Structural Violence against the Biological, Economic, and Psychological Functions of the Family in Contemporary Armed Conflicts from the Perspective of International Law (with Emphasis on the Situation of Women and Children)

Davoudi Garmaroudi, Mahdi; Davoudi Garmaroudi, Homa

doi:10.30497/flj.2026.251357.2414

Structural Violence against the Biological, Economic, and Psychological Functions of the Family in Contemporary Armed Conflicts from the Perspective of International Law (with Emphasis on the Situation of Women and Children)

Articles in Press

Document Type : Original/ Research Article

Authors

Mahdi Davoudi Garmaroudi ¹

Homa Davoudi Garmaroudi ²

¹ Not

² Not Afiliation

10.30497/flj.2026.251357.2414

Abstract

This study examines the dimensions of harm to family functioning in contemporary wars and the inability of international law to contain such harms, with emphasis on women and children. Its main question is: despite recognition of the right to family life in international instruments and ICRC customary rule 105, why do biological, economic, and psychological family functions collapse in contemporary wars, and what are the gaps in the legal system? Using an analytical-descriptive and comparative approach, it reviews international instruments (Geneva Conventions, Additional Protocols, Rome Statute, the two International Covenants, and Security Council resolutions) and compares them with jurisprudential principles (maqasid al-shari'a, the la darar rule, and protection of sanctities). The main hypothesis is that contemporary wars target these three functions, implementing structural violence that existing legal tools cannot contain. International law faces three fundamental gaps: failure to recognize the family as an independent rights-holder; lack of an effective distinction between international and non-international armed conflicts; and dominance of event-based over process-based approaches; institutional and enforcement weaknesses further impede harm containment. Islamic law, with its holistic view of the family, the la darar rule, and maqasid theory, can help fill existing gaps. The paper proposes a four-pillar model of preventive family protection: recognizing the family as an independent rights-holder; creating a specialized monitoring body; drafting an Additional Protocol on family protection; and strengthening judicial and reparative mechanisms. Conclusion: harm to family functioning in contemporary wars is not collateral but a core pillar of genocidal strategy; redefining human security through a family-centered lens is indispensable for international law.

Keywords

International Humanitarian Law

Structural Violence

Islamic Law

No-Harm Rule

Cultural Genocide

Armed Conflicts

Subject of Right

Subjects