LEA KACEN Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Spousal Abuse Among Immigrants From Ethiopia in Israel This ethnographic study obtains first-hand infor- ‘‘domestic violence’’ in his native Amharic. My mation on spousal abuse from Ethiopian immi- informer replied that there is no such term in their grants in Israel. Data include 23 interviews with language. ‘‘Then how do you describe situations male and female immigrants of various ages and in which a husband beats or insult his wife’’? I 10 professionals who worked with this commu- asked. He answered, ‘‘There is no reason to speak nity as well as observations and documents. The about it.’’ The conversation aroused my curiosity, findings, verified by participants, show that dur- as language is a means used by cultural groups to ing cultural transition, the immigrants’ code of transmit knowledge and shape social norms honor, traditional conflict-solving institutions, (Green, 1995). I asked myself whether there and family role distribution disintegrate. This was no need for the concept because violence situation, exacerbated by economic distress, toward women was nonexistent in Ethiopia, or proved conducive to women’s abuse. Lack of perhaps because there is another term with a sim- cultural sensitivity displayed by social services ilar meaning, or was it that the phenomenon is an actually encouraged women to behave abusively accepted, self-evident norm that need not be dis- toward their husbands and destroy their fami- cussed judgmentally as it is in Western cultures. lies. Discussion focuses on communication fail- Something else troubled me as well. If there is ures in spousal-abuse discourse between no term for domestic violence in Amharic, how immigrants from Ethiopia and absorbing soci- do immigrants from Ethiopia understand this ety, originating in differences in values, behav- concept as used in Israeli society to describe neg- ior, social representations, and insensitive ative situations of violence between husbands culture theories. and wives? What is the term’s meaning to them? I decided to find out what the immigrants them- selves have to say about these issues, interview- Over the past few years (1999 – 2004), I was ing men and women of various ages who fulfill involved in evaluating an experimental program a variety of functions in their community. to prevent spousal abuse among immigrants from Two additional factors motivated examination Ethiopia in Israel (Kacen & Keidar, 2006). In of the topic: the high rates of violence toward a conversation with an educated man from this women among immigrants from Ethiopia in community who participated in the program, I Israel and the failure of social services to prevent asked how to say ‘‘violence toward women’’ or and treat the problem, particularly within this population group. The Spitzer Department of Social Work, Ben-Gurion Spousal-Abuse Rates Among Immigrants University of the Negev, P.O. Box, 653, Beer-Sheva From Ethiopia 84105, Israel ([email protected]). Key Words: community, couple violence, culture, ethnogra- Twenty-five percent of all cases of murder of phy, family roles, immigration from Ethiopia. women by their spouses in Israel each year 1276 Journal of Marriage and Family 68 (December 2006): 1276–1290 Spouse Abuse Among Israeli Ethiopian Immigrants 1277 involve immigrants from Ethiopia, a rate consid- changed, the application rate declined from 7% erably higher than their proportion in the general in 1995 to 3% in 2000. In this article, I will at- population (1.5%). Although murder of women tempt to reveal the nature of spousal-abuse dis- by their husbands is an extreme indicator, it does course between immigrants from Ethiopia and reflect a problem that requires special investiga- social welfare agencies, as well as to understand tion. According to an Israel police report, why communication failures occur. This discourse 13,592 spousal-abuse complaints were registered analysis will contribute to our understanding of in 2004, of which 1,956 were filed by new immi- similar cases in which communities immigrate grants of various origins, including 226 immi- from traditional societies to modern ones. grants from Ethiopia (1.67% of all files and 11.6% of all those involving immigrants). This Domestic Violence: A Theoretical Review percentage, too, is higher than the share of Ethio- pian immigrants in Israel’s population (http:// The theories that dictate social service responses www.ynet.co.il/Ext/comp/articlesLayout). The to spousal abuse in Israel are primarily Western figures do not reflect the full extent of violence social theories that consider nuclear families toward women, as only 10% of all battered and the individuals comprising them to be the women (Fishman, Eisikovits, Mesch, & Gusinsky, focus of intervention. Key examples of such theo- 2001) – especially immigrants from countries ries are summarized below. with traditional societies (Bui, 2003) – inform Gelles (1997) reviews a variety of theoretical the police of their situation. Despite this high attempts to explain spousal violence, recalling rate, spousal abuse among immigrants from the psychiatric model, stress and coping theory, Ethiopia has only been on the Israeli agenda for social learning theory, resource theory, the eco- 5 years, and the taboo imposed on the subject logical approach, sociobiological theory,exchange was only lifted about 2 years ago when members theory, feminist theory, social psychology, and of the community began speaking openly about culture. He claims that each of these theories the phenomenon, seeking to reduce its incidence. sheds light on the phenomenon from a different This study reveals, for the first time, the immi- angle, and no single theory explains it completely. grants’ own point of view regarding problems According to these theories, violent spousal re- of spousal abuse. lations may be classified into three intercon- nected types of relationships, separated below for sake of clarity only: control, emotional ambiv- Social Service Failure to Prevent and Treat alence, and dependence. Violence Toward Women Among Immigrants From Ethiopia Control. Most cases of spousal abuse are charac- The mass immigration of the Jews of Ethiopia terized by men’s aggressive control of women, (known as Beta Israel) to Israel took place dur- the increasing literature on women’s abuse of ing 1984 in three major airlifts: Operations men notwithstanding (Crowell & Burgess, Moses, Sheba, and Solomon. Others arrived 1996). Aggressive control may be accompanied between these campaigns, and the influx contin- by violence of a physical (Straus, 1990), psycho- ues to this day. There are over 100,000 Jews of logical (McGee & Wolfe, 1991), or sexual nature Ethiopian origin in Israel (Shabtay & Kacen, (Riessman, 1994) or any combination thereof 2005; Swirsky & Swirsky, 2002). Their immi- (see Follingstad, Rutledge, Berg, Hause, & gration to the ‘‘Jerusalem’’ for which they had Polek, 1990; Walker, 1979). Domestic violence, yearned constituted religious and spiritual ful- as described in this article, conforms with the fillment that did not consider the material above description. changes entailed in the transition to a modern society (Freund, 2001). For the women, ‘‘arrival Emotional ambivalence. Spousal relations in Jerusalem’’ symbolized a kind of new free- between partners in a violent relationship are full dom and equality (Shabtay & Kacen, 2005). of conflicting emotions, such as love-hate or Indeed, during the first years after their immi- attraction-repulsion (Denzin, 1984; Lempert, gration, many of the women applied to social 1997). Such ambivalence engenders emotional services for assistance, claiming they were vic- confusion and unstable relations. One reflection tims of spousal abuse. Although all signs indi- of emotional ambivalence is the cycle of vio- cated that violence toward women had not lence, described by Walker (1979) as a process 1278 Journal of Marriage and Family in which anger builds up within the violent man anything that disrupts this meaning. According as a result of various events and eventually explo- to Ferraro, battering men are more threatened des as acute battering of his spouse, who serves as by harm to the self than by any other type of harm, victim. Once the anger is discharged, there are a situation that Lempert (1997) calls the principal feelings of regret and requests for forgiveness, reason for violent outbursts. often accompanied by a ‘‘honeymoon’’ and ex- In summary, these theories appear to focus on pressions of love, until the cycle begins again. spousal dynamics, ignoring environmental and The longer the violent relations continue, the cultural factors. At their foundation is the as- shorter the honeymoon periods and the more fre- sumption that spousal relations epitomize nuclear quent the violent outbursts. As a result, the families in modern society. Consequently, spou- women may develop learned helplessness syn- sal violence is a problem that is spousal in nature drome (Walker, 1988), posttraumatic reactions and can be solved by rehabilitating or breaking up (Star, 1980), or survival responses (Dutton, the couple and primarily by providing individual 1996). Men, in turn, develop feelings of isolation therapy for each partner. As the social services and separation anxiety (Holtzworth-Munroe & designed to treat spousal violence in Israel are Hutchinson, 1993). The daily encounter between based on these assumptions and as these services the battered woman’s learned helplessness and fail to provide appropriate solutions