–143.
Dalal, K., Rahman, F., & Jansson, B. (2009). Wife abuse in rural
Bangladesh. Journal of Biosocial Science, 41, 561.
Dinc, H., & Sahin, N. H. (2009). Bir kadin sagligi sorunu: Tore ve
namus cinayetleri [A women health problem: Custom and honor
13
killings]. Istanbul Universitesi Hemsirelik Dergisi [In Turkish], 17,
123–132.
Dindas, H., & Ege, E. (2009). Domestic violence against women
association between socio-economic status and quality of life.
Turkish Journal of Research & Development in Nursing, 11, 5–17.
Douglas, M. (1998). Restriction of the hours of sale of alcohol in a
small community: A beneficial impact. Australian and New Zeal-
and Journal of Public Health, 22, 714–719.
Duflo, E., Dupas, P., Kremer, M., & Sinei, S. (2007). Education and
HIV/AIDS prevention: Evidence from a randomized evaluation in
Western Kenya. (Policy Reseach Working Paper No. 4024).
Washington, DC: World Bank, p. 33.
Efe, Ş. Y., & Ayaz, S. (2010). Kadına yönelik aile içi şiddet ve
kadınların aile içi şiddete bakışı. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi
[Domestic Violence Against Women and Women’s Perspectives
Towards Domestic Violence], 11, 23–29.
Ellsberg, M., Arango, D. J., Morton, M., Gennari, F., Kiplesund, S.,
Contreras, M., & Watts, C. (2015). Prevention of violence against
women and girls: What does the evidence say? The Lancet, 385,
1555–1566.
Ellsberg, M., Jansen, H. A., Heise, L., Watts, C. H., & Garcia-Moreno,
C. (2008). 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. The Lancet, 371,
1165–1172.
Erulkar, A. S., & Muthengi, E. (2009). Evaluation of berhane hewan:
A program to delay child marriage in rural Ethiopia. International
Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 35, 6–14.
European Commission. (2010a). Domestic violence against women
report 2010. Belgium, Europe: Directorate-General for Justice,
Freedom and Security.
European Commission. (2010b). EUROPE 2020: A strategy for smart,
sustainable and inclusive growth. Brussel, Belgium: Author.
Flying Broom. (2012). Child brides: Early and forced marriage in
Turkey. In H. Guler & S. Dogan (Eds.), Child Brides, Early Mar-
riages: One size too big! (pp. 1-93). Ankara, Turkey: Author.
Garcı́a-Moreno, C., Jansen, H., Ellsberg, M., Heise, L., & Watts, C.
(2005). WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic
violence against women: Pregny-Chambésy, Geneva, Switzerland:
World Health Organization.
Garcı́a-Moreno, C., Zimmerman, C., Morris-Gehring, A., Heise, L.,
Amin, A., Abrahams, N., . . . Watts, C. (2015). Addressing vio-
lence against women: A call to action. The Lancet, 385,
1685–1695.
Gedikli, C. (2014). Female labour supply in Turkey: Do traditional
gender roles matter? Paper presented at IARIW 33rd General Con-
ference, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Gil-Gonzalez, D., Vives-Cases, C., Alvarez-Dardet, C., & Latour-
Pérez, J. (2006). Alcohol and intimate partner violence: Do we
have enough information to act? The European Journal of Public
Health, 16, 278–284.
Gondolf, E. W. (2004). Evaluating batterer counseling programs: A
difficult task showing some effects and implications. Aggression
and Violent Behavior, 9, 605–631.
Goodman, L., Fels, K., & Glenn, C. (2006). No safe place: Sexual
assault in the lives of homeless women. National Online Resource
14
Center on Violence Against Women. Retrieved June 2006 from
http://www.vawnet.org
Greiff, S. (2010). No justice in justifications: Violence against women in
the name of culture, religion, and tradition. Resource Paper, Global
Campaign to Stop Killing and Stoning Women, 1–44. Retrived from
https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/8810108/
sksw%20policy%20briefing%20series%201_no%20justice%20
in%20justifications_greiff.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId¼AKIAIW
OWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires¼1527687568&Signature¼
UxsFWN3W%2FjtCsUi0hxEufQphjww%3D&response-content-
disposition¼inline%3B%20filename%3DNo_Justice_in_Justifica
tions_Violence_ag.pdf
Güler, Ö., & Küçüker, H. (2010). Early marriages among adolesencent
girls in Afyonkarahisar, Turkey. European Journal of Gender
Medicine, 7, 365–371.
Gün, F., & Baskan, G. A. (2014). New education system in Turkey
(4þ 4þ 4): A critical outlook. Procedia-Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 131, 229–235.
Gündüz-Hoşgör, A., & Smits, J. (2008). Variation in labor market
participation of married women in Turkey. Women’s Studies Inter-
national Forum, 31, 104–117.
Haberland, N., Chong, E., & Bracken, H. (2003). Married adoles-
cents: An overview. Paper presented at WHO/UNFPA/Population
Council Technical Consultation on Married Adolescents, World
Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
Haber Sol. (2012). Diyarbakır’da çocuk gelin raporu [Child brides
report in Diyarbakir]. Haber Sol. Retrieved from http://haber.so
l.org.tr/kadinin-gunlugu/diyarbakirda-cocuk-gelin-raporu-13-
yasimdaydim-kocama-baba-diyordum-haberi-63339
Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies. (2008). Turkey
demographic and health survey. Retrieved from http://www.hip
s.hacettepe.edu.tr/eng/tdhs08/
Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies. (2014). Domes-
tic violence against women in turkey: Summary report. Ankara,
Turkey: The Republic of Turkey Ministry of Family and Social
Policies.
Haj-Yahia, M. M. (1998a). Beliefs about wife beating among palesti-
nian women the influence of their patriarchal ideology. Violence
Against Women, 4, 533–558.
Haj-Yahia, M. M. (1998b). A patriarchal perspective of beliefs about
wife beating among Palestinian men from the West Bank and the
Gaza Strip. Journal of Family Issues, 19, 595–621.
Haj-Yahia, M. M., & Uysal, A. (2008). Beliefs about wife beating
among medical students from Turkey. Journal of Family Violence,
23, 119–133.
Harwell, T. S., & Spence, M. R. (2000). Population surveillance for
physical violence among adult men and women, Montana 1998.
American journal of preventive medicine, 19, 321-324.
Heise, L. (1998). Violence against women an integrated, ecological
framework. Violence Against Women, 4, 262–290.
Heise, L., Ellsberg, M., & Gottemoeller, M. (1999). Ending violence
against women. Population Reports, 27, 1.
Heise, L., Ellsberg, M., & Gottmoeller, M. (2002). A global overview
of gender-based violence. International Journal of Gynecology &
Obstetrics, 78, S5–S14.
TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE XX(X)
Hines, D. A., & Saudino, K. J. (2002). Intergenerational transmission
of intimate partner violence a behavioral genetic perspective.
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 3, 210–225.
Hortaçsu, N., Kalaycioĝlu, S., & Rittersberger-Tilic, H. (2003). Intra-
family aggression in Turkey: Frequency, instigation, and accep-
tance. The Journal of Social Psychology, 143, 163–184.
Ilcan, S. M. (1994). Marriage regulation and the rhetoric of alliance in
northwestern Turkey. Ethnology, 33, 273–296.
Ilkaracan, P. (2001). Islam and women’s sexuality: A research report
from Turkey. In M. Hunt, P. Jung, & R. Balakrishan (Eds.), Good
sex: Feminist perspectives from the world’s religions. New Jersey,
NJ: Rutgers University Press.
_
Ilkkaracan, _ (2012). Why so few women in the labor market in
I.
Turkey? Feminist Economics, 18, 1–37.
_
Iltaş, Y. (2016). Bleeding wound: Underage marriages in Turkey.
E-Journal of Law, 1, 1–15.
Innocent, M., Ndonko, F., Ngoo, G., Soares, J., & Macassa, G. (2012).
Breaking the silence: Understanding the practice of breast ironing
in cameroon. African Journal of Health Sciences, 23, 260–265.
James, L., Brody, D., & Hamilton, Z. (2013). Risk factors for domestic
violence during pregnancy: A meta-analytic review. Violence Vic-
tims, 28, 359–380.
Jensen, R., & Thornton, R. (2003). Early female marriage in the
developing world. Gender & Development, 11, 9–19.
Jewkes, R. (2002). Intimate partner violence: Causes and prevention.
Lancet, 359, 1423–1429.
Jewkes, R., Dunkle, K., Koss, M. P., Levin, J. B., Nduna, M., Jama, N.,
& Sikweyiya, Y. (2006). Rape perpetration by young, rural South
African men: Prevalence, patterns and risk factors. Social Science
& Medicine, 63, 2949–2961.
Jewkes, R., Levin, J., & Penn-Kekana, L. (2002). Risk factors for
domestic violence: Findings from a South African cross-sectional
study. Social Science & Medicine, 55, 1603–1617.
Kadin Dayanisma Vakfi. (2008). Kadina Yonelik Sidet El Kitabi [Vio-
lence against women handbook]. Ankara, Turkey: Author.
Karaçam, Z., Çalışır, H., Dündar, E., Altuntaş, F., & Avcı, H. C.
(2006). Evli kadınların aile içi şiddet görmelerini etkileyen faktör-
ler ve kadınların şiddete ilişkin bazı özellikleri [Factors affecting
domestic violence against married women and women’s some
characteristics related to violence]. Ege Üniversitesi Hemşirelik
Yüksek Okulu Dergisi [In Turkish], 22, 71–88.
Karal, D., & Aydemir, E. (2012). Turkiye’de Kadina Yonelik Siddet
[Violence against women in Turkey]. Ankara, Turkey: Interna-
tional Strategic Research Organization.
Karaoglu, L., Celbis, O., Ercan, C., llgar, M., Pehlivan, E., Gunes,
G., . . . Egri, M. (2006). Physical, emotional and sexual violence
during pregnancy in Malatya, Turkey. European Journal of Public
Health, 16, 149–156.
Kim, J. C., Watts, C. H., Hargreaves, J. R., Ndhlovu, L. X., Phetla, G.,
Morison, L. A., . . . Pronyk, P. (2007). Understanding the impact
of a microfinance-based intervention on women’s empowerment
and the reduction of intimate partner violence in South Africa.
American Journal of Public Health, 97, 1794–1802.
Kimerling, R., Alvarez, J., Pavao, J., Mack, K. P., Smith, M. W., &
Baumrind, N. (2009). Unemployment among women: Examining
the relationship of physical and psychological intimate partner
Tekkas Kerman and Betrus
violence and posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Interperso-
nal Violence, 24, 450–463.
Kizilkaya, E. (2013). Turkey’s new prohibition lead to under-
ground market. Retrieved from http://www.al-monitor.com/
pulse/originals/2013/09/turkey-prohibition-creates-alcohol-
black-market.html
Kocacik, F., & Dogan, O. (2006). Domestic violence against women
in sivas, Turkey: Survey Study. [Article]. Croatian Medical Jour-
nal, 47, 742–749.
Kocacık, F., Kutlar, A., & Erselcan, F. (2007). Domestic violence
against women: A field study in Turkey. The Social Science Jour-
nal, 44, 698–720.
Koenig, M. A., Stephenson, R., Ahmed, S., Jejeebhoy, S. J., & Camp-
bell, J. (2006). Individual and contextual determinants of domestic
violence in North India. American Journal of Public Health, 96,
132–138.
Krug, E. G., Mercy, J. A., Dahlberg, L. L., & Zwi, A. B. (2002). World
report on violence and health. Biomedica, 22, 327–336.
Lawrence, E., Orengo-Aguayo, R., Langer, A., & Brock, R. L. (2012).
The impact and consequences of partner abuse on partners. Partner
Abuse, 3, 406–428.
Li, Q., Kirby, R. S., Sigler, R. T., Hwang, S.-S., LaGory, M. E., &
Goldenberg, R. L. (2010). A multilevel analysis of individual,
household, and neighborhood correlates of intimate partner vio-
lence among low-income pregnant women in Jefferson County,
Alabama. American Journal of Public Health, 100, 531–539.
Linos, N., Khawaja, M., & Kaplan, R. L. (2012). Women’s acceptance
of spousal abuse in Iraq: Prevalence rates and the role of female
empowerment characteristics. Journal of Family Violence, 27,
625–633.
Macmillan, R. (2000). Adolescent victimization and income deficits
in adulthood: Rethinking the costs of criminal violence from a life-
course perspective. Criminology, 38, 553–588.
Mamdouh, H. M., Ismail, H. M., Kharboush, I. F., Tawfik, M. M., El
Sharkawy, O. G., Abdel-Baky, M., & Sallam, H. N. (2012). Pre-
valence and risk factors for spousal violence among women attend-
ing health care centres in Alexandria, Egypt. Eastern
Mediterranean Health Journal, 18, 1118–1126.
Markowitz, S. (2000). The price of alcohol, wife abuse, and husband
abuse. Southern Economic Journal, 67, 279–303.
Marshall, G. A., & Furr, L. A. (2010). Factors that affect women’s
attitudes toward domestic violence in Turkey. Violence Victims,
25, 265–277.
Mathur, S., Greene, H., & Malhotra, A. (2003). Too young to wed; The
lives, rights, and health of young married girls. Washington, DC:
International Center for Research on Women
Mayda, A. S., & Akkuş, D. (2005). Domestic violence against 116
Turkish housewives: A field study. Women & Health, 40, 95–108.
Michau, L., Horn, J., Bank, A., Dutt, M., & Zimmerman, C. (2015).
Prevention of violence against women and girls: Lessons from
practice. The Lancet, 385, 1672–1684.
Ministry of Family and Social Policies. (2006). Aile Yapisi Arastir-
masi [Family structure study]. Retrieved from http://www.tuik.
gov.tr/Kitap.do?metod¼KitapDetay&KT_ID¼11&KITAP_
ID¼16
15
Monagan, S. L. (2009). Patriarchy: Perpetuating the practice of female
genital mutilation. International Research Journal of Arts &
Humanities (IRJAH), 37, 83–101.
Oetzel, J., & Duran, B. (2004). Intimate partner violence in American
Indian and/or Alaska Native communities: A social ecological
framework of determinants and interventions. American Indian
and Alaska Native Mental Health Research (online), 11, 49.
Ofstehage, A., Gandhi, A., Sholk, J., Radday, A., & Stanzler, C.
(2011). Empowering victims of domestic violence. Retrieved from
http://rootcause.org/documents/DV-Issue.pdf
Ozbay, F. (1995). Women’s labor in rural and urban settings. Bogazici
Journal: Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, 8, 1–2.
Pande, R., Kurz, K., Walia, S., MacQuarrie, K., & Jain, S. (2006).
Improving the reproductive health of married and unmarried youth
in India: Evidence of effectiveness and costs from community-
based interventions. Final report of the Adolescent Reproductive
Health Program in India. New Delhi, India, International Center
for Research on Women [ICRW], p. 77.
Pulerwitz, J., & Barker, G. (2008). Measuring attitudes toward gender
norms among young men in Brazil. Men & Masculinities, 10, 322–338.
Pulerwitz, J., Martin, S., Mehta, M., Castillo, T., Kidanu, A., Verani,
F., & Tewolde, S. (2010). Promoting gender equity for HIV and
violence prevention: Results from the PEPFAR Male Norms Ini-
tiative Evaluation in Ethiopia. Washington, DC: PATH.
Radatz, D. L., & Wright, E. M. (2016). Integrating the principles of
effective intervention into batterer intervention programming: The
case for moving toward more evidence-based programming.
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 17, 72–87.
Rani, M., Bonu, S., & Diop-Sidibe, N. (2004). An empirical investi-
gation of attitudes towards wife-beating among men and women in
seven sub-Saharan African countries. African Journal of Repro-
ductive Health, 8, 116–136.
Romans, S., Forte, T., Cohen, M. M., Du Mont, J., & Hyman, I.
(2007). Who is most at risk for intimate partner violence? A Cana-
dian population-based study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,
22, 1495–1514.
Sagrestano, L. M., Heavey, C. L., & Christensen, A. (1999). Perceived
power and physical violence in marital conflict. Journal of Social
Issues, 55, 65–79.
Sahin, N., Timur, S., Ergin, A., Taspinar, A., Balkaya, N., & Cubukcu,
S. (2010). Childhood trauma, type of marriage and self-esteem as
correlates of domestic violence in married women in Turkey. Jour-
nal of Family Violence, 25, 661–668.
Sakalli, N. (2001). Beliefs about wife beating among Turkish college
students: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and sex differences.
Sex Roles, 44, 599–610.
Sakalli-Ugurlu, N., & Beydogan, B. (2002). Turkish college students’
attitudes toward women managers: The effects of patriarchy, sexism,
and gender differences. The Journal of Psychology, 136, 647–656.
Schiamberg, L. B., & Gans, D. (1999). An ecological framework for
contextual risk factors in elder abuse by adult children. Journal of
Elder Abuse & Neglect, 11, 79–103.
Sen, S., & Bolsoy, N. (2017). Violence against women: Prevalence
and risk factors in Turkish sample. BMC Women’s Health, 17, 1–9.
16
Sev’er, A. (2012). In the name of fathers: Honour killings and some
examples from south-eastern Turkey. Atlantis: Critical Studies in
Gender, Culture & Social Justice, 30, 129–145.
Sev’er, A., & Yurdakul, G. (2001). Culture of honor, culture of
change: A feminist analysis of honor killings in rural Turkey.
Violence Against Women, 7, 964–998.
Slep, A. M. S., Foran, H. M., Heyman, R. E., & Snarr, J. D. (2010).
Unique risk and protective factors for partner aggression in a large
scale Air Force survey. Journal of Community Health, 35, 375–383.
Smith, P. H., Homish, G. G., Leonard, K. E., & Cornelius, J. R. (2012).
Intimate partner violence and specific substance use disorders:
Findings from the national epidemiologic survey on alcohol and
related conditions. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 26, 236.
Stith, S. M., Green, N. M., Smith, D. B., & Ward, D. B. (2008). Marital
satisfaction and marital discord as risk markers for intimate partner
violence: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Family Violence, 23,
149–160.
Stuart, G. L., Ramsey, S. E., Moore, T. M., Kahler, C. W., Farrell, L.
E., Recupero, P. R., & Brown, R. A. (2003). Reductions in marital
violence following treatment for alcohol dependence. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 18, 1113–1131.
Sugur, S. (2009). Kadina yonelik siddetin boyutlari [The dimensions
of violence against women]. In G. Yaktil Oguz (Ed.), Toplumsal
Yasamda Kadin (pp. 149–167). Ankara Turkey: Anadolu Univer-
sitesi Yayinlari.
Svanemyr, J., Chandra-Mouli, V., Christiansen, C. S., & Mbizvo, M.
(2012). Preventing child marriages: First international day of the
girl child “My life, my right, end child marriage”. Reproductive
Health, 9, 31.
Talhaoglu, C., & Baki, B. (2017). Men kill at least 261 women, girls in
2016. Bianet: Independent Communication Network. Retrieved
from https://bianet.org/english/women/183255-men-kill-at-least-
261-women-girls-in-2016
Tas, A. K., Uyanik, D., & Karakaya, Z. (1997). Siddeti icsellestiren
kadin profili: Turkiye icin nicel bir yaklasim [A woman profile of
internalization of violence: A quantitative approach for Turkey].
Ankara, Turkey: Network of Women&Children, State Institute of
Statistics of Turkey.
Tekeli, S. (2010). The Turkish women’s movement: A brief history of
success. Quaderns de la Mediterania [In Catalan], 14, 119–123.
Tokuç, B., Ekuklu, G., & Avcioglu, S. (2010). Domestic violence
against married women in Edirne. Journal of Interpersonal Vio-
lence, 25, 832–847.
Tsai, A. C. (2013). Intimate partner violence and population mental
health: Why poverty and gender inequities matter. PLoS Medicine,
10, e1001440.
Turkish Republic Prime Ministry Directorate General on the Status of
Women, H. U. I. o. P. S., ICON-Institute Public Sector GmbH, and
BNB Consulting. (2009). National research on domestic violence
against women in Turkey. Retrieved from http://www.hips.hacette
pe.edu.tr/eng/dokumanlar/2008-TDVAW_Main_Report.pdf
Turkish Statistics Institute. (1988). Women in statistics. Retrieved
from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr
Turkish Statistics Institute. (2015). Women in statistics. Retrieved
from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr
TRAUMA, VIOLENCE, & ABUSE XX(X)
Turkish Statistics Institute. (2016). Women in statistics. Retrieved
from http://www.turkstat.gov.tr
Ulukaya, C. (2015). Kadinlari Kim, Nerede, Nasil Oldurdu: 5 yilin
cinayet haritasi [By whom, how and when women were killed:
Murder map of five years]. Retrieved from http://bianet.org/bia
net/kadin/169494-kadin-cinayetlerinin-haritasi
United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). (1994). The United
Nations Population Fund: International Conference on Population
and Development Report. Retrieved from http://www.unfpa.org/
icpd
United Nations The Economic and Social Commission for Asia and
the Pacific (ESCAP). (2007). Violence against Women: Harmful
traditional and cultural practices in the Asian and Pacific region.
Gender Equality and Empowerment Section, Social Development
Division, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the
Pacific. Retrieved from http://goo.gl/1QjQ8o
United Nations Population Fund. (2014). Child Marriages in Turkey
(Overview). Ankara, Turkey: UNFPA, United Nations Population
Fund.
UN Women. (2009). Good practices in legislation on “Harmful
Practices” against women. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: United Nations
Division for the Advancement of Women, United Nations Eco-
nomic Commission for Africa.
Uthman, O. A., Moradi, T., & Lawoko, S. (2009). The independent
contribution of individual-, neighbourhood-, and country-level
socioeconomic position on attitudes towards intimate partner vio-
lence against women in sub-Saharan Africa: A multilevel model of
direct and moderating effects. Social Science & Medicine, 68,
1801–1809.
Varol, N., Fraser, I. S., Ng, C. H., Jaldesa, G., & Hall, J. (2014).
Female genital mutilation/cutting–towards abandonment of a
harmful cultural practice. Australian and New Zealand Journal
of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 54, 400–405.
Verma, R., Pulerwitz, J., Mahendra, V. S., Khandekar, S., Singh, A. K.,
Das, S. S., . . . Barker, G. (2008). Promoting gender equity as a
strategy to reduce HIV risk and gender-based violence among young
men in India. Horizons Final Report. Washington, DC: Population
Council.
Wareham, J., Boots, D. P., & Chavez, J. M. (2009). A test of social
learning and intergenerational transmission among batterers.
Journal of Criminal Justice, 37, 163–173.
Witte, T. H., & Mulla, M. M. (2012). Social norms for intimate partner
violence in situations involving victim infidelity. Journal of Inter-
personal Violence, 27, 3389–3404.
Women Against Violence Europe Network. (2012). Turkey country report:
Violence against women and migrant and minority women. WAVE-
office/Austrian Women’s Shelter Network, Vienna Austria.
World Health Organization. (2009). Violence Prevention the Evi-
dence: Promoting gender equality to prevent violence against
women. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
World Health Organization. (2010). Preventing intimate partner and
sexual violence against women: Taking action and generating evi-
dence. Geneva, Switzerland: Author.
Yuksel-Kaptanoglu, I., Turkyilmaz, A. S., & Heise, L. (2012). What
puts women at risk of violence from their husbands? Findings from
Tekkas Kerman and Betrus
a large, nationally representative survey in Turkey. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 27, 2743–2769.
Zeyneloğlu, S., Kısa, S., & Yılmaz, D. (2013). Turkish nursing stu-
dents’ knowledge and perceptions regarding virginity. Nurse Edu-
cation Today, 33, 110–115.
Author Biographies
Kader Tekkas Kerman, PhD, is an assistant professor of public
health nursing at the Koc University School of Nursing in Istanbul,
Turkey. Her studies focus on men and masculinities research, specif-
ically on developing a program to promote gender equality among
young Turkish men and on prevention of domestic violence in Turkey.
To achieve these goals, she collaborates with international and
national nongovernmental organizations. As part of her doctoral
17
dissertation work, she completed focus groups interviews to explore
male university students’ perspective on masculinity and gender
equality. Currently, she works on a project to assess and promote
men’s physical and sexual health.
Patricia Betrus, PhD, is an associate professor of psychosocial and
community health nursing at the University of Washington. Her
studies focus on research and theory of violent and aggressive beha-
viors. She teaches “Issues in Violence and Aggression for Health
Professionals” course designed to challenge students to clarify
beliefs, values related to topics such as homicide and domestic vio-
lence. She previously worked projects on women with depression
who had experienced violence, either in childhood or as young
adults. Most recently, she worked with the first author on gender
equality as an intervention with young men to reduce domestic vio-
lence in Turkey.