La violencia de género en la agenda del Parlamento español (1979-2004)

13Citations
Citations of this article
27Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Aims: To systematically examine the characteristics of the processes of formulating and taking decisions on gender-based violence in the Spanish Parliament. Methods: A search was performed for all parliamentary initiatives on gender-based violence in the Spanish parliament (1979-2004) and their qualitative content was analyzed. The ratio between initiatives on gender-based violence and those on other issues was calculated by years and legislatures. The probability of presenting initiatives on gender-based violence was analyzed by sex and political group (government vs. opposition) (odds ratio, 95%) CI and statistical significance using the Mantel-Haenszel method). Results: In the 26 years studied, there were 322,187 initiatives, of which 569 concerned gender-based violence. Initiatives on this issue increased in 1998 (4.12 per 1,000), 2001 (4.49 per 1,000) and 2004 (9.19 per 1,000). Sixty-seven percent were questions to the government. The majority of the initiatives were registered without agreement or decision (81%). Men had a higher probability of asking questions (OR = 17.08; 95%CI, 5.91-55.62.), but women instigated 60% of the initiatives. Parliamentary groups in government showed a higher probability of asking questions (OR = 2.63; 95%CI, 1.32-5.31), but 88% of the initiatives were promoted by the opposition. Conclusions: The process of policy construction has been started in Spain, which could lead to the development of true policies on gender-based violence in the future. Parliamentary activity on this issue should be maintained in the long-term, as the problem shows no sign of abating.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Vives-Cases, C., Gil-González, D., Carrasco-Portiño, M., & Álvarez-Dardet, C. (2006). La violencia de género en la agenda del Parlamento español (1979-2004). Gaceta Sanitaria, 20(2), 142–148. https://doi.org/10.1157/13087325

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free