Intimate partner violence against aboriginal men in Canada.

• Jurisdiction: Australia
• Author: Brownridge, Douglas A.
• Date: 01 August 2010

Using a large-scale representative sample of Canada collected in 1999, this study examined Aboriginal men's elevated risk for violent victimisation relative to non-Aboriginal men.Aboriginal men reported about 2.5 to 3.5 times the risk of intimate partner violence victimisation compared to non-Aboriginal men. Aboriginal men's elevated risk of violence was greatest on some of the most severe forms of violence and appeared to be due to their relatively higher levels of unemployment and relatively younger average age. While future research is needed to disentangle the complex interplay of colonisation and risk factors for understanding Aboriginal peoples' elevated risk of intimate partner violence victimisation, the current study demonstrates that gender is also worthy of consideration.

Keywords: Aboriginal,American Indian, Native, Indigenous, violence, abuse, men

**********

It is well established in the literature that Aboriginal women are particularly at risk of violence from their intimate partners. This is often attributed to colonisation (Native Women's Association of Canada, 2003; Razack, 1994). Colonisation theory essentially argues that the problems faced by many Aboriginal peoples have their roots in Aboriginal peoples' historical experience of colonisation (Brownridge, 2003). In analyses of intimate partner violence (IPV) against Aboriginal compared to non-Aboriginal women, Brownridge (2003, 2008, 2009b) found indirect support for colonisation theory. Using nationally representative Canadian data, these studies found that known risk factors for IPV do not fully explain the higher risk of violence against Aboriginal women relative to non-Aboriginal women. While not providing direct evidence of an effect of colonisation, these results suggested that unmeasured aspects of the larger experience of colonisation need to be examined to fully understand Aboriginal women's elevated risk of IPV. The high levels of violence generally used to deal with conflicts in many Aboriginal communities (e.g., Brzozowski, Taylor-Butts, & Johnson, 2006) beg the question of whether Aboriginal men also have a high risk of IPV victimisation and, if so, whether their elevated risk can also be indirectly attributed to colonisation.

There are a number of different mechanisms through which colonisation is thought to have impacted violence (Brownridge, 2009b; Snowball & Weatherburn, 2008). (1) Some of these mechanisms are theoretically applicable to violence against both genders. For example, Duran, Duran, Woodis, and Woodis (1998) used the Dine' (Navajo) cosmology to illustrate how, in precolonial times, men and women were kept in balance. With colonisation, Aboriginal peoples were forced to adopt the cosmology of their colonisers; one that involves an antagonistic power struggle between men and women. This antagonism is a breeding ground for violence, leading Duran et al. (1998) to conclude that 'it is understandable that one of the symptoms suffered by our men and women is that they try to destroy each other' (p. 108). Using data on a national survey of Indigenous male and female Australians, Snowball and Weatherburn (2008) tested theories of indigenous violence and found the strongest support for lifestyle/routine activity theory and moderate support for social disorganisation and social deprivation approaches. In terms of gender, on one hand one could theorise that, because both male and female Aboriginal people experienced colonisation, this common experience would have a similar effect on male and female Aboriginals, including with respect to violent victimisation. For example, Snowball and Weatherburn (2008) found no differences in rates of violent victimisation for Indigenous men and women, which they interpreted as suggesting that anomie as a consequence of colonisation does not explain violent victimisation of Indigenous peoples. On the other hand, it has been observed that colonisation was experienced as a gendered process with different effects for Aboriginal women and men. For example, patriarchal gender relations are argued to have been introduced to Aboriginal communities through colonisation (LaRocque, 1994; McEachern, Winkle, & Steiner, 1998). Thus, just as for Aboriginal women, it is important to study and assess explanations for IPV against Aboriginal men. The purpose of the current study is to apply Brownridge's analysis of violence against Aboriginal women to the examination of whether Aboriginal men have an elevated risk of IPV victimisation and, if so, to identify what the data suggest about the reasons for their elevated risk of violent victimisation at the hands of their intimate partners.

Past Research on Aboriginal Men's Risk of Violence

Over the past two decades there have been an increasing number of studies providing evidence that Aboriginal women are at risk of experiencing partner violence. However, relatively few studies have provided an indication of Aboriginal men's risk for IPV victimisation. Among these studies, those that did not include a comparison group provide an indication of Aboriginal men's risk of experiencing partner violence, while those that did do so provide an indication of the extent to which Aboriginal men's risk of experiencing partner violence is elevated.

The risk of partner violence against Aboriginal men. Table 1 summarises studies that provide prevalence rates of violence against Aboriginal men. All of these studies were conducted in the United States. The lifetime prevalence rates of violent victimisation in Table 1 range widely, from 3.6% to 91.7%, depending on methodological factors, such as the types of violence that were included and whether more than one partner was included (see notes in Table 1 for further elaboration). Similarly, Aboriginal men's prevalence of violent victimisation in the preceding year was between 1% and 50%. The wide variation in these prevalence rates shows that we do not know precisely how common is IPV against Aboriginal men. However, these studies tend to suggest that violent victimisation of Aboriginal men by intimate partners is prevalent.

The elevated risk of partner violence against Aboriginal men. Table 2 summarises studies that reported prevalence rates of violent victimisation for both Aboriginal men as well as for non-Aboriginal comparison groups of men. In addition, these studies were designed to be representative at the national level, namely the United States (Rennison, 2001) and Canada (Brzozowski, 2004; Trainor & Mihorean, 2001). These studies suggest that Aboriginal men may have an elevated risk of IPV victimisation, with prevalence rates that are 2 to 3 times the rate of non-Aboriginal men.

Risk Factors for Violence Against Aboriginal Men

While it is possible to theorise a connection between colonisation and IPV among Aboriginal peoples, it is difficult to extrapolate from their experience of colonisation why, as evidenced by the prevalence rates discussed above, some Aboriginal men experience violence and others do not. This begs the question of how risk factors, variables that increase the chances that violence will occur (Barnett, MillerPerrin, & Perrin, 2005), are related to violence against Aboriginal men. There are several known risk factors of violence on which Aboriginal peoples tend to be overrepresented and which thus may be particularly relevant for understanding violence against Aboriginal men. (2) The remainder of this section will identify those risk factors that were available for examination in the current study of partner violence against Aboriginal men in Canada.

Social Background Variables

Youth. The Aboriginal population is young compared to the general Canadian population (Hull, 2006). It is a well-established fact that youth is a risk factor for partner violence (H. Johnson, 1996).

Education. Aboriginal peoples tend to have lower educational attainment than non-Aboriginal Canadians (Brzozowski et al., 2006). Low educational attainment has been associated with an increased risk of violence (Barnett, Miller-Perrin, & Perrin, 1997).

Previous marriage/common.law union. As will be identified shortly, Aboriginal peoples in Canada have high rates of cohabitation. Given that cohabiting unions tend to be of short duration (Burch & Madan, 1986), Aboriginal peoples may be more likely to have a previous marital or common-law partner compared to nonAboriginal Canadians. Having a previous marital/common-law union has been associated with violence by a current partner (Brownridge, 2002).

Situational Variables

Unemployment. Rates of unemployment are higher among Aboriginal than nonAboriginal Canadians (Hull, 2006). Unemployment has been associated with an increased risk for violence (Barnett, et al., 1997).

Cohabitation/common-law union. Aboriginal peoples have a higher rate of cohabitation compared to non-Aboriginal Canadians (Frideres, 2001). Cohabitation has been associated with partner violence against women (Brownridge, 2004) and men (Brownridge, 2009a) in Canada.

Rural residence. Aboriginal peoples are more likely than non-Aboriginal Canadians to live in rural areas (Hull, 2006). About 30% of Aboriginal peoples lived on reserves while about 20% lived in rural nonreserve areas in 2001 (Statistics Canada...