medigraphic.com
ISSN 0016-3813 (Print)

2004, Number 5

Next >>

Gac Med Mex 2004; 140 (5)

Physical Abuse of Women.

Figueroa MD, Millán-Guerrero RO, Estrada-López M, Isais-Millán R, Bayardo-Quezada C, Trujillo-Hernández B, Tene CE

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page: 481-484
PDF size: 37.36 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: Our aim was determine prevalence of intrafamily violence of the type physical-abuse, toward female claimants aged 18 years and older at the HGZ MF No.1 in Colima. Material and Method: A transversal study was conducted in 288 females aged 18 years and older who were seen at the Family Medicine Unit for external consultation. Results: Average age was 33.86 years (+/- 11.6), the highest level of schooling was primary for 33% of subjects and secondary for 26%, 75% of our female claimants were divorced, 53.5% of monthly family incomes in each household was between $1,000 and $3,000 thousand Mexican pesos, and 27.8% of physical abuse consisted of shoving. Conclusions: Our research revealed that there is indeed physical violence toward 63.45% of female claimants at our hospital, especially toward those with low level of schooling, low socioeconomic status, and monthly income below minimum wage. These conditions only contribute toward making women fall prey to physical violence. Our study is only a first step for better understanding of domestic violence. Risk factors associated with physical abuse need to be controlled to decrease rate of interfamily violence against our claimants.


REFERENCES

  1. Health communications and public relations. Ginebra, Suiza: World Health Organization;1996.

  2. United Nations. Report of the Working Group on Violence Against Women. Viena, Austria: E/CN. 6/WG.2/1992/1.3.

  3. Herrada-Huidobro A, Nazar-Beutelspacher A, Cassaball-Núñez M, Vega-Ramos R, Nava-Cruz CB. El niño maltratado en Tlaxcala: estudio de casos. Salud Publica Mex 1992;34(6):626-634.

  4. Stark E, Flitcraft A. Women and children at risk: a feminist perspective on child abuse. Int J Health Serv 1988;18:97-118.

  5. Stark E, Flitcraft A, Frazier W. Medicine and patriarchal violence: the social construction of a “private” event. Int J Health Serv. 1979;9:461-93. 6. Mehta P, Dandrea L. The battered woman. Am Famy Physician 1988;37:193-199.

  6. Straus MA, Gelles RJ. Societal change and change in family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two national surveys. J Marriage Fam 1986;48:465-479.

  7. Duarte P. Encuesta de opinión pública sobre la incidencia de violencia en la familia. Asociación Mexicana Contra la Violencia Hacia las Mujeres, A.C. (COVAC). México, D.F. Fondo de Población de las Naciones Unidas/ Procuraduría General de Justicia del Distrito Federal, 1995:17.

  8. Hacker F. Agresión. En: Cano C, Cisneros MT, ed. La dinámica de la violencia en México. 1980. Barcelona, España: Grijalbo, 1973.

  9. Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-190.SSA1-1999.prestación de servicios de salud. Criterios para la atención Médica de la violencia familiar. Secretaria de la Salud. México 1999.

  10. Browner WS, Black D, Newman TB, Hulley SB. Estimación del tamaño de la muestra y de la potencia En Hulley SB,Cummings SR (Eds.). Diseño de la Investigación Clínica, Harcourt Brace. España: 1997:153-165.

  11. Heise L. Violencia contra la mujer: la carga oculta de salud. Mujer, salud desarrollo. Washington, D.C: Organización Panamericana de Salud, 1994:3-19.

  12. Pérez CMM. La Ley de Asistencia y Prevención de la Violencia familiar para el Distrito Federal. Boletín Mexicano de Derecho. XXXIII. 2000;98:909-24.

  13. Moreno PF. Congreso del Estado de Colima. Periódico Oficial del Gobierno Constitucional. LXXXIII.1998; 7:189-196.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com