Gender-Based Violence in the Context of Mothering: A Critical Canadian Health Perspective

Reviewer comment

Response

Reviewer 1:

This study he relationship between mothering and gender-based violence in Canada is complex and multifaceted. In this article the interplay among gender-based violence and the childbearing stages of pregnancy, birth, and post-partum are explored, including consideration of social disparities and equity-deserving groups.

I consider the subject to be interesting and important as a compilation of data from recent years. However, I have some suggestions.

Thank you for your feedback. The time and effort involved in reviewing our manuscript is greatly appreciated.

Correct the punctuation in the reference of line 27.

This has been corrected.

Is there any evidence about what mothers who separate from abusive partners needs from the justice system in order to obtain guarantees for the safety of their children (lines 358 to 360).

While there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of protection orders, this evidence has been added to this section- with a focus on the complexity of navigating the criminal justice system for mothers.  The following was added:

Within the context of the criminal justice system, it is important to understand that violence crosses legal jurisdictions including, family and criminal law creating increased complexity for both the legal system as well as those navigating it.  Within the criminal law system, protection orders have been studied globally, exploring the impact on keeping mothers and children safe [Douglas, 2018].  However, in a synthesis on the effects of violence protections orders, it was found that their utility ranges for mothers based on their expectations and experiences.  To that end, while protection orders are a legal tool available to mothers, the reality is that mothers are required to navigate the legal system and all its complexity, a system that often fails to fully understand the context and consequences of violence.

Missing L in child (line 468).

This has been corrected.

I believe that the conclusions can be strengthened to outline opportunities for action for mothers who suffer violence and their needs, if it is possible to influence from different levels so that they receive attention and resources or so that we as a society take their particular needs into account. And not just have a general conclusion as a group in inequality.

Thank you for this feedback. We have added additional detail to strengthen the conclusions and to highlight opportunities for action.

Reviewer 2:

This is an interesting paper as far as it goes. Studies on gender-based violence in the context of mothering are not new – there are many bodies of literature on that, even from the Canadian perspective – but what stood this paper out was the concept of relating gender-based violence across the various childbearing stages of pregnancy, birth, and postpartum. You demonstrated the impacts at every childbearing stage, and then you looked at approaches to address gender-based violence among childbearing women. Another thing that is unique to this paper is linking your discussion on gender violence to intersectional forms of disadvantages that certain social groups face, particularly in section 5. You also proffered interesting approaches to addressing gender-based violence in the context of mothering.  However, you could do with consistent paragraphing, more careful editing, clearer presentation of some of your arguments and, most importantly, a tighter conceptual framework that reflects current literature on gender, gender-based violence, and structural discrimination. I have made some general and specific comments on the manuscript below.

Thank you for this feedback.

See:

1. Colfer, C. J. P., Sijapati Basnett, B., & Ihalainen, M. (2018). Making sense of ‘intersectionality’: A manual for lovers of people and forests (Vol. 184). CIFOR.
2. Crenshaw, K. (2013). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. In Feminist legal theories (pp. 23-51). Routledge.
3. Fordham, M. (1999). The intersection of gender and social class in disaster: Balancing resilience and vulnerability. International journal of mass emergencies & disasters, 17(1), 15-36.

General comments:

As I said earlier, while I find your literature engagement impressive, I want you to use conceptual frameworks that reflect current literature on gender, gender-based violence, and structural discrimination, in parts of your work. This doesn't take away the fact that your literature is already rich, but you need to tweak the framing in some parts of the work. For instance, while you casually linked your discussion on gender violence to intersectional forms of disadvantages in Section 5 and at the end of discussing the Ecology approach in Section 6, I expected you to connect that to current literature on the ideas of intersectionality, which originally emerged from a study of violence against minority women in the United States but has gained wide usage in discussing gender-based violence.

Crenshaw’s work has been forefront, both the historical and well as the adapted versions within the context of violence throughout sections 5 and 6.

Parts of your abstract would benefit from rephrasing. I admit that writers can sometimes take important sentences and phrases from their work to the abstract, but copying most of your abstract from your introduction and other parts of your work may not be acceptable. 

Thank you for this feedback. We have re-phrased many of the sentences within the abstract such that they are unique from what is contained in the body of the paper.

Specific comments

The paragraph on the Ecology approach in Section 6 was too lengthy and sometimes winding. Please split it into two paragraphs to enhance clarity.

This has been split and edited to enhance clarity.

Line 178: Varied? Yes; but imprecise? I do not think so. Please read the following articles:

1. Beydoun, H. A., Al-Sahab, B., Beydoun, M. A., & Tamim, H. (2010). Intimate partner violence as a risk factor for postpartum depression among Canadian women in the Maternity Experience Survey. Annals of Epidemiology, 20(8), 575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2010.05.011
2. Desta, M., Memiah, P., Kassie, B., Ketema, D. B., Amha, H., Getaneh, T., & Sintayehu, M. (2021). Postpartum depression and its association with intimate partner violence and inadequate social support in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 279, 737-748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.11.053

1. Necho, M., Belete, A., & Zenebe, Y. (2020). The association of intimate partner violence with postpartum depression in women during their first month period of giving delivery in health centers at Dessie town, 2019. Annals of general psychiatry, 19, 1-12.

Thanks for this feedback, imprecise was not a great choice of word- this has been removed. Further the Canadian study has been included in this section.

Look at errors such as:

Line 34--- chapter

Thank-you. This has been changed to “paper”.

Line 51 --- the how

“the” has been removed.

Line 100 – citation needs a bracket

The square bracket has been added.

Line 258: found that found

The redundant “found” has been removed.

Line 336: to for

“To” has been removed.

Line 342 – 344: Read the sentence again. It is vague

This sentence has been edited and now reads “effective communication of the safety plan with the child including how the plan would keep them safe from the abuser during and after leaving, is helpful in supporting children to cope with the increased disruptions in their life during this time of transition.

Line 433 – consistent paragraphing style—your style is inconsistent throughout the paper: both indented and block were used

This has been corrected to be more consistent throughout.

Conclusion

I think you addressed an important issue in gender-based violence in a new and interesting way, but your conclusion does not reflect your paper. I expected you to reiterate the essence of your study, synthesize the key issues raised, express the impact of the paper and then make a recommendation. As a concept paper, the conclusion should make me feel good about your work yet make me look forward to the future studies that it can inspire. 

Thank you for this feedback. We have added more action-oriented suggestions to our conclusion, with a more positive feel/outlook for the future. We hope you find this acceptable.

Reviewer comment

Response

Reviewer 1:

This study he relationship between mothering and gender-based violence in Canada is complex and multifaceted. In this article the interplay among gender-based violence and the childbearing stages of pregnancy, birth, and post-partum are explored, including consideration of social disparities and equity-deserving groups.

I consider the subject to be interesting and important as a compilation of data from recent years. However, I have some suggestions.

Thank you for your feedback. The time and effort involved in reviewing our manuscript is greatly appreciated.

Correct the punctuation in the reference of line 27.

This has been corrected.

Is there any evidence about what mothers who separate from abusive partners needs from the justice system in order to obtain guarantees for the safety of their children (lines 358 to 360).

While there is limited evidence on the effectiveness of protection orders, this evidence has been added to this section- with a focus on the complexity of navigating the criminal justice system for mothers.  The following was added:

Within the context of the criminal justice system, it is important to understand that violence crosses legal jurisdictions including, family and criminal law creating increased complexity for both the legal system as well as those navigating it.  Within the criminal law system, protection orders have been studied globally, exploring the impact on keeping mothers and children safe [Douglas, 2018].  However, in a synthesis on the effects of violence protections orders, it was found that their utility ranges for mothers based on their expectations and experiences.  To that end, while protection orders are a legal tool available to mothers, the reality is that mothers are required to navigate the legal system and all its complexity, a system that often fails to fully understand the context and consequences of violence.

Missing L in child (line 468).

This has been corrected.

I believe that the conclusions can be strengthened to outline opportunities for action for mothers who suffer violence and their needs, if it is possible to influence from different levels so that they receive attention and resources or so that we as a society take their particular needs into account. And not just have a general conclusion as a group in inequality.

Thank you for this feedback. We have added additional detail to strengthen the conclusions and to highlight opportunities for action.

Reviewer 2:

This is an interesting paper as far as it goes. Studies on gender-based violence in the context of mothering are not new – there are many bodies of literature on that, even from the Canadian perspective – but what stood this paper out was the concept of relating gender-based violence across the various childbearing stages of pregnancy, birth, and postpartum. You demonstrated the impacts at every childbearing stage, and then you looked at approaches to address gender-based violence among childbearing women. Another thing that is unique to this paper is linking your discussion on gender violence to intersectional forms of disadvantages that certain social groups face, particularly in section 5. You also proffered interesting approaches to addressing gender-based violence in the context of mothering.  However, you could do with consistent paragraphing, more careful editing, clearer presentation of some of your arguments and, most importantly, a tighter conceptual framework that reflects current literature on gender, gender-based violence, and structural discrimination. I have made some general and specific comments on the manuscript below.

Thank you for this feedback.

See:

1. Colfer, C. J. P., Sijapati Basnett, B., & Ihalainen, M. (2018). Making sense of ‘intersectionality’: A manual for lovers of people and forests (Vol. 184). CIFOR.
2. Crenshaw, K. (2013). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. In Feminist legal theories (pp. 23-51). Routledge.
3. Fordham, M. (1999). The intersection of gender and social class in disaster: Balancing resilience and vulnerability. International journal of mass emergencies & disasters, 17(1), 15-36.

General comments:

As I said earlier, while I find your literature engagement impressive, I want you to use conceptual frameworks that reflect current literature on gender, gender-based violence, and structural discrimination, in parts of your work. This doesn't take away the fact that your literature is already rich, but you need to tweak the framing in some parts of the work. For instance, while you casually linked your discussion on gender violence to intersectional forms of disadvantages in Section 5 and at the end of discussing the Ecology approach in Section 6, I expected you to connect that to current literature on the ideas of intersectionality, which originally emerged from a study of violence against minority women in the United States but has gained wide usage in discussing gender-based violence.

Crenshaw’s work has been forefront, both the historical and well as the adapted versions within the context of violence throughout sections 5 and 6.

Parts of your abstract would benefit from rephrasing. I admit that writers can sometimes take important sentences and phrases from their work to the abstract, but copying most of your abstract from your introduction and other parts of your work may not be acceptable. 

Thank you for this feedback. We have re-phrased many of the sentences within the abstract such that they are unique from what is contained in the body of the paper.

Specific comments

The paragraph on the Ecology approach in Section 6 was too lengthy and sometimes winding. Please split it into two paragraphs to enhance clarity.

This has been split and edited to enhance clarity.

Line 178: Varied? Yes; but imprecise? I do not think so. Please read the following articles:

1. Beydoun, H. A., Al-Sahab, B., Beydoun, M. A., & Tamim, H. (2010). Intimate partner violence as a risk factor for postpartum depression among Canadian women in the Maternity Experience Survey. Annals of Epidemiology, 20(8), 575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annepidem.2010.05.011
2. Desta, M., Memiah, P., Kassie, B., Ketema, D. B., Amha, H., Getaneh, T., & Sintayehu, M. (2021). Postpartum depression and its association with intimate partner violence and inadequate social support in Ethiopia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Affective Disorders, 279, 737-748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2020.11.053

1. Necho, M., Belete, A., & Zenebe, Y. (2020). The association of intimate partner violence with postpartum depression in women during their first month period of giving delivery in health centers at Dessie town, 2019. Annals of general psychiatry, 19, 1-12.

Thanks for this feedback, imprecise was not a great choice of word- this has been removed. Further the Canadian study has been included in this section.

Look at errors such as:

Line 34--- chapter

Thank-you. This has been changed to “paper”.

Line 51 --- the how

“the” has been removed.

Line 100 – citation needs a bracket

The square bracket has been added.

Line 258: found that found

The redundant “found” has been removed.

Line 336: to for

“To” has been removed.

Line 342 – 344: Read the sentence again. It is vague

This sentence has been edited and now reads “effective communication of the safety plan with the child including how the plan would keep them safe from the abuser during and after leaving, is helpful in supporting children to cope with the increased disruptions in their life during this time of transition.

Line 433 – consistent paragraphing style—your style is inconsistent throughout the paper: both indented and block were used

This has been corrected to be more consistent throughout.

Conclusion

I think you addressed an important issue in gender-based violence in a new and interesting way, but your conclusion does not reflect your paper. I expected you to reiterate the essence of your study, synthesize the key issues raised, express the impact of the paper and then make a recommendation. As a concept paper, the conclusion should make me feel good about your work yet make me look forward to the future studies that it can inspire. 

Thank you for this feedback. We have added more action-oriented suggestions to our conclusion, with a more positive feel/outlook for the future. We hope you find this acceptable.