good research questions on domestic abuse

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Criminal Justice

IResearchNet

Academic Writing Services

Domestic violence research topics.

The list of domestic violence research paper topics below will show that domestic violence takes on many forms. Through recent scientific study, it is now known that domestic violence occurs within different types of households. The purpose of creating this list is for students to have available a comprehensive, state-of-the-research, easy-to-read compilation of a wide variety of domestic violence topics and provide research paper examples on those topics.

Domestic violence research paper topics can be divided into seven categories:

• Victims of domestic violence,
• Theoretical perspectives and correlates to domestic violence,
• Cross-cultural and religious perspectives,
• Understudied areas within domestic violence research,
• Domestic violence and the law,
• Child abuse and elder abuse, and
• Special topics in domestic violence.

100+ Domestic Violence Research Topics

Victims of domestic violence.

Initial research recognized wives as victims of domestic violence. Thereafter, it was acknowledged that unmarried women were also falling victim to violence at the hands of their boyfriends. Subsequently, the term ‘‘battered women’’ became synonymous with ‘‘battered wives.’’ Legitimizing female victimization served as the catalyst in introducing other types of intimate partner violence.

• Battered Husbands
• Battered Wives
• Battered Women: Held in Captivity
• Battered Women Who Kill: An Examination
• Cohabiting Violence
• Dating Violence
• Domestic Violence in Workplace
• Intimate Partner Homicide
• Intimate Partner Violence, Forms of
• Marital Rape
• Mutual Battering
• Spousal Prostitution

Read more about victims of domestic violence .

Part 2: Research Paper Topics on

Theoretical Perspectives and Correlates to Domestic Violence

There is no single causal factor related to domestic violence. Rather, scholars have concluded that there are numerous factors that contribute to domestic violence. Feminists found that women were beaten at the hands of their partners. Drawing on feminist theory, they helped explain the relationship between patriarchy and domestic violence. Researchers have examined other theoretical perspectives such as attachment theory, exchange theory, identity theory, the cycle of violence, social learning theory, and victim-blaming theory in explaining domestic violence. However, factors exist that may not fall into a single theoretical perspective. Correlates have shown that certain factors such as pregnancy, social class, level of education, animal abuse, and substance abuse may influence the likelihood for victimization.

• Animal Abuse: The Link to Family Violence
• Assessing Risk in Domestic Violence Cases
• Attachment Theory and Domestic Violence
• Battered Woman Syndrome
• Batterer Typology
• Bullying and the Family
• Coercive Control
• Control Balance Theory and Domestic Violence
• Cycle of Violence
• Depression and Domestic Violence
• Education as a Risk Factor for Domestic Violence
• Exchange Theory
• Feminist Theory
• Identity Theory and Domestic Violence
• Intergenerational Transfer of Intimate Partner Violence
• Popular Culture and Domestic Violence
• Post-Incest Syndrome
• Pregnancy-Related Violence
• Social Class and Domestic Violence
• Social Learning Theory and Family Violence
• Stockholm Syndrome in Battered Women
• Substance Use/Abuse and Intimate Partner Violence
• The Impact of Homelessness on Family Violence
• Victim-Blaming Theory

Read more about domestic violence theories .

Part 3: Research Paper Topics on

Cross-Cultural and Religious Perspectives on Domestic Violence

It was essential to acknowledge that domestic violence crosses cultural boundaries and religious affiliations. There is no one particular society or religious group exempt from victimization. A variety of developed and developing countries were examined in understanding the prevalence of domestic violence within their societies as well as their coping strategies in handling these volatile issues. It is often misunderstood that one religious group is more tolerant of family violence than another. As Christianity, Islam, and Judaism represent the three major religions of the world, their ideologies were explored in relation to the acceptance and prevalence of domestic violence.

• Africa: Domestic Violence and the Law
• Africa: The Criminal Justice System and the Problem of Domestic Violence in West Africa
• Asian Americans and Domestic Violence: Cultural Dimensions
• Child Abuse: A Global Perspective
• Christianity and Domestic Violence
• Cross-Cultural Examination of Domestic Violence in China and Pakistan
• Cross-Cultural Examination of Domestic Violence in Latin America
• Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Domestic Violence
• Cross-Cultural Perspectives on How to Deal with Batterers
• Dating Violence among African American Couples
• Domestic Violence among Native Americans
• Domestic Violence in African American Community
• Domestic Violence in Greece
• Domestic Violence in Rural Communities
• Domestic Violence in South Africa
• Domestic Violence in Spain
• Domestic Violence in Trinidad and Tobago
• Domestic Violence within the Jewish Community
• Human Rights, Refugee Laws, and Asylum Protection for People Fleeing Domestic Violence
• Introduction to Minorities and Families in America
• Medical Neglect Related to Religion and Culture
• Multicultural Programs for Domestic Batterers
• Qur’anic Perspectives on Wife Abuse
• Religious Attitudes toward Corporal Punishment
• Rule of Thumb
• Same-Sex Domestic Violence: Comparing Venezuela and the United States
• Worldwide Sociolegal Precedents Supporting Domestic Violence from Ancient to Modern Times

Part 4: Research Paper Topics on

Understudied Areas within Domestic Violence Research

Domestic violence has typically examined traditional relationships, such as husband–wife, boyfriend–girlfriend, and parent–child. Consequently, scholars have historically ignored non-traditional relationships. In fact, certain entries have limited cross-references based on the fact that there were limited, if any, scholarly publications on that topic. Only since the 1990s have scholars admitted that violence exists among lesbians and gay males. There are other ignored populations that are addressed within this encyclopedia including violence within military and police families, violence within pseudo-family environments, and violence against women and children with disabilities.

• Caregiver Violence against People with Disabilities
• Community Response to Gay and Lesbian Domestic Violence
• Compassionate Homicide and Spousal Violence
• Domestic Violence against Women with Disabilities
• Domestic Violence by Law Enforcement Officers
• Domestic Violence within Military Families
• Factors Influencing Reporting Behavior by Male Domestic Violence Victims
• Gay and Bisexual Male Domestic Violence
• Gender Socialization and Gay Male Domestic Violence
• Inmate Mothers: Treatment and Policy Implications
• Intimate Partner Violence and Mental Retardation
• Intimate Partner Violence in Queer, Transgender, and Bisexual Communities
• Lesbian Battering
• Male Victims of Domestic Violence and Reasons They Stay with Their Abusers
• Medicalization of Domestic Violence
• Police Attitudes and Behaviors toward Gay Domestic Violence
• Pseudo-Family Abuse
• Sexual Aggression Perpetrated by Females
• Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity: The Need for Education in Servicing Victims of Trauma

Part 5: Research Paper Topics on

Domestic Violence and the Law

The Violence against Women Act (VAWA) of 1994 helped pave domestic violence concerns into legislative matters. Historically, family violence was handled through informal measures often resulting in mishandling of cases. Through VAWA, victims were given the opportunity to have their cases legally remedied. This legitimized the separation of specialized domestic and family violence courts from criminal courts. The law has recognized that victims of domestic violence deserve recognition and resolution. Law enforcement agencies may be held civilly accountable for their actions in domestic violence incidents. Mandatory arrest policies have been initiated helping reduce discretionary power of police officers. Courts have also begun to focus on the offenders of domestic violence. Currently, there are batterer intervention programs and mediation programs available for offenders within certain jurisdictions. Its goals are to reduce the rate of recidivism among batterers.

• Battered Woman Syndrome as a Legal Defense in Cases of Spousal Homicide
• Batterer Intervention Programs
• Clemency for Battered Women
• Divorce, Child Custody, and Domestic Violence
• Domestic Violence Courts
• Electronic Monitoring of Abusers
• Expert Testimony in Domestic Violence Cases
• Judicial Perspectives on Domestic Violence
• Lautenberg Law
• Legal Issues for Battered Women
• Mandatory Arrest Policies
• Mediation in Domestic Violence
• Police Civil Liability in Domestic Violence Incidents
• Police Decision-Making Factors in Domestic Violence Cases
• Police Response to Domestic Violence Incidents
• Prosecution of Child Abuse and Neglect
• Protective and Restraining Orders
• Shelter Movement
• Training Practices for Law Enforcement in Domestic Violence Cases
• Violence against Women Act

Read more about Domestic Violence Law .

Part 6: Research Paper Topics on

Child Abuse and Elder Abuse

Scholars began to address child abuse over the last third of the twentieth century. It is now recognized that child abuse falls within a wide spectrum. In the past, it was based on visible bruises and scars. Today, researchers have acknowledged that psychological abuse, where there are no visible injuries, is just as damaging as its counterpart. One of the greatest controversies in child abuse literature is that of Munchausen by Proxy. Some scholars have recognized that it is a syndrome while others would deny a syndrome exists. Regardless of the term ‘‘syndrome,’’ Munchausen by Proxy does exist and needs to be further examined. Another form of violence that needs to be further examined is elder abuse. Elder abuse literature typically focused on abuse perpetrated by children and caregivers. With increased life expectancies, it is now understood that there is greater probability for violence among elderly intimate couples. Shelters and hospitals need to better understand this unique population in order to better serve its victims.

• Assessing the Risks of Elder Abuse
• Child Abuse and Juvenile Delinquency
• Child Abuse and Neglect in the United States: An Overview
• Child Maltreatment, Interviewing Suspected Victims of
• Child Neglect
• Child Sexual Abuse
• Children Witnessing Parental Violence
• Consequences of Elder Abuse
• Elder Abuse and Neglect: Training Issues for Professionals
• Elder Abuse by Intimate Partners
• Elder Abuse Perpetrated by Adult Children
• Filicide and Children with Disabilities
• Mothers Who Kill
• Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome
• Parental Abduction
• Postpartum Depression, Psychosis, and Infanticide
• Ritual Abuse–Torture in Families
• Shaken Baby Syndrome
• Sibling Abuse

Part 7: Research Paper Topics on

Special Topics  in Domestic Violence

Within this list, there are topics that may not fit clearly into one of the aforementioned categories. Therefore, they are be listed in a separate special topics designation. Analyzing Incidents of Domestic Violence: The National Incident-Based Reporting System

• Community Response to Domestic Violence
• Conflict Tactics Scales
• Dissociation in Domestic Violence, The Role of
• Domestic Homicide in Urban Centers: New York City
• Fatality Reviews in Cases of Adult Domestic Homicide and Suicide
• Female Suicide and Domestic Violence
• Healthcare Professionals’ Roles in Identifying and Responding to Domestic Violence
• Measuring Domestic Violence
• Neurological and Physiological Impact of Abuse
• Social, Economic, and Psychological Costs of Violence
• Stages of Leaving Abusive Relationships
• The Physical and Psychological Impact of Spousal Abuse

Domestic violence remains a relatively new field of study among social scientists but it is already a popular research paper subject within college and university students. Only within the past 4 decades have scholars recognized domestic violence as a social problem. Initially, domestic violence research focused on child abuse. Thereafter, researchers focused on wife abuse and used this concept interchangeably with domestic violence. Within the past 20 years, researchers have acknowledged that other forms of violent relationships exist, including dating violence, battered males, and gay domestic violence. Moreover, academicians have recognized a subcategory within the field of criminal justice: victimology (the scientific study of victims). Throughout the United States, colleges and universities have been creating victimology courses, and even more specifically, family violence and interpersonal violence courses.

The media have informed us that domestic violence is so commonplace that the public has unfortunately grown accustomed to reading and hearing about husbands killing their wives, mothers killing their children, or parents neglecting their children. While it is understood that these offenses take place, the explanations as to what factors contributed to them remain unclear. In order to prevent future violence, it is imperative to understand its roots. There is no one causal explanation for domestic violence; however, there are numerous factors which may help explain these unjustified acts of violence. Highly publicized cases such as the O.J. Simpson and Scott Peterson trials have shown the world that alleged murderers may not resemble the deranged sociopath depicted in horror films. Rather, they can be handsome, charming, and well-liked by society. In addition, court-centered programming on television continuously publicizes cases of violence within the home informing the public that we are potentially at risk by our caregivers and other loved ones. There is the case of the au pair Elizabeth Woodward convicted of shaking and killing Matthew Eappen, the child entrusted to her care. Some of the most highly publicized cases have also focused on mothers who kill. America was stunned as it heard the cases of Susan Smith and Andrea Yates. Both women were convicted of brutally killing their own children. Many asked how loving mothers could turn into cold-blooded killers.

Browse other criminal justice research topics .

The Edvocate

• Lynch Educational Consulting
• Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
• Write For Us
• The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
• The Edvocate Podcast
• Terms and Conditions
• Privacy Policy
• Assistive Technology
• Best PreK-12 Schools in America
• Child Development
• Classroom Management
• Early Childhood
• EdTech & Innovation
• Education Leadership
• First Year Teachers
• Gifted and Talented Education
• Special Education
• Parental Involvement
• Policy & Reform
• Best Colleges and Universities
• Best College and University Programs
• HBCU’s
• Higher Education EdTech
• Higher Education
• International Education
• The Awards Process
• Finalists and Winners of The 2022 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2021 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2020 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2019 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2018 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Finalists and Winners of The 2017 Tech Edvocate Awards
• Award Seals
• GPA Calculator for College
• GPA Calculator for High School
• Cumulative GPA Calculator
• Grade Calculator
• Weighted Grade Calculator
• Final Grade Calculator
• The Tech Edvocate
• AI Powered Personal Tutor

College Minor: Everything You Need to Know

14 fascinating teacher interview questions for principals, tips for success if you have a master’s degree and can’t find a job, 14 ways young teachers can get that professional look, which teacher supplies are worth the splurge, 8 business books every teacher should read, conditional admission: everything you need to know, college majors: everything you need to know, 7 things principals can do to make a teacher observation valuable, 3 easy teacher outfits to tackle parent-teacher conferences.

Research Topics on Domestic Violence

• Why Should Domestic Violence Be Studied?
• What Does Domestic Violence Theory Explains?
• What Distinguishes Domestic Violence from IPV?
• Which Age Group Is Most Affected by Domestic Violence?
• At What Point Does Domestic Abuse Become the Norm?
• How Do American and Other Cultures Address the Issue of Domestic Violence?
• What Are the Three Phases in the Domestic Violence Cycle?
• What Explanations Exist for Domestic Violence?
• How Many Fatalities Are Resultant from Domestic Violence?
• When Did Domestic Violence Get Its First Definition?
• What Are Some Ways to Prevent Domestic Violence?
• How Do Gender, Race, and Class Affect Domestic Violence?
• Why Do Abuse Victims Occasionally Keep Quiet?
• What Mental Effects Does Domestic Violence Have?
• Is Domestic Violence Frequently Associated with Mental Illness?
• What Emotional Effects Does Domestic Violence Have on a Person?
• What Cognitive Effects Does Domestic Violence Have on Children?
• Why Should Employers Take Domestic Violence Seriously?
• What Causes Domestic Violence, Exactly?
• Which Nation Experiences Domestic Violence?
• What Impact Does Domestic Violence Have on Victims’ Lives?
• What Could Be the Causes and Symptoms of Domestic Violence?
• How Does Domestic Violence Relate to Socioeconomic Status?
• How Does Domestic Violence Affect the Australian Criminal Justice System?
• What Role Does Culture Play in Domestic Abuse in the UK?
• What Does an Abuser’s Psychology Look Like?
• How Are Police Addressing Domestic Violence?
• What Exactly Is Domestic Violence According to the Government?
• Which Industry Has the Highest Domestic Violence Rate?
• How Much Domestic Violence Is Related to Alcohol?

21 Ways Support Students Who Are Chronically ...

Domino’s pizza essay topics.

Matthew Lynch

Related articles more from author, research topics about bmw, writing prompts for drugs, interesting essay topics to write about disorders, simple visual art essay topics, simple & easy indian culture essay topics, aging essay topics.

SAFETY ALERT:  If you are in danger, please use a safer computer and consider calling 911. The National Domestic Violence Hotline at 1-800-799-7233 / TTY 1-800-787-3224 or the StrongHearts Native Helpline at 1−844-762-8483 (call or text) are available to assist you.

Please review these safety tips .

Research & Evidence

NRCDV works to strengthen researcher/practitioner collaborations that advance the field’s knowledge of, access to, and input in research that informs policy and practice at all levels. We also identify and develop guidance and tools to help domestic violence programs and coalitions better evaluate their work, including by using participatory action research approaches that directly tap the diverse expertise of a community to frame and guide evaluation efforts.

Safety & Privacy in a Digital World

Immigrant Survivors of Domestic Violence  

Teen Dating Violence

Housing and Domestic Violence

Domestic Violence in LGBTQ Communities

Trans and Non-Binary Survivors

The Difference Between Surviving & Not Surviving

Earned Income Tax Credit & Other Tax Credits

For an extensive list of research & evidence materials check out the research & statistics section on VAWnet

The Domestic Violence Evidence Project (DVEP) is a multi-faceted, multi-year and highly collaborative effort designed to assist state coalitions, local domestic violence programs, researchers, and other allied individuals and organizations better respond to the growing emphasis on identifying and integrating evidence-based practice into their work. DVEP brings together research, evaluation, practice and theory to inform critical thinking and enhance the field's knowledge to better serve survivors and their families.

The Community Based Participatory Research Toolkit  (CBPR) is for researchers and practitioners across disciplines and social locations who are working in academic, policy, community, or practice-based settings. In particular, the toolkit provides support to emerging researchers as they consider whether and how to take a CBPR approach and what it might mean in the context of their professional roles and settings. Domestic violence advocates will also find useful information on the CBPR approach and how it can help answer important questions about your work.

For over two decades, the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence has operated  VAWnet , an online library focused on violence against women and other forms of gender-based violence.  VAWnet.org  has long been identified as an unparalleled, comprehensive, go-to source of information and resources for anti-violence advocates, human service professionals, educators, faith leaders, and others interested in ending domestic and sexual violence.

Safe Housing Partnerships , the website of the Domestic Violence and Housing Technical Assistance Consortium , includes the latest research and evidence on the intersection of domestic and sexual violence, housing, and homelessness. You can also find new research exploring different aspects of efforts to expand housing options for domestic and sexual violence survivors, including the use of flexible funding approaches, DV Housing First and rapid rehousing, DV Transitional Housing, and mobile advocacy.

• Open access
• Published: 20 June 2023

A qualitative quantitative mixed methods study of domestic violence against women

• Mina Shayestefar 1 ,
• Mohadese Saffari 1 ,
• Razieh Gholamhosseinzadeh 2 ,
• Monir Nobahar 3 , 4 ,
• Majid Mirmohammadkhani 4 ,
• Seyed Hossein Shahcheragh 5 &
• Zahra Khosravi 6  

BMC Women's Health volume  23 , Article number:  322 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

7381 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Violence against women is one of the most widespread, persistent and detrimental violations of human rights in today’s world, which has not been reported in most cases due to impunity, silence, stigma and shame, even in the age of social communication. Domestic violence against women harms individuals, families, and society. The objective of this study was to investigate the prevalence and experiences of domestic violence against women in Semnan.

This study was conducted as mixed research (cross-sectional descriptive and phenomenological qualitative methods) to investigate domestic violence against women, and some related factors (quantitative) and experiences of such violence (qualitative) simultaneously in Semnan. In quantitative study, cluster sampling was conducted based on the areas covered by health centers from married women living in Semnan since March 2021 to March 2022 using Domestic Violence Questionnaire. Then, the obtained data were analyzed by descriptive and inferential statistics. In qualitative study by phenomenological approach and purposive sampling until data saturation, 9 women were selected who had referred to the counseling units of Semnan health centers due to domestic violence, since March 2021 to March 2022 and in-depth and semi-structured interviews were conducted. The conducted interviews were analyzed using Colaizzi’s 7-step method.

In qualitative study, seven themes were found including “Facilitators”, “Role failure”, “Repressors”, “Efforts to preserve the family”, “Inappropriate solving of family conflicts”, “Consequences”, and “Inefficient supportive systems”. In quantitative study, the variables of age, age difference and number of years of marriage had a positive and significant relationship, and the variable of the number of children had a negative and significant relationship with the total score and all fields of the questionnaire (p < 0.05). Also, increasing the level of female education and income both independently showed a significant relationship with increasing the score of violence.

Conclusions

Some of the variables of violence against women are known and the need for prevention and plans to take action before their occurrence is well felt. Also, supportive mechanisms with objective and taboo-breaking results should be implemented to minimize harm to women, and their children and families seriously.

Peer Review reports

Violence against women by husbands (physical, sexual and psychological violence) is one of the basic problems of public health and violation of women’s human rights. It is estimated that 35% of women and almost one out of every three women aged 15–49 experience physical or sexual violence by their spouse or non-spouse sexual violence in their lifetime [ 1 ]. This is a nationwide public health issue, and nearly every healthcare worker will encounter a patient who has suffered from some type of domestic or family violence. Unfortunately, different forms of family violence are often interconnected. The “cycle of abuse” frequently persists from children who witness it to their adult relationships, and ultimately to the care of the elderly [ 2 ]. This violence includes a range of physical, sexual and psychological actions, control, threats, aggression, abuse, and rape [ 3 ].

Violence against women is one of the most widespread, persistent, and detrimental violations of human rights in today’s world, which has not been reported in most cases due to impunity, silence, stigma and shame, even in the age of social communication [ 3 ]. In the United States of America, more than one in three women (35.6%) experience rape, physical violence, and intimate partner violence (IPV) during their lifetime. Compared to men, women are nearly twice as likely (13.8% vs. 24.3%) to experience severe physical violence such as choking, burns, and threats with knives or guns [ 4 ]. The higher prevalence of violence against women can be due to the situational deprivation of women in patriarchal societies [ 5 ]. The prevalence of domestic violence in Iran reported 22.9%. The maximum of prevalence estimated in Tehran and Zahedan, respectively [ 6 ]. Currently, Iran has high levels of violence against women, and the provinces with the highest rates of unemployment and poverty also have the highest levels of violence against women [ 7 ].

Domestic violence against women harms individuals, families, and society [ 8 ]. Violence against women leads to physical, sexual, psychological harm or suffering, including threats, coercion and arbitrary deprivation of their freedom in public and private life. Also, such violence is associated with harmful effects on women’s sexual reproductive health, including sexually transmitted infection such as Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), abortion, unsafe childbirth, and risky sexual behaviors [ 9 ]. There are high levels of psychological, sexual and physical domestic abuse among pregnant women [ 10 ]. Also, women with postpartum depression are significantly more likely to experience domestic violence during pregnancy [ 11 ].

Prompt attention to women’s health and rights at all levels is necessary, which reduces this problem and its risk factors [ 12 ]. Because women prefer to remain silent about domestic violence and there is a need to introduce immediate prevention programs to end domestic violence [ 13 ]. violence against women, which is an important public health problem, and concerns about human rights require careful study and the application of appropriate policies [ 14 ]. Also, the efforts to change the circumstances in which women face domestic violence remain significantly insufficient [ 15 ]. Given that few clear studies on violence against women and at the same time interviews with these people regarding their life experiences are available, the authors attempted to planning this research aims to investigate the prevalence and experiences of domestic violence against women in Semnan with the research question of “What is the prevalence of domestic violence against women in Semnan, and what are their experiences of such violence?”, so that their results can be used in part of the future planning in the health system of the society.

This study is a combination of cross-sectional and phenomenology studies in order to investigate the amount of domestic violence against women and some related factors (quantitative) and their experience of this violence (qualitative) simultaneously in the Semnan city. This study has been approved by the ethics committee of Semnan University of Medical Sciences with ethic code of IR.SEMUMS.REC.1397.182. The researcher introduced herself to the research participants, explained the purpose of the study, and then obtained informed written consent. It was assured to the research units that the collected information will be anonymous and kept confidential. The participants were informed that participation in the study was entirely voluntary, so they can withdraw from the study at any time with confidence. The participants were notified that more than one interview session may be necessary. To increase the trustworthiness of the study, Guba and Lincoln’s criteria for rigor, including credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability [ 16 ], were applied throughout the research process. The COREQ checklist was used to assess the present study quality. The researchers used observational notes for reflexivity and it preserved in all phases of this qualitative research process.

Qualitative method

Based on the phenomenological approach and with the purposeful sampling method, nine women who had referred to the counseling units of healthcare centers in Semnan city due to domestic violence in February 2021 to March 2022 were participated in the present study. The inclusion criteria for the study included marriage, a history of visiting a health center consultant due to domestic violence, and consent to participate in the study and unwillingness to participate in the study was the exclusion criteria. Each participant invited to the study by a telephone conversation about study aims and researcher information. The interviews place selected through agreement of the participant and the researcher and a place with the least environmental disturbance. Before starting each interview, the informed consent and all of the ethical considerations, including the purpose of the research, voluntary participation, confidentiality of the information were completely explained and they were asked to sign the written consent form. The participants were interviewed by depth, semi-structured and face-to-face interviews based on the main research question. Interviews were conducted by a female health services researcher with a background in nursing (M.Sh.). Data collection was continued until the data saturation and no new data appeared. Only the participants and the researcher were present during the interviews. All interviews were recorded by a MP3 Player by permission of the participants before starting. Interviews were not repeated. No additional field notes were taken during or after the interview.

The age range of the participants was from 38 to 55 years and their average age was 40 years. The sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in table below (Table  1 ).

Five interviews in the courtyards of healthcare centers, 2 interviews in the park, and 2 interviews at the participants’ homes were conducted. The duration of the interviews varied from 45 min to one hour. The main research question was “What is your experience about domestic violence?“. According to the research progress some other questions were asked in line with the main question of the research.

The conducted interviews were analyzed by using the 7 steps Colizzi’s method [ 17 ]. In order to empathize with the participants, each interview was read several times and transcribed. Then two researchers (M.Sh. and M.N.) extracted the phrases that were directly related to the phenomenon of domestic violence against women independently and distinguished from other sentences by underlining them. Then these codes were organized into thematic clusters and the formulated concepts were sorted into specific thematic categories.

In the final stage, in order to make the data reliable, the researcher again referred to 2 participants and checked their agreement with their perceptions of the content. Also, possible important contents were discussed and clarified, and in this way, agreement and approval of the samples was obtained.

Quantitative method

The cross-sectional study was implemented from February 2021 to March 2022 with cluster sampling of married women in areas of 3 healthcare centers in Semnan city. Those participants who were married and agreed with the written and verbal informed consent about the ethical considerations were included to the study. The questionnaire was completed by the participants in paper and online form.

The instrument was the standard questionnaire of domestic violence against women by Mohseni Tabrizi et al. [ 18 ]. In the questionnaire, questions 1–10, 11–36, 37–65 and 66–71 related to sociodemographic information, types of spousal abuse (psychological, economical, physical and sexual violence), patriarchal beliefs and traditions and family upbringing and learning violence, respectively. In total, this questionnaire has 71 items.

The scoring of the questionnaire has two parts and the answers to them are based on the Likert scale. Questions 11–36 and 66–71 are answered with always [ 4 ] to never (0) and questions 37–65 with completely agree [ 4 ] to completely disagree (0). The minimum and maximum score is 0 and 300, respectively. The total score of 0–60, 61–120 and higher than 121 demonstrates low, moderate and severe domestic violence against women, respectively [ 18 ].

In the study by Tabrizi et al., to evaluate the validity and reliability of this questionnaire, researchers tried to measure the face validity of the scale by the previous research. Those items and questions which their accuracies were confirmed by social science professors and experts used in the research, finally. The total Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.183, which confirmed that the reliability of the questions and items of the questionnaire is sufficient [ 18 ].

Descriptive data were reported using mean, standard deviation, frequency and percentage. Then, to measure the relationship between the variables, χ2 and Pearson tests also variance and regression analysis were performed. All analysis were performed by using SPSS version 26 and the significance level was considered as p < 0.05.

Qualitative results

According to the third step of Colaizzi’s 7-step method, the researcher attempted to conceptualize and formulate the extracted meanings. In this step, the primary codes were extracted from the important sentences related to the phenomenon of violence against women, which were marked by underlining, which are shown below as examples of this stage and coding.

The primary code of indifference to the father’s role was extracted from the following sentences. This is indifference in the role of the father in front of the children.

“Some time ago, I told him that our daughter is single-sided deaf. She has a doctor’s appointment; I have to take her to the doctor. He said that I don’t have money to give you. He doesn’t force himself to make money anyway” (p 2, 33 yrs).

“He didn’t value his own children. He didn’t think about his older children” (p 4, 54 yrs).

The primary code extracted here included lack of commitment in the role of head of the household. This is irresponsibility towards the family and meeting their needs.

“My husband was fired from work after 10 years due to disorder and laziness. Since then, he has not found a suitable job. Every time he went to work, he was fired after a month because of laziness” (p 7, 55 yrs).

“In the evening, he used to get dressed and go out, and he didn’t come back until late. Some nights, I was so afraid of being alone that I put a knife under my pillow when I slept” (p 2, 33 yrs).

A total of 246 primary codes were extracted from the interviews in the third step. In the fourth step, the researchers put the formulated concepts (primary codes) into 85 specific sub-categories.

Twenty-three categories were extracted from 85 sub-categories. In the sixth step, the concepts of the fifth step were integrated and formed seven themes (Table  2 ).

These themes included “Facilitators”, “Role failure”, “Repressors”, “Efforts to preserve the family”, “Inappropriate solving of family conflicts”, “Consequences”, and “Inefficient supportive systems” (Fig.  1 ).

Themes of domestic violence against women

Some of the statements of the participants on the theme of “ Facilitators” are listed below:

Husband’s criminal record

“He got his death sentence for drugs. But, at last it was ended for 10 years” (p 4, 54 yrs).

Inappropriate age for marriage

“At the age of thirteen, I married a boy who was 25 years old” (p 8, 25 yrs).

“My first husband obeyed her parents. I was 12–13 years old” (p 3, 32 yrs).

“I couldn’t do anything. I was humiliated” (p 1, 38 yrs).

“A bridegroom came. The mother was against. She said, I am young. My older sister is not married yet, but I was eager to get married. I don’t know, maybe my father’s house was boring for me” (p 2, 33 yrs).

“My parents used to argue badly. They blamed each other and I always wanted to run away from these arguments. I didn’t have the patience to talk to mom or dad and calm them down” (p 5, 39 yrs).

Overdependence

“My husband’s parents don’t stop interfering, but my husband doesn’t say anything because he is a student of his father. My husband is self-employed and works with his father on a truck” (p 8, 25 yrs).

“Every time I argue with my husband because of lack of money, my mother-in-law supported her son and brought him up very spoiled and lazy” (p 7, 55 yrs).

Bitter memories

“After three years, my mother married her friend with my uncle’s insistence and went to Shiraz. But, his condition was that she did not have the right to bring his daughter with her. In fact, my mother also got married out of necessity” (p 8, 25 yrs).

Some of their other statements related to “ Role failure” are mentioned below:

Lack of commitment to different roles

“I got angry several times and went to my father’s house because of my husband’s bad financial status and the fact that he doesn’t feel responsible to work and always says that he cannot find a job” (p 6, 48 yrs).

“I saw that he does not want to change in any way” (p 4, 54 yrs).

“No matter how kind I am, it does not work” (p 1, 38 yrs).

Some of their other statements regarding “ Repressors” are listed below:

Fear and silence

“My mother always forced me to continue living with my husband. Finally, my father had been poor. She all said that you didn’t listen to me when you wanted to get married, so you don’t have the right to get angry and come to me, I’m miserable enough” (p 2, 33 yrs).

“Because I suffered a lot in my first marital life. I was very humiliated. I said I would be fine with that. To be kind” (p1, 38 yrs).

“Well, I tell myself that he gets angry sometimes” (p 3, 32 yrs).

Shame from society

“I don’t want my daughter-in-law to know. She is not a relative” (p 4, 54 yrs).

Some of the statements of the participants regarding the theme of “ Efforts to preserve the family” are listed below:

Hope and trust

“I always hope in God and I am patient” (p 2, 33 yrs).

Efforts for children

“My divorce took a month. We got a divorce. I forgave my dowry and took my children instead” (p 2, 33 yrs).

Some of their other statements regarding the “ Inappropriate solving of family conflicts” are listed below:

Child-bearing thoughts

“My husband wanted to take me to a doctor to treat me. But my father-in-law refused and said that instead of doing this and spending money, marry again. Marriage in the clans was much easier than any other work” (p 8, 25 yrs).

Lack of effective communication

“I was nervous about him, but I didn’t say anything” (p 5, 39 yrs).

“Now I am satisfied with my life and thank God it is better to listen to people’s words. Now there is someone above me so that people don’t talk behind me” (p 2, 33 yrs).

Some of their other statements regarding the “ Consequences” are listed below:

Harm to children

“My eldest daughter, who was about 7–8 years old, behaved differently. Oh, I was angry. My children are mentally depressed and argue” (p 5, 39 yrs).

After divorce

“Even though I got a divorce, my mother and I came to a remote area due to the fear of what my family would say” (p 2, 33 yrs).

Social harm

“I work at a retirement center for living expenses” (p 2, 33 yrs).

“I had to go to clean the houses” (p 5, 39 yrs).

Non-acceptance in the family

“The children’s relationship with their father became bad. Because every time they saw their father sitting at home smoking, they got angry” (p 7, 55 yrs).

Emotional harm

“When I look back, I regret why I was not careful in my choice” (p 7, 55 yrs).

“I felt very bad. For being married to a man who is not bound by the family and is capricious” (p 9, 36 yrs).

Some of their other statements regarding “ Inefficient supportive systems” are listed below:

Inappropriate family support

“We didn’t have children. I was at my father’s house for about a month. After a month, when I came home, I saw that my husband had married again. I cried a lot that day. He said, God, I had to. I love you. My heart is broken, I have no one to share my words” (p 8, 25 yrs).

“My brother-in-law was like himself. His parents had also died. His sister did not listen at all” (p 4, 54 yrs).

“I didn’t have anyone and I was alone” (p 1, 38 yrs).

Inefficiency of social systems

“That day he argued with me, picked me up and threw me down some stairs in the middle of the yard. He came closer, sat on my stomach, grabbed my neck with both of his hands and wanted to strangle me. Until a long time later, I had kidney problems and my neck was bruised by her hand. Given that my aunt and her family were with us in a building, but she had no desire to testify and was afraid” (p 3, 32 yrs).

Undesired training and advice

“I told my mother, you just said no, how old I was? You never insisted on me and you didn’t listen to me that this man is not good for you” (p 9, 36 yrs).

Quantitative results

In the present study, 376 married women living in Semnan city participated in this study. The mean age of participants was 38.52 ± 10.38 years. The youngest participant was 18 and the oldest was 73 years old. The maximum age difference was 16 years. The years of marriage varied from one year to 40 years. Also, the number of children varied from no children to 7. The majority of them had 2 children (109, 29%). The sociodemographic characteristics of the participants are summarized in the table below (Table  3 ).

The frequency distribution (number and percentage) of the participants in terms of the level of violence was as follows. 89 participants (23.7%) had experienced low violence, 59 participants (15.7%) had experienced moderate violence, and 228 participants (60.6%) had experienced severe violence.

Cronbach’s alpha for the reliability of the questionnaire was 0.988. The mean and standard deviation of the total score of the questionnaire was 143.60 ± 74.70 with a range of 3-244. The relationship between the total score of the questionnaire and its fields, and some demographic variables is summarized in the table below (Table  4 ).

As shown in the table above, the variables of age, age difference and number of years of marriage have a positive and significant relationship, and the variable of number of children has a negative and significant relationship with the total score and all fields of the questionnaire (p < 0.05). However, the variable of education level difference showed no significant relationship with the total score and any of the fields. Also, the highest average score is related to patriarchal beliefs compared to other fields.

The comparison of the average total scores separately according to each variable showed the significant average difference in the variables of the previous marriage history of the woman, the result of the previous marriage of the woman, the education of the woman, the education of the man, the income of the woman, the income of the man, and the physical disease of the man (p < 0.05).

In the regression model, two variables remained in the final model, indicating the relationship between the variables and violence score and the importance of these two variables. An increase in women’s education and income level both independently show a significant relationship with an increase in violence score (Table  5 ).

The results of analysis of variance to compare the scores of each field of violence in the subgroups of the participants also showed that the experience and result of the woman’s previous marriage has a significant relationship with physical violence and tradition and family upbringing, the experience of the man’s previous marriage has a significant relationship with patriarchal belief, the education level of the woman has a significant relationship with all fields and the level of education of the man has a significant relationship with all fields except tradition and family upbringing (p < 0.05).

According to the results of both quantitative and qualitative studies, variables such as the young age of the woman and a large age difference are very important factors leading to an increase in violence. At a younger age, girls are afraid of the stigma of society and family, and being forced to remain silent can lead to an increase in domestic violence. As Gandhi et al. (2021) stated in their study in the same field, a lower marriage age leads to many vulnerabilities in women. Early marriage is a global problem associated with a wide range of health and social consequences, including violence for adolescent girls and women [ 12 ]. Also, Ahmadi et al. (2017) found similar findings, reporting a significant association among IPV and women age ≤ 40 years [ 19 ].

Two others categories of “Facilitators” in the present study were “Husband’s criminal record” and “Overdependence” which had a sub-category of “Forced cohabitation”. Ahmadi et al. (2017) reported in their population-based study in Iran that husband’s addiction and rented-householders have a significant association with IPV [ 19 ].

The patriarchal beliefs, which are rooted in the tradition and culture of society and family upbringing, scored the highest in relation to domestic violence in this study. On the other hand, in qualitative study, “Normalcy” of men’s anger and harassment of women in society is one of the “Repressors” of women to express violence. In the quantitative study, the increase in the women’s education and income level were predictors of the increase in violence. Although domestic violence is more common in some sections of society, women with a wide range of ages, different levels of education, and at different levels of society face this problem, most of which are not reported. Bukuluki et al. (2021) showed that women who agreed that it is good for a man to control his partner were more likely to experience physical violence [ 20 ].

Domestic violence leads to “Consequences” such as “Harm to children”, “Emotional harm”, “Social harm” to women and even “Non-acceptance in their own family”. Because divorce is a taboo in Iranian culture and the fear of humiliating women forces them to remain silent against domestic violence. Balsarkar (2021) stated that the fear of violence can prevent women from continuing their studies, working or exercising their political rights [ 8 ]. Also, Walker-Descarte et al. (2021) recognized domestic violence as a type of child maltreatment, and these abusive behaviors are associated with mental and physical health consequences [ 21 ].

On the other hand and based on the “Lack of effective communication” category, ignoring the role of the counselor in solving family conflicts and challenges in the life of couples in the present study was expressed by women with reasons such as lack of knowledge and family resistance to counseling. Several pathologies are needed to investigate increased domestic violence in situations such as during women’s pregnancy or infertility. Because the use of counseling for couples as a suitable solution should be considered along with their life challenges. Lin et al. (2022) stated that pregnant women were exposed to domestic violence for low birth weight in full term delivery. Spouse violence screening in the perinatal health care system should be considered important, especially for women who have had full-term low birth weight infants [ 22 ].

Also, lack of knowledge and low level of education have been found as other factors of violence in this study, which is very prominent in both qualitative and quantitative studies. Because the social systems and information about the existing laws should be followed properly in society to act as a deterrent. Psychological training and especially anger control and resilience skills during education at a younger age for girls and boys should be included in educational materials to determine the positive results in society in the long term. Manouchehri et al. (2022) stated that it seems necessary to train men about the negative impact of domestic violence on the current and future status of the family [ 23 ]. Balsarkar (2021) also stated that men and women who have not had the opportunity to question gender roles, attitudes and beliefs cannot change such things. Women who are unaware of their rights cannot claim. Governments and organizations cannot adequately address these issues without access to standards, guidelines and tools [ 8 ]. Machado et al. (2021) also stated that gender socialization reinforces gender inequalities and affects the behavior of men and women. So, highlighting this problem in different fields, especially in primary health care services, is a way to prevent IPV against women [ 24 ].

There was a sub-category of “Inefficiency of social systems” in the participants experiences. Perhaps the reason for this is due to insufficient education and knowledge, or fear of seeking help. Holmes et al. (2022) suggested the importance of ascertaining strategies to improve victims’ experiences with the court, especially when victims’ requests are not met, to increase future engagement with the system [ 25 ]. Sigurdsson (2019) revealed that despite high prevalence numbers, IPV is still a hidden and underdiagnosed problem and neither general practitioner nor our communities are as well prepared as they should be [ 26 ]. Moreira and Pinto da Costa (2021) found that while victims of domestic violence often agree with mandatory reporting, various concerns are still expressed by both victims and healthcare professionals that require further attention and resolution [ 27 ]. It appears that legal and ethical issues in this regard require comprehensive evaluation from the perspectives of victims, their families, healthcare workers, and legal experts. By doing so, better practical solutions can be found to address domestic violence, leading to a downward trend in its occurrence.

Some of the variables of violence against women have been identified and emphasized in many studies, highlighting the necessity of policymaking and social pathology in society to prevent and use operational plans to take action before their occurrence. Breaking the taboo of domestic violence and promoting divorce as a viable solution after counseling to receive objective results should be implemented seriously to minimize harm to women, children, and their families.

Limitations

Domestic violence against women is an important issue in Iranian society that women resist showing and expressing, making researchers take a long-term process of sampling in both qualitative and quantitative studies. The location of the interview and the women’s fear of their husbands finding out about their participation in this study have been other challenges of the researchers, which, of course, they attempted to minimize by fully respecting ethical considerations. Despite the researchers’ efforts, their personal and professional experiences, as well as the studies reviewed in the literature review section, may have influenced the study results.

Data Availability

Data and materials will be available upon email to the corresponding author.

Abbreviations

Intimate Partner Violence

Human Immunodeficiency Virus

Organization WH. Violence against women prevalence estimates, 2018: global, regional and national prevalence estimates for intimate partner violence against women and global and regional prevalence estimates for non-partner sexual violence against women. World Health Organization; 2021.

Huecker MR, Malik A, King KC, Smock W. Kentucky Domestic Violence. StatPearls. Treasure Island (FL) ineligible companies. Disclosure: Ahmad Malik declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies. Disclosure: Kevin King declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies. Disclosure: William Smock declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.: StatPearls Publishing Copyright © 2023, StatPearls Publishing LLC.; 2023.

Gandhi A, Bhojani P, Balkawade N, Goswami S, Kotecha Munde B, Chugh A. Analysis of survey on violence against women and early marriage: Gyneaecologists’ perspective. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2021;71(Suppl 2):76–83.

Article   Google Scholar  

Sugg N. Intimate partner violence: prevalence, health consequences, and intervention. Med Clin. 2015;99(3):629–49.

Google Scholar  

Abebe Abate B, Admassu Wossen B, Tilahun Degfie T. Determinants of intimate partner violence during pregnancy among married women in Abay Chomen district, western Ethiopia: a community based cross sectional study. BMC Womens Health. 2016;16(1):1–8.

Adineh H, Almasi Z, Rad M, Zareban I, Moghaddam A. Prevalence of domestic violence against women in Iran: a systematic review. Epidemiol (Sunnyvale). 2016;6(276):2161–11651000276.

Pirnia B, Pirnia F, Pirnia K. Honour killings and violence against women in Iran during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet Psychiatry. 2020;7(10):e60.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Balsarkar G. Summary of four recent studies on violence against women which obstetrician and gynaecologists should know. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2021;71:64–7.

Ellsberg M, Jansen HA, Heise L, Watts CH, Garcia-Moreno C. Intimate partner violence and women’s physical and mental health in the WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence: an observational study. The lancet. 2008;371(9619):1165–72.

Chasweka R, Chimwaza A, Maluwa A. Isn’t pregnancy supposed to be a joyful time? A cross-sectional study on the types of domestic violence women experience during pregnancy in Malawi. Malawi Med journal: J Med Association Malawi. 2018;30(3):191–6.

Afshari P, Tadayon M, Abedi P, Yazdizadeh S. Prevalence and related factors of postpartum depression among reproductive aged women in Ahvaz. Iran Health care women Int. 2020;41(3):255–65.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Gebrezgi BH, Badi MB, Cherkose EA, Weldehaweria NB. Factors associated with intimate partner physical violence among women attending antenatal care in Shire Endaselassie town, Tigray, northern Ethiopia: a cross-sectional study, July 2015. Reproductive health. 2017;14:1–10.

Duran S, Eraslan ST. Violence against women: affecting factors and coping methods for women. J Pak Med Assoc. 2019;69(1):53–7.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Devries KM, Mak JY, Garcia-Moreno C, Petzold M, Child JC, Falder G, et al. The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science. 2013;340(6140):1527–8.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Mahapatro M, Kumar A. Domestic violence, women’s health, and the sustainable development goals: integrating global targets, India’s national policies, and local responses. J Public Health Policy. 2021;42(2):298–309.

Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry: sage; 1985.

Colaizzi PF. Psychological research as the phenomenologist views it. 1978.

Mohseni Tabrizi A, Kaldi A, Javadianzadeh M. The study of domestic violence in Marrid Women Addmitted to Yazd Legal Medicine Organization and Welfare Organization. Tolooebehdasht. 2013;11(3):11–24.

Ahmadi R, Soleimani R, Jalali MM, Yousefnezhad A, Roshandel Rad M, Eskandari A. Association of intimate partner violence with sociodemographic factors in married women: a population-based study in Iran. Psychol Health Med. 2017;22(7):834–44.

Bukuluki P, Kisaakye P, Wandiembe SP, Musuya T, Letiyo E, Bazira D. An examination of physical violence against women and its justification in development settings in Uganda. PLoS ONE. 2021;16(9):e0255281.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Walker-Descartes I, Mineo M, Condado LV, Agrawal N. Domestic violence and its Effects on Women, Children, and families. Pediatr Clin North Am. 2021;68(2):455–64.

Lin C-H, Lin W-S, Chang H-Y, Wu S-I. Domestic violence against pregnant women is a potential risk factor for low birthweight in full-term neonates: a population-based retrospective cohort study. PLoS ONE. 2022;17(12):e0279469.

Manouchehri E, Ghavami V, Larki M, Saeidi M, Latifnejad Roudsari R. Domestic violence experienced by women with multiple sclerosis: a study from the North-East of Iran. BMC Womens Health. 2022;22(1):1–14.

Machado DF, Castanheira ERL, Almeida MASd. Intersections between gender socialization and violence against women by the intimate partner. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2021;26:5003–12.

Holmes SC, Maxwell CD, Cattaneo LB, Bellucci BA, Sullivan TP. Criminal Protection orders among women victims of intimate Partner violence: Women’s Experiences of Court decisions, processes, and their willingness to Engage with the system in the future. J interpers Violence. 2022;37(17–18):Np16253–np76.

Sigurdsson EL. Domestic violence-are we up to the task? Scand J Prim Health Care. 2019;37(2):143–4.

Moreira DN, Pinto da Costa M. Should domestic violence be or not a public crime? J Public Health. 2021;43(4):833–8.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors of this study appreciate the Deputy for Research and Technology of Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Social Determinants of Health Research Center of Semnan University of Medical Sciences and all the participants in this study.

Research deputy of Semnan University of Medical Sciences financially supported this project.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Allied Medical Sciences, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Mina Shayestefar & Mohadese Saffari

Amir Al Momenin Hospital, Social Security Organization, Ahvaz, Iran

Razieh Gholamhosseinzadeh

Department of Nursing, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Monir Nobahar

Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Monir Nobahar & Majid Mirmohammadkhani

Clinical Research Development Unit, Kowsar Educational, Research and Therapeutic Hospital, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Seyed Hossein Shahcheragh

Student Research Committee, School of Allied Medical Sciences, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran

Zahra Khosravi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

M.Sh. contributed to the first conception and design of this research; M.Sh., Z.Kh., M.S., R.Gh. and S.H.Sh. contributed to collect data; M.N. and M.Sh. contributed to the analysis of the qualitative data; M.M. and M.Sh. contributed to the analysis of the quantitative data; M.SH., M.N. and M.M. contributed to the interpretation of the data; M.Sh., M.S. and S.H.Sh. wrote the manuscript. M.Sh. prepared the final version of manuscript for submission. All authors reviewed the manuscript meticulously and approved it. All names of the authors were listed in the title page.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mina Shayestefar .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This article is resulted from a research approved by the Vice Chancellor for Research of Semnan University of Medical Sciences with ethics code of IR.SEMUMS.REC.1397.182 in the Social Determinants of Health Research Center. The authors confirmed that all methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. All participants accepted the participation in the present study. The researchers introduced themselves to the research units, explained the purpose of the research to them and then all participants signed the written informed consent. The research units were assured that the collected information was anonymous. The participant was informed that participating in the study was completely voluntary so that they can safely withdraw from the study at any time and also the availability of results upon their request.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

All authors declare that there are no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Shayestefar, M., Saffari, M., Gholamhosseinzadeh, R. et al. A qualitative quantitative mixed methods study of domestic violence against women. BMC Women's Health 23 , 322 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-023-02483-0

Download citation

Received : 28 April 2023

Accepted : 14 June 2023

Published : 20 June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-023-02483-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Domestic violence
• Cross-sectional studies
• Qualitative research

BMC Women's Health

ISSN: 1472-6874

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Domestic Violence Facts and Statistics    *  Domestic Violence Video Presentations   *   Online CEU Courses

From the Editorial Board of the Peer-Reviewed Journal, Partner Abuse www.springerpub.com/pa and the Advisory Board of the Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Programs www.battererintervention.org *  www.domesticviolenceintervention.net

Resources for researchers, policy-makers, intervention providers, victim advocates, law enforcement, judges, attorneys, family court mediators, educators, and anyone interested in family violence

PASK FINDINGS

61-Page Author Overview

Domestic Violence Facts and Statistics at-a-Glance

PASK Researchers

PASK Video Summary by John Hamel, LCSW

• Introduction
• Implications for Policy and Treatment
• Domestic Violence Politics

17 Full PASK Manuscripts and tables of Summarized Studies

INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH

THE PARTNER ABUSE STATE OF KNOWLEDGE PROJECT

The world's largest domestic violence research data base, 2,657 pages, with summaries of 1700 peer-reviewed studies.

Courtesy of the scholarly journal, Partner Abuse www.springerpub.com/pa and the Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Providers www.domesticviolenceintervention.net

Over the years, research on partner abuse has become unnecessarily fragmented and politicized. The purpose of The Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project (PASK) is to bring together in a rigorously evidence-based, transparent and methodical manner existing knowledge about partner abuse with reliable, up-to-date research that can easily be accessed both by researchers and the general public.

Family violence scholars from the United States, Canada and the U.K. were invited to conduct an extensive and thorough review of the empirical literature, in 17 broad topic areas. They were asked to conduct a formal search for published, peer-reviewed studies through standard, widely-used search programs, and then catalogue and summarize all known research studies relevant to each major topic and its sub-topics. In the interest of thoroughness and transparency, the researchers agreed to summarize all quantitative studies published in peer-reviewed journals after 1990, as well as any major studies published prior to that time, and to clearly specify exclusion criteria. Included studies are organized in extended tables, each table containing summaries of studies relevant to its particular sub-topic.

In this unprecedented undertaking, a total of 42 scholars and 70 research assistants at 20 universities and research institutions spent two years or more researching their topics and writing the results. Approximately 12,000 studies were considered and more than 1,700 were summarized and organized into tables. The 17 manuscripts, which provide a review of findings on each of the topics, for a total of 2,657 pages, appear in 5 consecutive special issues of the peer-reviewed journal Partner Abuse . All conclusions, including the extent to which the research evidence supports or undermines current theories, are based strictly on the data collected.

Contact: [email protected]

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TRAININGS

Online CEU Courses - Click Here for More Information

Also see VIDEOS and ADDITIONAL RESEARCH sections below.

Other domestic violence trainings are available at: www.domesticviolenceintervention.net , courtesy of the Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Providers (ADVIP)

Click here for video presentations from the 6-hour ADVIP 2020 International Conference on evidence-based treatment.

NISVS: The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey

Click here for all reports

CLASSIC VIDEO PRESENTATIONS Murray Straus, Ph.D. *  Erin Pizzey  *  Don Dutton, Ph.D. Click Here

Video: the uncomfortable facts on ipv, tonia nicholls, ph.d., video: batterer intervention groups:  moving forward with evidence-based practice, john hamel, ph.d., additional research.

From Other Renowned Scholars and Clinicians.  Click on any name below for research, trainings and expert witness/consultation services

PREVALENCE RATES

Arthur Cantos, Ph.D. University of Texas

Denise Hines, Ph.D. Clark University

Zeev Winstok, Ph.D. University of Haifa (Israel)

CONTEXT OF ABUSE

Don Dutton, Ph.D University of British Columbia (Canada)

K. Daniel O'Leary State University of New York at Stony Brook

Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Ph.D. University of South Alabama

ABUSE WORLDWIDE ETHNIC/LGBT GROUPS

Fred Buttell, Ph.D. Tulane University

Clare Cannon, Ph.D. University of California, Davis

Vallerie Coleman, Ph.D. Private Practice, Santa Monica, CA

Chiara Sabina, Ph.D. Penn State Harrisburg

Esteban Eugenio Santovena, Ph.D. Universidad Autonoma de Ciudad Juarez, Mexico

Christauria Welland, Ph.D. Private Practice, San Diego, CA

RISK FACTORS

Louise Dixon, Ph.D. University of Birmingham (U.K.)

Sandra Stith, Ph.D. Kansas State University

Gregory Stuart, Ph.D. University of Tennessee Knoxville

IMPACT ON VICTIMS AND FAMILIES

Deborah Capaldi, Ph.D. Oregon Social Learning Center

Patrick Davies, Ph.D. University of Rochester

Miriam Ehrensaft, Ph.D. Columbia University Medical Ctr.

Amy Slep, Ph.D. State University of New York at Stony Brook

VICTIM ISSUES

Carol Crabsen, MSW Valley Oasis, Lancaster, CA

Emily Douglas, Ph.D. Bridgewater State University

Leila Dutton, Ph.D. University of New Haven

Margaux Helm WEAVE, Sacramento, CA

Linda Mills, Ph.D. New York University

Brenda Russell, Ph.D. Penn State Berks

CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSES

Ken Corvo, Ph.D. Syracuse University

Jeffrey Fagan, Ph.D. Columbia University

Brenda Russell, Ph.D, Penn State Berks

Stan Shernock, Ph.D. Norwich University

PREVENTION AND TREATMENT

Julia Babcock, Ph.D. University of Houston

Fred Buttell, Ph.D.Tulane University

Michelle Carney, Ph.D. University of Georgia

Christopher Eckhardt, Ph.D. Purdue Univerity

Kimberly Flemke, Ph.D. Drexel University

Nicola Graham-Kevan, Ph.D. Univ. Central Lancashire (U.K.)

Peter Lehmann, Ph.D. University of Texas at Arlingon

Penny Leisring, Ph.D. Quinnipiac University

Christopher Murphy, Ph.D. University of Maryland

Ronald Potter-Efron, Ph.D. Private Practice, Eleva, WI

Daniel Sonkin, Ph.D. Private Practice, Sausalito, CA.

Lynn Stewart, Ph.D. Correctional Service, Canada

Casey Taft, Ph.D Boston University School of Medicine

Jeff Temple, Ph.D. University of Texas Medical Branch

Join us in urging your Members of Congress to act now and prevent catastrophic cuts to th [Read More]

• What is DV?

Frequently Asked Questions about Domestic Violence

• What is domestic violence?
• What are resources available for victims?
• Why do victims sometimes return to or stay with abusers?
• Do abusers show any potential warning signs?
• Is it possible for abusers to change?
• Are men victims of domestic violence?
• Do LGBTQ people experience domestic violence?
• How does the economy affect domestic violence?
• What can I do to help?

1. What is domestic violence?

Domestic violence is a pattern of coercive, controlling behavior that can include physical abuse, emotional or psychological abuse, sexual abuse or financial abuse (using money and financial tools to exert control). Some abusers are able to exert complete control over a victim’s every action without ever using violence or only using subtle threats of violence. All types of abuse are devastating to victims.

Domestic violence is a pervasive, life-threatening crime that affects millions of individuals across the United States regardless of age, economic status, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, ability, or education level.

High-profile cases of domestic violence will attract headlines, but thousands of people experience domestic abuse every day. They come from all walks of life. In our annual Domestic Violence Counts Report , the National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV) finds that U.S. domestic violence shelters and programs serve thousands of victims and answer thousands of crisis hotline calls, chats, texts, and emails every day of the year.

Abusive partners make it very difficult for victims to escape relationships. Sadly, many survivors suffer from abuse for decades.

It is important for survivors to know that the abuse is not their fault, and that they are not alone. Help is available to those who are experiencing domestic violence.

2. What are resources available for victims?

Survivors have many options, from obtaining a protection order to staying in a shelter, exploring options through support group, or making an anonymous call to a local domestic violence shelter or national hotline. There is hope for victims, and they are not alone.

There are hundreds of local shelters across the United States that provide safety, counseling, legal help, and other resources for victims and their children.

Information and support are available for victims of abuse and their friends and family:

• If you are in danger, call a local hotline, the National Domestic Violence Hotline, or, if it is safe to do so, 911.
• The National Domestic Violence Hotline provides confidential and anonymous support 24/7. Reach out by phone at 1-800-799-7233 and TTY 1-800-787-3224.
• Loveisrespect provides teens and young adults confidential and anonymous support. Reach out by phone 1-866-331-9474 and TTY 1-866-331-8453.
• WomensLaw.org provides legal information and resources for victims. Reach out by email through the WomensLaw Email Hotline in English and Spanish.
• Technology can be used by victims to increase safety and privacy; it can also be misused by perpetrators to harass, abuse, or harm victims. Find information, including resources and toolkits, related to technology safety at TechSafety.org .
• Financial abuse is widespread. Learn more about rebuilding from financial abuse from The Moving Ahead Curriculum , created in partnership with The Allstate Foundation .
• Find state-specific legal information on WomensLaw.org related to custody, protection orders, divorce, immigration, and more.

TIP: Before using online resources, know that your computer or phone may not be safe. Some abusive partners misuse technology to stalk and track a partner’s activities on a computer, tablet, or mobile device. (Learn more at TechSafety.org .)

3. Why do victims sometimes return to or stay with abusers?

The question is not “ Why doesn’t the victim just leave?” The better question is “ Why does the abuser choose to abuse? ”

The deck is stacked against victims as they navigate safety:

• Abusive partners work very hard to keep victims trapped in the relationship. They may try to isolate the victim from friends and family, thereby reducing the people and places where the survivor can go for support. Through various tactics of financial abuse , abusive partners create financial barriers to safety.
• There is a real fear of death or more abuse if they leave, as abusers may perceive this act of independence as a threat to the power and control they’ve worked to gain, and they may choose to escalate the violence in response. On average, three women die at the hands of a current or former intimate partner every day.
• Through “gaslighting,” abusive partners cause victims to feel like they are responsible for the abuse. Gaslighting is a form of emotional abuse that abusers use to confuse and shift blame onto the victim. This often causes the victim to doubt their sanity and feel like they are responsible for the abuse and therefore able to stop it.
• Abuse takes an emotional and physical toll over time, which can translate to additional health issues that make leaving more difficult.
• Survivors often report that they want the abuse to end, not the relationship. A survivor may stay with or return to an abusive partner because they believe the abuser’s promises to change.

4. Do abusers show any potential warning signs?

There is no way to spot an abuser in a crowd, but most abusers share some common characteristics. Some of the subtle warning signs include:

• They insist on moving quickly into a relationship.
• They can be very charming and may seem “too good to be true.”
• They insist that you stop participating in your preferred leisure activities or spending time with family and friends.
• They are extremely jealous or controlling.
• They do not take responsibility for their actions and blame others for everything that goes wrong.
• They criticize their partner’s appearance and make frequent put-downs.
• Their words and actions don’t match.

It’s important to remember that domestic violence is first and foremost a pattern of power and control. Any one of these behaviors may not be indicative of abuse on its own, until it is considered as part of a pattern of behavior.

5. Is it possible for abusers to change?

Yes, but they must first make the choice to change their behavior. It’s not easy for an abusive partner to stop choosing abusive behavior, and it requires a serious commitment to change. Once an abuser has had all of the power in a relationship, it’s difficult to transition to a healthy relationship where each partner has equal respect and power.

Sometimes an abusive partner stops one form of the abuse – for example, the physical violence – but continues to employ other forms of abuse – such as emotional, sexual, or financial abuse. It is important to remember that domestic violence includes one or more forms of abuse and is a part of an overall pattern of seeking power and control over the victim.

6. Are men victims of domestic violence?

Yes, men can be victims of domestic abuse. Domestic violence is a pervasive, life-threatening crime that affects millions of individuals across the United States regardless of age, economic status, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, ability, or education level.

According to data collected from 2003 to 2012, 82 percent of domestic, dating, and sexual violence was committed against women, and 18 percent against men [1]. A 2012 study found that about 4 in 5 victims of domestic, dating, and sexual violence between 1994 and 2010 were women [2].

Pervasive stereotypes that men are always the abuser and women are always the victim discriminates against survivors who are men and discourages them from coming forward with their stories. Survivors of domestic violence who are men are less likely to seek help or report abuse. Many are unaware of services for men, and there is a common misconception that domestic violence programs only serve women.

When we talk about domestic violence, we’re not talking about men versus women or women versus men. We’re talking about violence versus peace and control versus respect. Domestic violence affects us all, and all of us – women, children, and men – must be part of the solution.

7.  Do LGBTQ people experience domestic violence?

Yes, LGBTQ people can be victims of domestic abuse. Domestic violence is a pervasive, life-threatening crime that affects millions of individuals across the United States regardless of age, economic status, race, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, ability, or education level.

At some point in their lives, 43.8% lesbian women and 61.1% of bisexual women have experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner, as opposed to 35% of heterosexual women [3].

Twenty-six percent of gay men and 37.3% of bisexual men have experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetime, in comparison to 29% of heterosexual men [4].

A 2016 report found that more than half (54%) of transgender individuals have experienced intimate partner violence. A 2015 study found that 22% of transgender respondents had been harassed by law enforcement, 6% were physically assaulted, and 46% felt uncomfortable seeking police assistance.

8. How does the economy affect domestic violence?

A bad economy does not cause domestic violence, but it can make it worse. The severity and frequency of abuse can increase when factors associated with a bad economy are present. Job loss, housing foreclosures, debt, and other factors contribute to higher stress levels at home, which can lead to increased violence.

As the abuse gets worse, a weak economy limits options for survivors to seek safety or escape. Additionally, domestic violence shelters and programs may experience funding cuts right when they need more staff and funding to keep up with the demand for their services. Victims may also have a more difficult time finding a job to become financially independent of abusers.

9. What can I do to help?

Everyone can speak out against domestic violence. Use our “10 Tips to Have Informed Conversation about Domestic Violence” to help guide your conversations with friends, colleagues, and loved ones.

Every person can take individual action to create a supportive community for survivors. Get involved in your community – we’ve got ideas for creative ways to get involved in our Get Involved Toolkit .

Members of the public can donate to local, statewide, or national anti-domestic violence programs or victim assistance programs, like NNEDV . Find your state or territory coalition here .

You can call on your public officials to support life-saving domestic violence services and hold perpetrators accountable. Learn more, or take action here .

[1] Catalano, S., U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics. Special Report: Intimate Partner Violence, 1998-2010. (Nov. 2012, revised Sep. 2015)

[2] Tjaden, P., and Thoennes, N., U.S. Department of Justice. Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence. (July 2000).

[3] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010 Findings on Victimization by Sexual Orientation,” 2013.

[4] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010 Findings on Victimization by Sexual Orientation,” 2013.

Domestic Violence

About domestic violence, narrow the topic.

• Articles & Videos
• MLA Citation This link opens in a new window
• APA Citation This link opens in a new window

Domestic violence describes abuse perpetrated by one partner against another in the context of an interpersonal relationship. Domestic violence can be committed by current or former partners. The alternate term intimate partner violence has gained favor in the twenty-first century, as it expands the definition to include relationships between couples who are not married or cohabiting. Family violence further extends the scope of the issue to consider cases in which other immediate family members are victimized by violent or abusive behavior.

The prevalence of domestic and intimate partner violence is difficult to determine, as these forms of violence often remain unreported. For example, according to the US Department of Justice's Office for Victims of Crime, reports of intimate partner violence...  ( Opposing Viewpoints )

• Is domestic violence a sign that  America’s family values are in decline?
• Do female batterers differ from male batterers?
• How do drug abuse and alcoholism affect family violence?
• Are there signs that violence will escalate to murder?
• How have the O.J. Simpson, Chris Brown, or Ray Rice cases affected domestic violence awareness?
• Is the "conditioned helplessness" of abused women a factor?
• I s violence genetic or environmental?
• Does poverty affect spousal abuse?
• Why do some men still regard their wives as property?
• What affect does domestic violence have on the divorce rate?
• Is counseling effective for couples in violent relationships?
• Can abusers be rehabilitated?
• Has the economic downturn increased the number of battered spouses?
• Why do some women stay in an abusive relationship?
• Discuss particular issues in same-sex intimate partner violence.
• What are the signs of a battered person/partner?
• Why do women under-report being abused?
• Why are men less likely than women to report being abused?
• Is there adequate support for victims of same-sex partner violence?
• How do gender roles, stereotypes, and hetero-sexism shape domestic violence?
• What are the behavioral patterns of spousal abuse?
• What is the psychological make-up of an abuser?
• How does spousal abuse affect the family unit?
• Does spousal abuse impact the larger community, if so how?
• Is spousal abuse a crime?
• What are the statistics for spousal abuse in the U.S.?
• What types of treatment are available for abusive husbands and wives?
• How effective are these treatments in preventing future abuse?
• Do children who witness spousal abuse become abusers or abused as adults?
• What resources are available for abused spouses to get help?
• Next: Library Resources >>
• Last Updated: Feb 6, 2024 12:40 PM
• URL: https://libguides.broward.edu/domestic_violence

Advertisement

Ethically Driven and Methodologically Tailored: Setting the Agenda for Systematic Reviews in Domestic Violence and Abuse

• Original Article
• Open access
• Published: 03 April 2023
• Volume 38 , pages 1055–1069, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Karen Schucan Bird   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6297-8499 1 ,
• Nicola Stokes 2 ,
• Martha Tomlinson 2 &
• Carol Rivas 1  

2777 Accesses

3 Citations

9 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Systematic reviews have an important, and growing, role to play in the global evidence eco-system of domestic violence and abuse. Alongside substantive contributions to knowledge, such reviews stimulate debates about ethical reviewing practices and the importance of tailoring methods to the nuances of the field. This paper aims to pinpoint a set of ethical and methodological priorities to guide and enhance review practices specifically in the field of domestic abuse.

The five Pillars of the Research Integrity Framework (ethical guidelines for domestic abuse research) are used to interrogate the systematic review process. To do so, the Framework is retrospectively applied to a recently completed systematic review in domestic abuse. The review included a rapid systematic map and in-depth analysis of interventions aimed at creating or enhancing informal support and social networks for victim-survivors of abuse.

Ethical and methodological priorities for systematic reviews in domestic abuse include (1) Safety and wellbeing: maintaining the wellbeing of researchers and stakeholders, and appraising the ethics of included studies, (2) Transparency/ accountability: transparent reporting of research funding, aims and methods together with explicit consideration of authorship of outputs, (3) Equality, human rights and social justice: developing diverse review teams/ Advisory groups, and review methods that aim to search for, and report, diverse perspectives. Considering researcher positionality/ reflexivity in the review, (4) Engagement: collaboration with non-academic stakeholders and individuals with lived experience throughout the review process, (5) Research Ethics: independent ethical scrutiny of systematic review proposals with input from researchers with expertise in systematic reviews and domestic abuse.

Additional research is required to comprehensively examine the ethics of each stage of the review process. In the meantime, attention should be given to the underpinning ethical framework for our systematic review practices and the wider research infrastructure that governs reviews.

Similar content being viewed by others

Parallels in Practice: Applying Principles of Research Integrity and Ethics in Domestic Violence Fatality Review (DVFR)

Elizabeth A. Cook, James Rowlands, … Grace Boughton

The Importance of Grey and Qualitative Literature in Developing Domestic Violence and Abuse and Child Maltreatment Core Outcome Sets: A Brief Report

Claire Powell, Siofra Peeren, … Emma Howarth

Intrafamilial Child Homicide: an Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews

Bitna Kim, Alida V. Merlo & Yeonghee Kim

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Systematic reviews have an important, and growing, role in the global evidence eco-system of domestic violence and abuse (DVA). Systematic reviews are reviews of ‘existing research using explicit, accountable rigorous research methods’ (Gough et al., 2017b , p. 2). Over the past fifteen years, there has been a significant expansion in the conduct and publication of systematic reviews in the field of DVA (MacGregor et al., 2014 ), spanning a wide range of topics from perpetrator programmes (for example, see Bell & Coates, 2022 ) to children’s experiences of domestic abuse (Noble-Carr et al., 2021 ). This body of review level evidence has a critical role to play in developing effective policies and programmes to prevent, reduce and mitigate the effects of DVA across multiple sectors, including public health, criminal justice, and social work (Addis & Snowdon, 2021 ).

Alongside substantive contributions to knowledge, systematic reviews in DVA stimulate wider debates about ethical reviewing practices and the importance of tailoring methods to the nuances of the field. Such reviews have evolved over time to respond to the shifting demands of policy/ practice and adapt to a growing, but challenging, evidence base. Early reviews of interventions in DVA followed standard methodologies for ‘what works/ effectiveness’ reviews (using comparative, quantitative studies to test impacts of interventions) (see Gough & Thomas, 2017 ; Munn et al., 2018 ) to reveal a severe lack of ‘evidence of suitable quality’ (such as Wathen & MacMillan, 2003 ). More recently, intervention reviews have begun to develop innovative methodologies to maximise the contributions of the evidence base, despite the limitations, and draw inferences for applied contexts (such as Rivas et al., 2019 ; Trabbold et al., 2020). Yet, reviews of DVA interventions continue to face a number of challenges as the research landscape includes few high-quality, well-designed trials, an absence of standardised measures, and limited relevance for DVA policy/practice questions (Bell & Coates, 2022 ; Feder et al., 2011 ; Tarzia et al., 2017 ). This literature includes small sample sizes, short term follow-up, an over reliance on official sources of data (such as police records) and narrow conceptions of DVA (primarily focusing on physical violence) (Bell & Coates, 2022 ). Moreover, the studies tend to report data on relatively homogeneous population groups (predominantly heterosexual, female, white, adult samples) (Addis and Snowman, 2021 ) from specific geographical areas (North American studies dominate the field) (Gregory et al., 2017 ; Trabold et al., 2020 ). Nevertheless, DVA research also offers possibilities for systematic reviewers. The field is growing, underpinned by a rich scholarship on ethical considerations (Bender, 2017 ) and includes a high number of methodological robust qualitative studies, although they tend to be poorly reported (Arai et al., 2021 ; Meyer et al., 2020 ; Noble-Carr et al., 2021 ). A further strength rests with the collaborative and transdisciplinary nature of DVA research, with a significant proportion of studies undertaken and published through non-academic channels, and typically dispersed across disciplines and sectors (Bender, 2017 ; Konya et al., 2020 ). Such characteristics present numerous challenges and opportunities for researchers who seek to undertake relevant and useful systematic reviews for improving policy and practice in DVA (Tarzia et al., 2017 ). Yet, there is limited methodological debate about whether and how to tailor review methods to the field of DVA. Further, the centrality of ethical issues has remained marginal to methodological developments in reviews (Suri, 2020 ). This article take steps to address these gaps by aiming to pinpoint a set of ethical and methodological priorities to guide and enhance review practices specifically in the field of DVA. This endeavour aligns with the broader imperative to develop standards of conduct to promote and maintain quality standards in reviews (Higgins et al., 2022 ; White et al., 2018a ).

This articles uses the Research Integrity Framework ( RIF ) (Women’s Aid, 2020 ), supplemented by additional themes identified in wider literature (such as Bender, 2017 ; Ellsberg & Heise, 2002 ; World Health Organization, 2001 ) to identify ethical priorities in DVA research. The RIF aims to sketch out ‘what good research practice relating to DVA looks like’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 2) and was collaboratively developed by DVA practitioners from non-governmental organisations together with academics in the UK. The RIF uses five pillars to ‘highlight the key aspects of research in this field’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 5): (1) Safety and wellbeing, (2) Transparency/ accountability, (3) Equality, human rights, and social justice, (4) Engagement, (5) Research ethics. Drawing on feminist research practice, the RIF offers a useful starting point for analysing DVA specific methodologies and presents an initial attempt to develop standards of (primary) research conduct in this field. In doing so, the RIF offers a series of checklists to support best practice and aims to assist policy makers/ commissioners in appraising DVA research. Indeed, there are examples of the RIF being used in policy orientated research teams (such as the Domestic Abuse Commissioner for England and Wales).

In this article, the RIF is applied to a recently completed systematic review in the field of domestic violence and abuse (Schucan Bird et al., 2022 ) . This review, funded by the Economic & Social Research Council (ESRC), as part of UK Research & Innovation’s rapid response to Covid-19, was a collaboration between university academics and researchers from a domestic abuse organisation. An Advisory group composed of individuals with lived experience, frontline DVA service providers, and DVA specialists was created to feed into the project at three key points. The systematic review examined empirical research on informal social support interventions (‘activities designed to change the existing quality, level, or function of an individual’s personal social network or to create new networks and relationships’, Budde & Schene, 2004 , p. 342). The review followed a two-stage approach, beginning with a systematic map of qualitative and quantitative studies (complying with key characteristics associated with ‘scoping study’, ‘systematic map’, and ‘evidence map’ in Snilstveit et al., 2016 ). The second stage included a mixed methods review (Grant & Booth, 2009 ) that was informed by an EPPI Centre approach (Gough et al., 2017a ; Hong et al., 2020 ).

With a specific focus on interventions in DVA, the case review follows on from traditional systematic reviews that assess the evidence base for interventions (Munn et al., 2018 ). As such, the methods of the first stage of the review were guided by standards of conduct tailored towards reviews of intervention studies (White et al., 2018b , 2020 ) and included an element of pre-specification that was expected of such review types (such as searching, and inclusion criteria established a priori ). Similarly, the review questions, in the second stage, asked about the effectiveness of DVA interventions and so included elements common to wider ‘What works’ reviews (Gough & Thomas, 2017 ). However, the focus and methods of the case review also extended beyond traditional ‘effectiveness reviews’ by asking wider questions about the interventions and including diverse study designs (Schucan Bird et al., 2022 ) . This reflected the EPPI-Centre commitment to adjusting review methods to respond to questions in meaningful and useful ways, drawing on a selection of ‘different tools within our toolbox of review approaches’ (Gough & Thomas, 2017 , p. 52). Therefore, the case review did not faithfully embody one type of review (Munn et al., 2018 ) but included a combination of different review types (systematic map and mixed method syntheses). This reflects the variety of reviews undertaken in the field of domestic abuse including qualitative evidence syntheses (such as Sinko et al., 2021 ) and ‘scoping reviews’ of research (such as Aljomaie et al., 2022 ).

As ‘reviews can vary on many dimensions and that these may go beyond branded types of review’ (Gough & Thomas, 2017 , p. 49), other characteristics of the case example shared similarities with the wider body of DVA reviews: a broad conceptualisation of the problem and rapid imperative. The case review focused on interventions targeting DVA, broadly conceptualised (similar to recent DVA reviews such as Anderson et al., 2021 ; Trabold et al., 2020 ) and used techniques to expediate the review process. This aligns with the imperative to undertake rapid research in the field of DVA, especially during the pandemic, to develop ‘actionable’ findings that can be translated into policy and practice recommendations (Richardson et al., 2020 ). The review aimed to produce research outputs that were ‘useful, useable and used’ (Graham et al., 2019 , p. 1) and so the methods of the review were shaped by an ethical imperative to improve outcomes for victim-survivors of DVA. The execution of common review types, similarities with DVA reviews of interventions combined with a heightened awareness of ethical issues makes this review a suitable example. The RIF was applied retrospectively to this case review and each of the Pillars are considered below.

Findings and Discussion

Pillar 1: safety and wellbeing.

The RIF defines safety and wellbeing in terms of the maintenance of the ‘safety, both physical and emotional, of research participants, and researchers themselves, within the research process’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 5). The protection of research participants has long been a concern for scholars of DVA (Burgess-Proctor, 2015 ; Clark & Walker, 2011 ; Mulla & Hlavka, 2011 ) but the systematic review process does not include direct research participants. Therefore, the remit of safety and wellbeing in the case review relates to the participants in the primary studies included in the review, the researchers themselves and the stakeholders involved in the Advisory Group. These will now be considered.

Participant Safety in Primary Studies

Common to systematic reviews, the case review did not examine whether the included studies assured the safety and wellbeing of research participants (Elia et al., 2016 ). The review used a quality assessment tool to appraise the methods of included studies but this did not include ethical criteria (Hong et al., 2018 ). Neither conduct nor reporting guidelines for systematic reviews, such as Cochrane Collaboration (Higgins et al., 2022 ) or PRISMA (Page et al., 2021a ) stipulate that reviews should assess or report the ethical approval of the included primary studies. Yet, there are growing calls to do so as part of wider efforts to address research misconduct (Elia et al., 2016 ; Vergnes et al., 2010 ; Weingarten et al., 2004 ). Assessing the ethics of included studies is highly appropriate for systematic reviews in DVA, given the centrality of the safety of participants for research in this field (Women’s Aid, 2020 ).

Researcher Wellbeing

Typical of academic projects in gender-based violence, the study did not explicitly identify the support needs of the researchers (Nikischer, 2019 ; Schulz et al., 2022 ). Yet, maintaining the safety and wellbeing of researchers is ‘paramount and should guide all project decisions’ in the field of DVA (World Health Organization, 2001 , p. 10). Systematic reviewers do not collect data from victim-survivors so potentially have a different level of exposure to distressing or trauma content compared with primary researchers. Nevertheless, secondary data collection and analysis including sensitive topics can still involve a degree of ‘emotional work’ with associated risks to researcher wellbeing (Hanna, 2019 ; Jackson et al., 2013 ). Several strategies may mitigate potential harms, as illustrated by the case review. Reviewers had access to support services provided by the institutions to which they were affiliated. The domestic abuse organisation, SafeLives, provided tailored and responsive support services for researchers (see, for example, the Clinical Supervision Guidelines SafeLives, 2022 ). The academic institution provided access to a limited number of sessions from an external, generic mental health provider. The wider literature highlights that such services are insufficient and unable to respond to the impacts associated with working in the field of DVA (Schulz et al., 2022 ). New researchers may feel particularly reluctant to seek external support for fear of compromising their professional identity (Hanna, 2019 ). Other strategies organically emerged in the case review including informal peer-to-peer support and the emergence of collective caring (Neale, 2013 ). Support from colleagues in DVA, ‘turning to others who get it’, is considered to be an important pillar for researcher wellbeing alongside, or in the absence of, tailored institutional mechanisms (Schulz et al., 2022 ) but this may not always be available to researchers (Jackson et al., 2013 ). Aside from informal coping strategies, studies recommend that institutional and system-wide responses are needed to provide ethical infrastructure to maintain the wellbeing of DVA researchers. This includes training in researcher self-care and extending university ethics protocols to protect researcher well-being in potentially traumatic fields (Cullen et al., 2021 ; Nikischer, 2019 ). Whilst systematic review guidelines or ethical discussions currently overlook issues associated with reviewer welfare (Higgins et al., 2022 ; such as Suri, 2020 ; Vergnes et al., 2010 ), using established strategies from primary research can ensure that secondary researchers are better protected when engaging with difficult and potentially distressing data (Hanna, 2019 ).

Wellbeing of Advisory Group

Much discussion of ethics in studies of DVA centres on maintaining the physical and emotional safety of victim-survivors, primarily as research participants (Bender, 2017 ; Ellsberg & Heise, 2002 ; Women’s Aid, 2020 ). These discussions also have applicability to stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews. The case review provided the Advisory group, including individuals with lived experience, with Terms of Reference and a Privacy Notice to garner informed consent and share the protocols regarding anonymity/ confidentiality. Whilst these documents established ground rules for involvement, the case example identified two further ethical issues. First, the team did not explicitly consider the potential for inadvertently causing harm or distress to stakeholders (World Health Organization, 2001 ). In the case review, not all members of the research team had prior experience of working in the field of DVA and/ or sufficient understanding of the sensitivities in this area. This may potentially have increased the risk of harm to Advisory group members during the review process. Discussion in Advisory group meetings in the case review, for example, prompted individuals with lived experience to recall difficult experiences and some questions may have been phrased insensitively. The make-up of systematic review teams, typically large and constituted by methodologists and topic experts (Oliver et al., 2017 ), means that not all reviewers will have substantive knowledge of DVA. To minimise the potential for harm, DVA reviews should ensure that all researchers have sufficient experience or training in the field, including a basic introduction to DVA and an opportunity to explore their own biases and fears (World Health Organization, 2001 ).

Second, ethical considerations pertaining to the wellbeing of the Advisory group may be shaped by the type of systematic review and the extent to which methods/ concepts/ data are pre-specified. Stakeholders in reviews with highly specified methods and concepts (such as ‘What works’ reviews, see Gough and Thomas, 2017 ) should have a reasonably complete understanding of the scope of the review and the likely data they will encounter. Such information can therefore be used to inform stakeholders’ decisions to provide consent for involvement. Reviews with more inductive approaches, however, mean that Advisory groups may not have sufficient information at the outset of the review to be able to make an informed judgement. The concepts and data used in the synthesis of the case review, for example, emerged through the review process yet informed consent was only sought at the start of the project. Therefore, it is helpful to recognise consent as an ongoing process and establish ethical protocols to ensure stakeholders can withdraw their participation at any point in the research process (Neale, 2013 ).

Whilst the wellbeing of individuals with lived experience was partially addressed in the case review, there was a lack of explicit concern for other stakeholders (such as service providers or policy colleagues). Pillar 1 of the RIF only focuses on the safety and wellbeing of a specific group of research participants: those directly involved in the data collection. Extending our understanding of participants to include all individuals involved in the research, ‘however tangential the involvement may be’, can recognise the importance of the wellbeing of all stakeholder groups (Neale, 2013 , p. 7). This ‘stakeholder ethics’ aligns with wider strategies in the DVA sector that recognise that anyone working in the field may have direct experience of abuse/ trauma and so need recourse to support services (SafeLives, 2018 ).

Pillar 2: Transparency/ Accountability

Transparency/ accountability in the RIF refers to the importance of being explicit about the entire research process, including ‘who is doing the research?’, to enable policy makers to assess the merit of the research. This section will focus on issues relating to the reporting of the funder/ commissioner of the research, the research aims and methods, and review outputs (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 8).

Research Funding

Pillar 2 of the RIF highlights the importance of reporting research funding ‘so that the reader is clear about any vested interests’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 9). The case example was contractually obliged, by the public funder (UKRI), to explicitly state the source of funding in any publications or publicly facing outputs. Once the funding had been secured, the project was relatively autonomous and without explicit vested interests. The ethics of research funding, however, extends beyond concerns about vested interests to include the role and purpose of public resources for systematic reviews in DVA.

In most countries, funding for research is mainly channelled towards primary research with comparatively few resources provided for systematic reviews or strategies to maximise research use. This balance of resources raises ethical concerns as such funding structures arguably fail to maximise existing research knowledge and/ or use this research to inform policy and practice decisions (Gough et al., 2019 ). Against this backdrop, we have seen renewed political commitments to use evidence over the past two decades with research synthesis playing a central role (Breckon & Gough, 2019 ). The publicly funded network of ‘What Works Centres’ in the UK, for example, have designated systematic reviews as ‘the best available research evidence’ and DVA systematic reviews have been commissioned and catalogued as part of this process (e.g., The Crime Reduction Toolkit). ‘What Works’ reviews in DVA have highlighted the rich and abundant field of primary research and the efficient and valuable contribution that syntheses offer for policy making (such as Addis & Snowdon, 2021 ). Yet, there are also concerns that a narrow focus on ‘What works’ overlooks the wider array of review questions that may be important for stakeholders (Munn et al., 2018 ). Moreover, a focus on ‘effectiveness’ and ‘impact’ may control or limit research agendas through ‘themed’ or ‘directed’ funding streams that prioritise particular forms of ‘useful’ research over others (Chubb & Reed, 2018 ). This agenda may present a challenge to ‘scholarly moral conduct’ by compromising integrity and shaping studies to fit into current policy agendas (Chubb & Watermeyer, 2017 ). These debates have resonance for the research agenda in DVA, where the extent and nature of funding fluctuates with policy priorities (See Auchter & Backes, 2013 for an example from the USA) and there has always been a ‘moral obligation on researchers’ to ensure that DVA findings are useful and used for advocacy, policy, and intervention (Ellsberg & Heise, 2002 , p. 1602; Women’s Aid, 2020 ). In the UK, public funding streams have provided welcome opportunities to develop appropriate and effective studies into violence against women, and embed research in the political agenda (Harwin, 2006 ). However, there are concerns that such an agenda may marginalize and overlook particular communities (such as disabled women, LGBTQ + communities, men. See Bates & Douglas, 2020 ; Harwin, 2006 ) as funding may not be offered to research with more specialised reach and low impact potential (Chubb & Reed, 2018 ).

The review provides an interesting case example because it was funded despite sitting outside the traditional remit of government agencies or policy priorities in the UK. The focus on informal support for victim-survivors has been hitherto overlooked by policy (e.g., Domestic Abuse Act, 2021 , does not explicitly refer to informal supporters) and practice (Goodman & Smyth, 2011 ). Indeed, funding for the case example, a responsive stream related to the Covid-19 pandemic, primarily supported projects that focused on formal responses to DVA (such as criminal justice agencies or established services). Therefore, the case example represented an exception to the main policy foci. However, the review did focus on interventions (and their effectiveness) and included substantial ‘impact’ orientated activities. The emphasis on staged milestones/ outcomes meant that the research adopted a rapid reviewing approach ‘in which systematic review processes are accelerated and methods are streamlined to complete the review more quickly’ (Tricco et al., 2017 , p. 3). Steps were taken to ensure rigor of the process but the need to allocate resource to ‘impact’ activities may have detracted from the underpinning research. This can be considered ethically problematic if the funding is understood to inhibit the methodological rigour or compromise the integrity of the project (Suri, 2020 ). To address these concerns, DVA reviews can explicitly reflect on how research aims/ themes relate to wider policy/ social context and consider whether the emphasis on impact activities, central to field of DVA (Ellsberg & Heise, 2002 ), influenced the rigour of the review (and report in the limitations section).

Review aims

Pillar 2 of the RIF requires transparent reporting of research aims and encourages researchers to consider ‘who designed the aims and objectives’ (p.19). Systematic review practices and standards of conduct go further by stipulating that the perspectives and priorities of stakeholders need to ‘play an important role in defining the research question’ (Rees & Oliver, 2017 ; White et al., 2018b , p. 2). The case review developed, and prioritised research questions within the team and in collaboration with the wider Advisory Group members. Within the field of DVA research, there is recognition that the perspectives of victim-survivors need to be ‘placed front and centre in shaping the research agenda’ (Tarzia et al., 2017 , p. 713) although it is difficult to judge the extent to which DVA systematic reviews involve stakeholders in setting the research question. A scoping review of health focused systematic reviews that reported stakeholder involvement did not identify any reviews from the field of DVA (Pollock et al., 2018 ). Indeed, whilst systematic review reporting guidelines require explicit reporting of the research aims (Page et al., 2021b ; The Methods Coordinating Group of the Campbell Collaboration, 2016 ), there is no requirement for details to be provided about the process for generating research questions in the first place. This is ethically significant as it is essential that readers are able to judge whether review questions are appropriate (Oliver et al., 2017 ) and the investment of resources in a review is worthwhile (Suri, 2020 ).

Methods Reporting

Transparent reporting of methodology is an inherent, defining feature of the systematic review approach (Gough et al., 2017b ). There are a number of standards that guide the reporting of systematic reviews to ‘help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found’ (such as M. Campbell et al., 2020 ; Page et al., 2021b Abstract). The case review adhered to both conduct and reporting standards in the field of systematic reviews and so met, and exceeded, the expectations of transparency/ accountability set out in the RIF . Without a systematic overview of all reviews in the field of DVA, it is difficult to gauge the transparency of reporting in this field. Indications from specific reviews of reviews, such as interventions with young people (Kovalenko et al., 2022 ), suggest that improvements in reporting/ transparency would be welcome. Yet, journals that publish systematic reviews in DVA, such as Journal of Family Violence , strongly encourage authors to adhere to reporting standards. Therefore, where possible DVA reviews should aim to follow and adhere to established reporting standards.

The RIF stipulates that research teams should adhere to ‘standard authorship guidelines’ and allocate ‘the roles and responsibilities of authors, including both academic and non-academic partners’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 , p. 9). Authorship was offered to all researchers and members of the Advisory group, guided by the CrediT taxonomy (Brand et al., 2015 ) and in line with expectations associated with social science authorship (British Sociological Association, 2001 ). Explicit consideration of authorship, contribution and order is particularly important for systematic reviews, where there are typically large research teams. Indeed, publishers of systematic reviews, such as the Campbell and Cochrane Collaborations, require authors to specify their individual contributions to the research (Higgins et al., 2022 ). Yet, standards of review conduct and reporting do not always stipulate the rights or responsibilities of authors (such as White et al., 2018b ). The case example discussed authorship of outputs with the Advisory group, proposing to recognise diverse contributions and provide scope for all members to be listed as article authors alongside the core research team. However, named authorship may not always be possible and/ or appropriate in the field of DVA. First, some publishers stipulate the requirements for authorship which may preclude the inclusion of diverse contributors/ Advisory group members (such as the Campbell Collaboration that use International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, n.d.). Second, named authorship may not be feasible and/ or appropriate for all non-academic members. Individuals with lived experience of DVA may be unable or reluctant to be named on written outputs. Third, whilst authorship may be diverse, the writing-up of research primarily remains the responsibility of the academic who may struggle to faithfully represent the perspectives of all contributors (Silverio et al., 2020 ). Therefore, the ethical issues surrounding authorship allocation in the context of DVA require sensitive consideration.

The transparency/ accountability identified in the RIF may be facilitated by open access publications. Open access refers to freely accessible research reports and has been shown to provide positive impacts in terms of disseminating research to non-academic groups and advancing citizen science projects (Tennant et al., 2016 ). Within the systematic review community, there have been definite moves towards open access publications (such as Campbell Systematic Reviews) and there is an ethical imperative to make publicly funded research available. Yet, without infrastructure to curate and support public access and use of reviews, current processes remain insufficient (Gough et al., 2019 ). Moreover, as the RIF highlights, open science practices also raise a number of ethical challenges in the field of DVA such as protecting privacy, safety and confidentiality of primary research participants (Campbell et al., 2019 ). Without assessing the ethical standards of included studies, systematic reviews may inadvertently contain studies with ethical insufficiencies (Vergnes et al., 2010 ) and so potentially amplify such research through open publishing.

Pillar 3: Equality, Human Rights and Social Justice

The RIF ‘recognises the importance in the research process of being aware, and naming, issues linked to equality, human rights and social justice’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 10). There is growing recognition that systematic reviews can help to explore or advance issues related to equality and social justice (such as Dukhanin et al., 2018 ; Perera et al., 2022 ). This resonates with the field of DVA, where research is highly valued for its potential to contribute to improving efforts to tackle abuse and improve outcomes for victim-survivors (Green & Morton, 2021 ; Spalding et al., 2015 ). Fitting within this tradition, ‘working towards improving outcomes for victim-survivors of DVA’ was identified as a ‘guiding principle’ for the case review and so in alignment with Pillar 3. Two further ethical issues surrounding equality and social justice within the review process will be considered further: researcher reflexivity and representing diverse perspectives.

Positionality and Reflexivity

The formation of the core research team included researchers of different ages, ethnicities, and experiences. The RIF implies that researcher demographics and experience influence the research project and should be considered in the design stages: ‘Researchers will bring different types of knowledge and experience to the research process’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 10). Yet, the RIF does not specify a role for ongoing reflexive research practices. In the systematic review community, the importance of positionality or reflexivity in the review process is rarely acknowledged. Quality appraisal tools used in systematic reviews of qualitative research typically include assessment of positionality (Critical Appraisal Skills & Programme, 2018 ) but reflexivity statements are not part of reporting or conduct standards for systematic reviews (such as White et al., 2018a ). Meta-narrative systematic reviews present an exception where one of the guiding principles includes reflexivity ‘throughout the review, reviewers must continually reflect, individually and as a team, on the emerging findings’ (Wong et al., 2013 ). Indeed, informed subjectivity and reflexivity are important for the systematic review process (Suri, 2008 , 2020 ) and decisions about synthesis have been found to be influenced by the skills and perspectives that researchers bring to the review (Lorenc et al., 2016 ). Within the case review, one member of the team had no experience of research in DVA whilst others had lived experience of DVA. These backgrounds were openly discussed within the team but there was limited discussion about the role played by our experiences or knowledge in shaping the review. There are attempts to begin to examine the diversity of review teams and the role of authors’ demographics in influencing research questions and processes (Qureshi et al., 2020 ). Reflexivity is a necessary strategy to consider how familiarity/ experience influences the researcher (Berger, 2015 ) and is critical for collaborative DVA research (Linabary et al., 2021 ). Therefore, there is an ethical imperative to embed reflexivity in the conduct and reporting procedures of systematic reviews.

Representing Diverse Perspectives

The RIF highlights several intersecting factors that influence experiences of abuse and so recommends that research acknowledge diverse perspectives/ groups of victim-survivors (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 18). This responds to wider concerns that DVA research is largely focused on particular groups, white poor women, at the expense of others, such as women of colour or male victims (Bent-Goodley, 2005 ). The case example was alert to these debates and took steps to ensure representation of different populations and/ or viewpoints. First, the composition of the Advisory group aimed to ensure representation of different perspectives based on ethnicity and geographical locations but potentially included other dimensions of difference too (such as social class). Demographic information for stakeholders was not explicitly collected but, just like primary research, may have some value for seeking to ‘understand whose perspective might not be represented and to understand the nuances of DVA across a variety of groups’ (Women’s Aid: 2020 : 8). Whilst diverse stakeholders bring welcome contributions to review methods, it is also important to recognise heterogeneity within groups (Rees & Oliver, 2017 ) and the necessity of an intersectional approach (Green & Morton, 2021 ). This means that reviewers should explore different perspectives within, for example, racial and ethnic groupings (Ragavan et al., 2020 ) and whether/ how these shape priorities alongside other social characteristics.

Second, the review purposively sought studies that included marginalised voices. The search strategy included ‘grey literature’ sources, targeting organisations that were known to focus on DVA in diverse groups in the UK and globally (Schucan Bird et al., 2022 ) ). Searching for studies that represent a range of ‘contextual configurations and viewpoints’ is ethically defensible (Suri, 2020 , p. 47) and did result in a broader sample of studies in the case review (e.g., identifying research with indigenous communities that was not found otherwise). However, with few curated libraries or databases of grey literature studies, significant resources and creativity are required to develop effective search strategies, drawing on the specialist knowledge of stakeholders (Mahood et al., 2014 ). In the case review, researchers from the wider DVA sector played a crucial role in identifying potential resources that house research (such as https://vawnet.org/ ) and organisations that may publish relevant applied/ non-governmental research.

Third, the data extraction tools collected data about the characteristics of the populations in the primary studies, including gender, ethnicity, age, migrated populations, and length of exposure to DVA. This allowed for the disaggregation of data on many characteristics specified in Pillar 3 but not all (i.e., disability and neurodiversity) (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 9). However, sampling in the primary studies rarely included minoritized groups, such as first-generation migrants, and the authors rarely explored culture/ ethnicity in their analysis. Gaps in the primary data about the social identities of DVA victim-survivors inhibits the potential of researchers and systematic reviewers to analyse intersectionality and multiple perspectives (Cullen et al., 2021 ). Indeed, there are attempts to encourage studies to evaluate interventions against a number of equity measures (O’Neill et al., 2014 ). In DVA reviews that identify a small or limited evidence base, novel review methods (Huntley et al., 2020 ) or additional primary data collection (with participants who can represent missing voices) (Green & Morton, 2021 ) may serve to ensure comprehensive understanding. Developing such strategies in reviews is particularly important due to their role in informing policy and practice decisions (Suri, 2008 ).

Pillar 4: Engagement

Pillar 4 of the RIF highlights the importance of collaborative research in DVA. This Pillar foregrounds the contributions of non-academic partners in the research process, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 12–13). Systematic reviews are naturally aligned with Pillar 4, as inherently collaborative pieces of research, with the potential for varying degrees of ‘user involvement’ in undertaking the review (Pollock et al., 2018 ; Rees & Oliver, 2017 ). This section will examine collaboration between academics and researchers from a domestic abuse organisation, and then consider stakeholder engagement.

Research Collaboration

The case review was inherently collaborative, designed and delivered by a team of university-based academics and specialist DVA researchers from a domestic abuse organisation. This collaboration was embedded in the design/budget of the project to enable meaningful contribution from all parties and build individual, team and organisational capacity for systematic reviews (Oliver et al., 2015 ). Collaborative systematic reviews in DVA raise several ethical issues. First, collaborative projects need to consider the relationships and distribution of power between different project contributors. Power distribution in the research process is a central concern for primary DVA research which seeks to minimize power differentials between the researcher and the researched (Bender, 2017 ). Whilst there are no research participants in systematic reviews, the distribution of power amongst the review team is arguably an important ethical issue. Standards of conduct for reviews have hitherto provided scarce guidance about collaborative working and power distribution across review teams (e.g., White et al., 2018) but shared ownership/ contribution to the review methods is part of the ethical decision-making process (Suri, 2020 ). In the case review, the academic team/ institution held the contract with the funder with one researcher from the domestic abuse organisation named as Co-investigator to recognise that ‘partners in research are equally able to shape the work’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 13). The distribution of resources (time and funds), however, meant that the project was primarily led by academics. Yet, there were explicit attempts to integrate all expertise and share power in decision-making to generate good methodological decisions in the review (Oliver et al., 2017 ). Weekly meetings, for example, served to ensure that different perspectives were voiced and discussed.

Second, all collaborators may potentially bring (intentional or unconscious) allegiances or interests to the review process. Stakeholder groups may bring particularly strong vested interests to the topic (Rees & Oliver, 2017 ) whilst researchers often under-estimate their own vested interests (such as ideological or reputational) (Montgomery and Bell, 2021 ). The influence of these interests on the methods and outcomes of the review should be subject to ethical consideration (Suri, 2008 ). Collaborative reviews may potentially spotlight these different vested interests and/ or improve the management of them (Montgomery and Bell, 2021 ). The potential for conflicting interests in DVA research is not directly addressed in the RIF , or wider discussions of ethics (Bender, 2017 ; Ellsberg & Heise, 2002 ; World Health Organization, 2001 ), but crucial for collaborative projects. The case review included researchers with varied interests, potentially incompatible, which were managed through explicit discussion within the team and transparent reporting. Each member of the research team declared conflicts of interest in the published protocol (Schucan Bird et al., 2022 ) which adhered to the standards specified by systematic review guidelines (Higgins et al., 2022 ). However, such guidelines need to be expanded to encourage researchers to recognise all forms of vested interest and normalise reflexivity statements (Montgomery and Bell, 2021 ).

Stakeholder Engagement

Systematic reviews, like other pieces of research, are subjective and ‘need to draw on a range of perspectives to produce a rounded piece of work’ (Rees & Oliver, 2017 , p. 27). Involving ‘stakeholders’ (those who may be affected by the work and/ or have a stake in the issue) in the systematic review process is a means of doing so. Stakeholder engagement in reviews of DVA raise various ethical and methodological issues. The decision to include stakeholders as participants in the review process can be understood as an ethical choice: embedding the voice of victim-survivors and relevant non-academic partners in the research is essential for ensuring relevance and maximising the benefits of DVA studies (Ellsberg & Heise, 2002 ; Women’s Aid, 2020 ). The methods used to engage stakeholders involves multiple ethical considerations and this section will only focus on the ethical selection and involvement of stakeholders in the review.

Systematic reviews involve a diverse range of potential stakeholders in the research process (Rees & Oliver, 2017 ) and victim-survivors, service providers and non-governmental organisations are highlighted as important collaborators specifically for DVA research (Women’s Aid, 2020 ). The case review identified a diverse group of potential stakeholders in order to represent different types of knowledge/ experience in the review process (Rees & Oliver, 2017 ). The selection of the membership was then based on professional networks. Whilst the use of personal contacts is a common method for recruiting stakeholders to reviews (Pollock et al., 2018 ), this may also be ethically problematic if it means that particular perspectives are unknown/ inadvertently overlooked and so excluded from the review (Green & Morton, 2021 ; Suri, 2008 ). A representation framework may serve as a helpful tool for mapping out potential groups from which to invite representatives (Smith et al., 2009 ). The case example did, however, actively seek stakeholders that could represent perspectives of minoritized groups and different geographical locations in recognition of the ‘intersecting structural inequalities’ that underpin experiences of abuse (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 10, Pillar 3).

The domestic abuse organisation involved in the review acted as gatekeepers for the recruitment process, considered ‘good practice’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 5. Pillar 1), to ensure that individuals with lived experience had access to support services throughout the research. Similarly, frontline services known to them were identified and approached. Six experts/ scholars in DVA were approached by the PI, who were known through professional contacts, of which two agreed. Despite enthusiasm for the project, two experts were unable to be involved due to lack of resources/ capacity and a further two did not respond to the request. Indeed, this underlines the importance of ensuring that organisations are ‘costed in funded bids to cover their time and involvement’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 : 13). Funding was allocated to individuals with lived experience and frontline services, at a rate that exceeded the recommended rates for involvement in health research (National Institute for Health and Care Research, 2022 ), but not for the involvement of wider DA organisations or experts in the field. This raises several ethical issues. First, whilst scholars/ experts were invited to contribute to written outputs (i.e., academic article), there are further considerations concerning the capacity/ time investment of these groups and appropriate incentives and/ or rewards for participation. Such details need to be explicitly considered to ensure transparency (Pillar 2) although systematic reviews rarely report details of financial or other compensation for stakeholder involvement (Pollock et al., 2018 ). Second, a fuller discussion needs to consider the benefits of involvement for individuals with lived experience, aside from financial compensation (Fontes, 2004 ), and the potential risk of the commodification of stakeholder engagement (Carr, 2019 ). Third, ethical DVA research places victim-survivor perspectives at the heart of the project (Women’s Aid, 2020 ). By involving a wide range of stakeholders, not only victim-survivors, in DVA reviews (including the case example) there is a risk that the contributions of individuals with lived experience will be diluted. It is therefore important to consider the balance of different knowledges and perspectives in the review team (Oliver et al., 2017 ).

Pillar 5: Research Ethics

The RIF promotes the value of independent ethical reviews of research plans/ protocols and the importance of Research Ethics Committees (RECs). The case review adhered to Pillar 5 by submitting an ethical application to the institution’s panel for reviewing research ethics. The institutional process, however, did not require the PI to specify or reflect on the ethical issues associated with the systematic review process. This is common practice as ethical review boards do not typically include guidelines for systematic reviews (Suri, 2020 ). However, this experience illustrates concerns raised by social scientists about the value and utility of institutional ethical review procedures (Hunter, 2018 ). Critics suggest that RECs primarily focus on enforcing compliance with ethical regulations rather than enabling reflection about ethical practices in research (Allen & Israel, 2018 ). Further, there are specific concerns that the complex ethical dilemmas faced by researchers in DVA research are rarely addressed in the ethical guidelines of RECs (Downes et al., 2014 ). These challenges, not acknowledged or addressed by the RIF , pertain to numerous issues including a lack of understanding of how DVA services operate and a resistance to working with vulnerable groups, to which victim-survivors often belong (Green & Morton, 2021 ). The RIF could therefore be enhanced by recognising such challenges and providing guidance/ recommendations for RECs. The lack of ethical guidance for systematic reviews (Suri, 2020 ) further compounds the challenges associated with DVA as RECs are not equipped with a framework for guiding ethical practice in this methodology.

To better consider the ethical implications of systematic reviews in DVA, RECs/ institutional frameworks could be adapted in several ways. First, a regulatory system could be tailored to social science with methodological and subject specialists, such as systematic reviewers or DVA experts, residing on RECs (Hunter, 2018 ). Second, translation of ethical academic research (such as this paper and Suri, 2008 , 2020 ) into the practice of RECs could support local and national frameworks for assessing systematic reviews. Third, the ethical priorities identified by DVA researchers can be used to guide assessment of review methods in this field. The centrality of victim-survivor voice in DVA research (Ellsberg & Heise, 2002 ; Women’s Aid, 2020 ) suggests that RECs should assess the presence, role and contribution of victim-survivors in systematic reviews whether as researchers, stakeholders and/ or authors/ participants in primary research studies. This could constitute part of broader consideration of ethical issues associated with how voices/ perspectives of different groups are included in research synthesis (Suri, 2008 ). Further, the significance of ethics in DVA research means that REC assessment of systematic reviews should also consider the methods used by reviewers to appraise the ethical quality of included studies. Whilst assessing the ethics of included studies is not typically undertaken (Vergnes et al., 2010 ), such scrutiny could serve to develop and improve practice.

Limitations

To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to identify ethical and methodological issues that sit at the intersection of DVA research and systematic reviewing. The findings reported above need to sit alongside the following limitations. First, the analysis does not comprehensively consider the ethical or methodological issues of systematic reviews, of which there are many (Suri, 2020 ), but sketches out a selection of these debates. The dynamic nature of ethical considerations mean that these debates are potentially subject to continuous reinterpretation (Burgess-Proctor, 2015 ) and the conversations need to be ongoing. Second, the findings and recommendations are drawn from a single review (with multiple components). The case example is therefore not representative of all types of review and so the different approaches (such as meta-narrative reviews or cost/ economic evaluation reviews, see Gough and Thomas, 2017 ; Munn et al., 2018 ) may generate new or alternative ethical and methodological issues. The claims made in this article therefore need to further explored in other types of systematic reviews in DVA. Third, whilst the RIF has served as a useful tool for highlighting ethical considerations in DVA research, it also warrants several enhancements. (1) to ensure transparency and accountability (Pillar 2), the methods used to develop the framework should be reported. There are examples of ethical frameworks from the field of gender and violence that do so (such as World Health Organisation, 2021 ). (2) there are minimal attempts within the Pillars to make explicit links to wider ethical debates within the field of DVA and beyond. There are, for example, vigorous debates about the role of Research Ethics Committees in higher education (Hunter, 2018 ) that should be acknowledged and considered in Pillar 5. (3) the RIF is based on the ethical premise of ‘do no harm’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 , p. 5) without discussion of this underpinning philosophical tradition (and rationale for this choice) or any others. Engaging with and identifying moral and philosophical frameworks that underpin our research is arguably part of the ethical endeavour (Suri, 2020 ). (4) Whilst recognising that ‘victim-survivor perspectives should be present at the outset of the research endeavour’ (Women’s Aid, 2020 , p. 3 and Pillar 4: Engagement), the RIF did not explicitly involve victim-survivors in the development of the guidelines. There are wider examples of co-creating research integrity guidelines (Labib et al., 2022 ) that serve to illustrate potential methods and demonstrate value of integrating diverse perspectives.

This paper has examined ethical and methodological issues at the intersection of DVA scholarship and systematic reviews to establish a new agenda for research practice and governance. Table  1 identifies priorities for researchers to enhance the ethics of systematic reviews in the field of DVA, organised in line with the Pillars of the RIF . The transparent and rigorous methods associated with systematic reviews mean that the review process is arguably primed to integrate stronger ethical standards of conduct in other fields too. Systematic reviewers (individuals, teams, and the wider review community) are encouraged to actively engage with ethical issues at each stage of the review process, including consideration of reviewer positionality and reflexivity.

Several implications arise from this agenda for research practice and policy. First, the systematic review community should continue to engage and widen discussion about ethics and systematic reviews. Additional analysis is required to comprehensively examine the ethical issues associated with each stage of the review process. This article has only highlighted a few overarching issues and so more thorough consideration, alongside wider debate with stakeholders, is required. Second, this analysis has extended the discussion of ethics in the field of DVA. Scholarship and guidelines surrounding ethical research practices should continue to evolve for all types of research in DVA (not just systematic reviews or secondary analysis). Third, institutions and research infrastructure (such as RECs) need to review current policies and procedures to ensure and enable the ethical conduct of systematic reviews in DVA (such as providing tailored support services to DVA reviewers). Fourth, systematic review organisations and the wider infrastructure (such as Cochrane and Campbell collaboration) need to engage with ethical debates and consider the revision of conduct and reporting guidelines.

Addis, S., & Snowdon, L. (2021). What Works to Prevent Violence against Women, Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence (VAWDASV) Systematic Evidence Assessment . Wales Violence Prevention Unit. https://www.violencepreventionwales.co.uk/cms-assets/research/What-Works-to-Prevent-Violence-against-Women-Domestic-Abuse-and-Sexual-Violence-Systematic-Evidence-Assessment_2021-09-20-124755_aypz.pdf

Aljomaie, H. A. H., Hollingdrake, O., Cruz, A. A., & Currie, J. (2022). A scoping review of the healthcare provided by nurses to people experiencing domestic violence in primary health care settings. International Journal of Nursing Studies Advances , 4 , 100068. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnsa.2022.100068 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Allen, G., & Israel, M. (2018). Moving beyond Regulatory Compliance: Building Institutional support for ethical reflection in Research. In R. Iphofen, & M. Tolich (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative Research Ethics (pp. 276–287). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526435446.n19 .

Anderson, E. J., Krause, K. C., Krause, M., Welter, C., McClelland, A., Garcia, D. J., Ernst, D. O., Lopez, K., E. C., & Koss, M. P. (2021). Web-based and mHealth interventions for intimate Partner Violence victimization Prevention: A systematic review. Trauma Violence & Abuse , 22 (4), 870–884. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838019888889 .

Arai, L., Shaw, A., Feder, G., Howarth, E., MacMillan, H., Moore, T. H. M., Stanley, N., & Gregory, A. (2021). Hope, agency, and the lived experience of violence: A qualitative systematic review of children’s perspectives on domestic violence and abuse. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse , 22 (3), 427–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838019849582

Auchter, B., & Backes, B. L. (2013). NIJ’s program of domestic Violence Research: Collaborative efforts to build knowledge guided by Safety for victims and accountability of perpetrators. Violence Against Women , 19 (6), 713–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801213494703 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bates, E. A., & Douglas, E. M. (2020). Services for domestic violence victims in the United Kingdom and United States: Where are we today? Partner Abuse , 11 (3), 350–382. https://doi.org/10.1891/PA-2020-0019 .

Bell, C., & Coates, D. (2022). The effectiveness of interventions for perpetrators of domestic and family violence: An overview of findings from reviews . Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety (ANROWS). https://www.anrows.org.au/publication/what-works-to-reduce-and-respond-to-violence-against-women-overview-of-reviews-series/

Bender, A. K. (2017). Ethics, methods, and measures in intimate Partner Violence Research: The current state of the field. Violence Against Women , 23 (11), 1382–1413. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801216658977 .

Bent-Goodley, T. B. (2005). Culture and domestic violence: Transforming knowledge development. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 20 (2), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260504269050 .

Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research , 15 (2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475 .

Brand, A., Allen, L., Altman, M., Hlava, M., & Scott, J. (2015). Beyond authorship: Attribution, contribution, collaboration, and credit. Learned Publishing , 28 (2), 151–155. https://doi.org/10.1087/20150211 .

Breckon, J., & Gough, D. (2019). Using evidence in the UK. In N. Davies, S. Nutley, A. Boaz, & A. Fraser (Eds.), What works now?: Evidence-informed policy and practice . Policy Press.

British Sociological Association (2001). Authorship guidelines . https://www.britsoc.co.uk/media/21409/authorship_01.pdf

Budde, S., & Schene, P. (2004). Informal Social Support Interventions and their role in Violence Prevention: An agenda for future evaluation. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 19 (3), 341–355. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260503261157 .

Burgess-Proctor, A. (2015). Methodological and ethical issues in feminist research with abused women: Reflections on participants’ vulnerability and empowerment. Women’s Studies International Forum , 48 , 124–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2014.10.014 .

Campbell, M., McKenzie, J. E., Sowden, A., Katikireddi, S. V., Brennan, S. E., Ellis, S., Hartmann-Boyce, J., Ryan, R., Shepperd, S., Thomas, J., Welch, V., & Thomson, H. (2020). Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: Reporting guideline. Bmj , 368 , l6890. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l6890 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Campbell, R., Goodman-Williams, R., & Javorka, M. (2019). A trauma-informed Approach to sexual Violence Research Ethics and Open Science. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 34 (23–24), 4765–4793. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519871530 .

Carr, S. (2019). I am not your nutter’: A personal reflection on commodification and comradeship in service user and survivor research. Disability & Society , 34 (7–8), 1140–1153. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2019.1608424 .

Chubb, J., & Reed, M. S. (2018). The politics of research impact: Academic perceptions of the implications for research funding, motivation and quality. British Politics , 13 (3), 295–311. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-018-0077-9 .

Chubb, J., & Watermeyer, R. (2017). Artifice or integrity in the marketization of research impact? Investigating the moral economy of (pathways to) impact statements within research funding proposals in the UK and Australia. Studies in Higher Education , 42 (12), 2360–2372. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2016.1144182 .

Clark, J. J., & Walker, R. (2011). Research Ethics in Victimization Studies: Widening the Lens. Violence Against Women , 17 (12), 1489–1508. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801211436167 .

Critical Appraisal Skills & Programme (2018). CASP Qualitative Checklis . https://casp-uk.b-cdn.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018_fillable_form.pdf

Cullen, P., Dawson, M., Price, J., & Rowlands, J. (2021). Intersectionality and invisible victims: Reflections on Data Challenges and Vicarious Trauma in Femicide, Family and intimate Partner Homicide Research. Journal of Family Violence , 36 (5), 619–628. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00243-4 .

Domestic Abuse Act 2021 c.17. Retrieved March 29, 2023. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2021/17/contents/enacted

Downes, J., Kelly, L., & Westmarland, N. (2014). Ethics in violence and abuse Research—A positive empowerment Approach. Sociological Research Online , 19 (1), 29–41. https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.3140 .

Dukhanin, V., Searle, A., Zwerling, A., Dowdy, D. W., Taylor, H. A., & Merritt, M. W. (2018). Integrating social justice concerns into economic evaluation for healthcare and public health: A systematic review. Social Science & Medicine , 198 , 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.012 .

Feder, L., Holditch Niolon, P., Campbell, J., Wallinder, J., Nelson, R., & Larrouy, H. (2011). The need for experimental methodology in intimate partner violence: Finding programs that effectively prevent IPV. Violence Against Women , 17 (3), 340–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801211398620

Elia, N., von Elm, E., Chatagner, A., Pöpping, D. M., & Tramèr, M. R. (2016). How do authors of systematic reviews deal with research malpractice and misconduct in original studies? A cross-sectional analysis of systematic reviews and survey of their authors. British Medical Journal Open , 6 (3), e010442. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010442 .

Ellsberg, M., & Heise, L. (2002). Bearing witness: Ethics in domestic violence research. The Lancet , 359 (9317), 1599–1604. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08521-5 .

Fontes, L. A. (2004). Ethics in Violence Against Women Research: The sensitive, the dangerous, and the overlooked. Ethics & Behavior , 14 (2), 141–174. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327019eb1402_4 .

Goodman, L. A., & Smyth, K. F. (2011). A call for a social network-oriented approach to services for survivors of intimate partner violence. Psychology of Violence , 1 (2), 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022977 .

Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017a). An introduction to systematic reviews (2nd edition). SAGE.

Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017b). Introducing systematic reviews. An introduction to systematic reviews (2nd ed., pp. 1–18). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Gough, D., & Thomas, J. (2017). Commonality and diversity in reviews. In D. Gough, S. Oliver, & J. Thomas (Eds.), An introduction to systematic reviews (2nd ed., pp. 1–18). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Gough, D., Thomas, J., & Oliver, S. (2019). Clarifying differences between reviews within evidence ecosystems. Systematic Reviews , 8 (1), 170, s13643-019-1089–2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1089-2

Graham, I. D., McCutcheon, C., & Kothari, A. (2019). Exploring the frontiers of research co-production: The Integrated Knowledge Translation Research Network concept papers. Health Research Policy and Systems , 17 (1), 88. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-019-0501-7 .

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies: A typology of reviews. Maria J Grant & Andrew Booth Health Information & Libraries Journal , 26 (2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x .

Green, S. O., & Morton, S. (2021). Listening to less-heard voices. In J. Devaney, C. Bradbury-Jones, R. J. Macy, C. Øverlien, & S. Holt (Eds.), The Routledge International Handbook of Domestic Violence and Abuse (1st ed., pp. 627–641). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429331053-46

Gregory, A. C., Williamson, E., & Feder, G. (2017). The Impact on Informal Supporters of Domestic Violence Survivors: A Systematic Literature Review. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse , 18 (5), 562–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838016641919

Hanna, E. (2019). The emotional labour of researching sensitive topics online: Considerations and implications. Qualitative Research , 19 (5), 524–539. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794118781735 .

Harwin, N. (2006). Putting a stop to domestic violence in the United Kingdom: Challenges and Opportunities. Violence Against Women , 12 (6), 556–567. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801206289134 .

Higgins, J., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M., & Welch, V. (Eds.). (2022). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Vol. version 6.3 (updated February 2022) . Cochrane. www.training.cochrane.org/handbook

Hong, Q. N., Rees, R., Sutcliffe, K., & Thomas, J. (2020). Variations of mixed methods reviews approaches: A case study. Research Synthesis Methods , 11 (6), 795–811. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1437 .

Hong, Q., Pluye, P., Fàbregues, S., Bartlett, G., Boardman, F., Cargo, M., Dagenais, P., Gagnon, M. P., Griffiths, F., Nicolau, B., O’Cathain, A., Rousseau, M. C., & Vedel, I. (2018). Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018. Registration of Copyright (#1148552), Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Industry Canada

Hunter, D. (2018). Research Ethics Committees – what are they good for? In R. Iphofen, & M. Tolich (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative Research Ethics (pp. 289–300). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526435446.n20 .

Huntley, A. L., Szilassy, E., Potter, L., Malpass, A., Williamson, E., & Feder, G. (2020). Help seeking by male victims of domestic violence and abuse: An example of an integrated mixed methods synthesis of systematic review evidence defining methodological terms. BMC Health Services Research , 20 (1), 1085. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-020-05931-x .

International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. (n.d.). Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors . Retrieved 19 (July 2022). from https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html

Jackson, S., Backett-Milburn, K., & Newall, E. (2013). Researching distressing topics: Emotional reflexivity and emotional labor in the secondary analysis of children and young people’s narratives of abuse. SAGE Open , 3 (2), 215824401349070. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013490705 .

Konya, J., Perôt, C., Pitt, K., Johnson, E., Gregory, A., Brown, E., Feder, G., & Campbell, J. (2020). Peer-led groups for survivors of sexual abuse and assault: A systematic review. Journal of Mental Health . https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2020.1770206

Kovalenko, A. G., Abraham, C., Graham-Rowe, E., Levine, M., & O’Dwyer, S. (2022). What works in Violence Prevention among Young People?: A systematic review of reviews. Trauma Violence & Abuse , 23 (5), 1388–1404. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838020939130 .

Labib, K., Pizzolato, D., Stappers, P. J., Evans, N., Lechner, I., Widdershoven, G., Bouter, L., Dierickx, K., Bergema, K., & Tijdink, J. (2022). Using co-creation methods for research integrity guideline development – how, what, why and when? Accountability in Research , 08989621. 2022.2154154.

Linabary, J. R., Corple, D. J., & Cooky, C. (2021). Of wine and whiteboards: Enacting feminist reflexivity in collaborative research. Qualitative Research , 21 (5), 719–735. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120946988 .

Lorenc, T., Felix, L., Petticrew, M., Melendez-Torres, G. J., Thomas, J., Thomas, S., O’Mara-Eves, A., & Richardson, M. (2016). Meta-analysis, complexity, and heterogeneity: A qualitative interview study of researchers’ methodological values and practices. Systematic Reviews , 5 (1), 192. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0366-6 .

MacGregor, J. C., Wathen, N., Kothari, A., Hundal, P. K., & Naimi, A. (2014). Strategies to promote uptake and use of intimate partner violence and child maltreatment knowledge: An integrative review. Bmc Public Health , 14 (1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-14-862 .

Mahood, Q., Van Eerd, D., & Irvin, E. (2014). Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: Challenges and benefits: MAHOOD ET AL . Research Synthesis Methods , 5 (3), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1106 .

Meyer, S. R., Lasater, M. E., García-Moreno, C. (2020). Violence against older women: A systematic review of qualitative literature. PLOS ONE , 15 (9): e0239560. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239560

Montgomery, P., & Bell, C. (2021). Non-financial conflict of interest in social intervention trials and systematic reviews: An analysis of the issues with case studies and proposals for management. Children and Youth Services Review . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105642

Mulla, S., & Hlavka, H. (2011). Gendered violence and the Ethics of Social Science Research. Violence Against Women , 17 (12), 1509–1520. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801211436169 .

Munn, Z., Stern, C., Aromataris, E., Lockwood, C., & Jordan, Z. (2018). What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Medical Research Methodology , 18 (1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4 .

National Institute for Health and Care Research (2022, July 5). Payment guidance for researchers and professionals . https://www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/payment-guidance-for-researchers-and-professionals/27392

Neale, B. (2013). Adding Time into the Mix: Stakeholder Ethics in qualitative Longitudinal Research. Methodological Innovations Online , 8 (2), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.4256/mio.2013.010 .

Nikischer, A. (2019). Vicarious trauma inside the academe: Understanding the impact of teaching, researching and writing violence. Higher Education , 77 (5), 905–916. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0308-4 .

Noble-Carr, D., Moore, T., & McArthur, M. (2021). The nature and extent of qualitative research conducted with children about their experiences of domestic violence: Findings from a Meta-synthesis. Trauma Violence & Abuse , 22 (4), 928–943. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838019888885 .

Oliver, S., Bangpan, M., Stansfield, C., & Stewart, R. (2015). Capacity for conducting systematic reviews in low- and middle-income countries: A rapid appraisal. Health Research Policy and Systems , 13 (1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-015-0012-0 .

Oliver, S., Dickson, K., Mukdarut, B., & Mark, N. (2017). Getting started with a review. In D. Gough, S. Oliver, & J. Thomas (Eds.), An introduction to systematic reviews (2nd ed., pp. 1–18). SAGE Publications, Inc.

O’Neill, J., Tabish, H., Welch, V., Petticrew, M., Pottie, K., Clarke, M., Evans, T., Pardo Pardo, J., Waters, E., White, H., & Tugwell, P. (2014). Applying an equity lens to interventions: Using PROGRESS ensures consideration of socially stratifying factors to illuminate inequities in health. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , 67 (1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.08.005 .

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., & Moher, D. (2021a). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj , 71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 .

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., & Moher, D. (2021b). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj , 71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 .

Perera, C., Bakrania, S., Ipince, A., Nesbitt-Ahmed, Z., Obasola, O., Richardson, D., Van de Scheur, J., & Yu, R. (2022). Impact of social protection on gender equality in low‐ and middle‐income countries: A systematic review of reviews. Campbell Systematic Reviews , 18 (2), https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1240 .

Pollock, A., Campbell, P., Struthers, C., Synnot, A., Nunn, J., Hill, S., Goodare, H., Morris, J., Watts, C., & Morley, R. (2018). Stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews: A scoping review. Systematic Reviews , 7 (1), 208. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-018-0852-0 .

Qureshi, R., Han, G., Fapohunda, K., Abariga, S., Wilson, R., & Li, T. (2020). Authorship diversity among systematic reviews in eyes and vision. Systematic Reviews , 9 (1), 192. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01451-1 .

Ragavan, M. I., Thomas, K. A., Fulambarker, A., Zaricor, J., Goodman, L. A., & Bair-Merritt, M. H. (2020). Exploring the needs and lived experiences of racial and ethnic minority domestic violence survivors through community-based Participatory Research: A systematic review. Trauma Violence & Abuse , 21 (5), 946–963. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838018813204 .

Rees, R., & Oliver, S. (2017). Stakeholder perspectives and participation in reviews. In D. Gough, S. Oliver, & J. Thomas (Eds.), An introduction to systematic reviews (2nd ed., pp. 19–42). SAGE Publications, Inc.

Richardson, J., Godfrey, B., & Walklate, S. (2020). Rapid, Remote and Responsive Research During COVID-19. Working Paper No. 3. Domestic Abuse: Responding to the Shadow Pandemic . University of Liverpool. https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/media/livacuk/sociology-social-policy-and-criminology/2-research/Working ,Paper,No3,-,Rapid,Remote,and,Responsive,Research.pdf

Rivas, C., Vigurs, C., Cameron, J., & Yeo, L. (2019). A realist review of which advocacy interventions work for which abused women under what circumstances. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 6 (6), CD013135.

SafeLives (2018). The Whole Picture: Our strategy to end domestic abuse, for good SafeLives. https://safelives.org.uk/sites/default/files/resources/The%20Whole%20Picture%20-%20SafeLives’%20Strategy.pdf

SafeLives (2022). Clinical Supervision at SafeLives .

Schucan Bird, K. L., Stokes, N., Rivas, C., & Tomlinson, M. (2022) PROTOCOL: Informal social support interventions for improving outcomes for victim‐survivors of domestic violence and abuse: An evidence and gap map. Campbell Systematic Reviews , 18 (3), 10. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1263

Schulz, P., Kreft, A. K., Touquet, H., & Martin, S. (2022). Self-care for gender-based violence researchers – beyond bubble baths and chocolate pralines. Qualitative Research , 146879412210878. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221087868 .

Silverio, S. A., Wilkinson, C., & Wilkinson, S. (2020). Academic Ventriloquism. In P. Liamputtong (Ed.), Handbook of Social Inclusion: Research and Practices in Health and Social Sciences (pp. 1–18). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-48277-0_32-1

Sinko, L., James, R., & Hughesdon, K. (2021). Healing after gender-based violence: A qualitative metasynthesis using Meta-ethnography. Trauma Violence & Abuse , 152483802199130. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838021991305 .

Smith, E., Donovan, S., Beresford, P., Manthorpe, J., Brearley, S., Sitzia, J., & Ross, F. (2009). Getting ready for user involvement in a systematic review. Health Expectations . https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00535.x .

Snilstveit, B., Vojtkova, M., Bhavsar, A., Stevenson, J., & Gaarder, M. (2016). Evidence & gap maps: A tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , 79 , 120–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.05.015 .

Spalding, K., Macvean, M., Mildon, R., Devine, B., Falkiner, J., Wade, C., & Forbes, F. (2015). Review of the evidence on knowledge translation and exchange in the violence against women field: State of knowledge . ANROWS. https://anrowsdev.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/ANROWS-Landscapes-Review-of-the-evidence-on-knowledge-translation-and-exchange-in-the-violence-against-women-field_0.pdf

Suri, H. (2008). Ethical considerations in synthesising research - whose representations? Qualitative Research Journal , 8 (1), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.3316/QRJ0801062 .

Suri, H. (2020). Ethical considerations of conducting systematic reviews in Educational Research. In O. Zawacki-Richter, M. Kerres, S. Bedenlier, M. Bond, & K. Buntins (Eds.), Systematic reviews in Educational Research: Methodology, perspectives and application . Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7 .

Tarzia, L., Humphreys, C., & Hegarty, K. (2017). Translating research about domestic and family violence into practice in Australia: Possibilities and prospects. Evidence and Policy , 13 (4), 709–722. https://doi.org/10.1332/174426416X14742825885830 .

Tennant, J. P., Waldner, F., Jacques, D. C., Masuzzo, P., Collister, L. B., & Hartgerink, C. H. J. (2016). The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: An evidence-based review. F1000Research , 5 , 632. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.8460.3

The Methods Coordinating Group of the Campbell Collaboration. (2016). Methodological expectations of Campbell collaboration intervention reviews: Reporting standards. The Campbell Collaboration . https://doi.org/10.4073/cpg.2016.4 .

Trabold, N., McMahon, J., Alsobrooks, S., Whitney, S., & Mittal, M. (2020). A systematic review of intimate Partner Violence Interventions: State of the field and implications for practitioners. Trauma Violence & Abuse , 21 (2), 311–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838018767934 .

Tricco, A. C., Langlois, E. V., Straus, S. E., & World Health Organization. (2017). Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research, &. Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: A practical guide . World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/258698

Vergnes, J. N., Marchal-Sixou, C., Nabet, C., Maret, D., & Hamel, O. (2010). Ethics in systematic reviews. Journal of Medical Ethics , 36 (12), 771–774. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.2010.039941 .

Wathen, C. N., & MacMillan, H. L. (2003). Interventions for violence against women. Scientific Review JAMA , 289 (5), 589. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.5.589 .

Weingarten, M. A., Paul, M., & Leibovici, L. (2004). Assessing ethics of trials in systematic reviews. Bmj , 328 (7446), 1013–1014. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7446.1013 .

White, H., Albers, B., Gaarder, M., Kornør, H., Littell, J., Marshall, Z., Matthew, C., Pigott, T., Snilstveit, B., Waddington, H., & Welch, V. (2020). Guidance for producing a Campbell evidence and gap map. Campbell Systematic Reviews , 16 (4), e1125. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1125 .

White, H., Welch, V., Pigott, T., Marshall, Z., Snilstveit, B., Mathew, C., & Littell, J. (2018a). Campbell collaboration checklist for evidence and gap maps: Conduct standards DRAFT Version 1.2 . Campbell Collaboration.

White, H., Welch, V., Pigott, T., Marshall, Z., Snilstveit, B., Mathew, C., & Littell, J. (2018b). Campbell collaboration checklist for evidence and gap maps: Conduct standards DRAFT Version 1.2 . Campbell Collaboration.

Women’s Aid. (2020). Research Integrity Framework on domestic violence and abuse . Women’s Aid.

Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., Westhorp, G., Buckingham, J., & Pawson, R. (2013). RAMESES publication standards: Meta-narrative reviews. BMC Medicine , 11 (1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-11-20 .

World Health Organisation (2021). Ethical considerations in research on female genital mutilation . https://www.who.int/publications-detail-redirect/9789240040731

World Health Organization (2001). Putting women first: Ethical and safety recommendations for research on domestic violence against women (WHO/FCH/GWH. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/65893 ). World Health Organization.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Many thanks to the anonymous reviewers for their thoughtful comments. We would like to acknowledge and thank Kate Hinds for her contributions to the original systematic review. We would also like to thank the Advisory group for their engagement and valuable contributions to the case review.

The original systematic review project was funded by the Economic & Social Research Council (ESRC), as part of UK Research & Innovation’s rapid response to Covid-19 (Grant reference ES/W001225/1).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Social Research Institute, University College London, 10 Woburn Sq, London, WC1H 0NR, UK

Karen Schucan Bird & Carol Rivas

SafeLives, Suite 2a, Whitefriars, Lewins Mead, Bristol, BS1 2NT, UK

Nicola Stokes & Martha Tomlinson

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen Schucan Bird .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

Nicola Stokes and Martha Tomlinson were/are employed at SafeLives, a UK-wide charity dedicated to ending domestic abuse.

Karen Schucan Bird and Carol Rivas have no conflicts of interest with respect to the content of the article.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Schucan Bird, K., Stokes, N., Tomlinson, M. et al. Ethically Driven and Methodologically Tailored: Setting the Agenda for Systematic Reviews in Domestic Violence and Abuse. J Fam Viol 38 , 1055–1069 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-023-00541-7

Download citation

Accepted : 23 March 2023

Published : 03 April 2023

Issue Date : August 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-023-00541-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Systematic review
• Methodology
• Informal social support
• Research integrity
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Please sign in to continue

Processing payment, please wait...

• children & families
• Create account
• open the search modal
• open the menu

• The evidence base around domestic violence and abuse

Published: 10/02/2022

This podcast examines the evidence base around domestic violence and abuse, perpetration and the interface with children’s social care.

Dez Holmes, Director of Research in Practice, talks to Jo Todd Chief Executive of Respect , Kyla Kirkpatrick Director of the Drive Partnership and Dr Olumide Adisa Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Abuse Research at the University of Suffolk about the evidence base around domestic violence and abuse, perpetration and the interface with children’s social care.

[Introduction] 

This is a Research in Practice podcast supporting evidence - informed practice with children and families, young people and adults.   

Dez: Hello, my name's Dez Holmes I'm the director of Research in Practice and I'm delighted to be joined by Jo Todd, Kyla Kirkpatrick and Olumide Adisa today. We're going to be discussing the nature of the evidence base particularly the evidence base around domestic violence and abuse, the perpetration of that abuse and the interface with children's social care. So let me start by introducing colleagues.  

Jo: I'm Jo Todd, I'm the Chief Exec at Respect, we have a focus on domestic abuse perpetrators on male victims and on young people who cause harm.  

Kyla: I'm Kyla Kirkpatrick, I'm the Director for the Drive partnership which is a partnership between the three organisations, really focusing on responses to perpetrators of domestic abuse and developing those responses.  

Olumide: My name is Olumide Adisa, I'm a senior research fellow and the head of the centre for abuse research at the University of Suffolk and we basically are focused on building a what works everyday list around domestic abuse research and projects as well. So we really have a huge focus on service improvement and actually ensuring that we are building an evidence space, bringing in academics, practitioners and policymakers as well.   

[The whole systems approach of the Drive Partnership and their work with children’s social care] 

Dez: Thank you so much, great to have you all here. Kyla, I think you were going to start by just briefly describing the Drive partnership, the Drive intervention and why you're focusing particularly at this stage around children's social care.    

Kyla: So the Drive partnership came together maybe five, six years ago to take a look at the existing responses to perpetrators of domestic abuse, really looking at what was a long-standing intractable social issue and terms of domestic abuse and how could some of this be approached differently. Social finance is one member organisation and looking at these issues of social justice and particularly building the business case for investment in these areas is a specialism that they bring and they really triggered this debate and discussion and brought in two organisations to provide that expertise in the field. So one being Respect with their expertise in responding to perpetrators of domestic abuse and Safe Lives with their focus on victim-survivors, so the three organisations have worked together over the course of the last five or six years. The very first piece of work was to look at a very particular project, what else could we do and what could we be doing differently to respond to perpetrators and at that time really focusing on addressing issues around high harm, high-risk perpetrators. Perpetrators who otherwise not engaging with services, flying under the radar, not eligible for existing programmes because of complexities around safety, maybe substance misuse, mental health issues and the partnership built a different way of working to work with that very particular cohort.   

Over the course of the last three years, we have expanded that scope and we're looking much more broadly at whole systems around domestic abuse and perpetrators of domestic abuse. So not just focusing on one intervention there's no magic bullet, there's no one size fits all, what needs to change across the whole system in terms of what service delivery but also commissioning and policymaking to really shift the dial on this issue. Briefly the focus here on children's social care came initially from our work with high harm, high-risk perpetrators which take a very multi-agency approach, coordinate response from different services around a case. And we were finding that on individual casework we were making really significant changes when we worked closely with probation, police and children's social care amongst others. And we find that they were really significant changes in high social care who worked with our teams in terms of information sharing, risk management, planning when we were working on a case by case basis. And the Drive case managers were learning from social care, social workers were learning from them and there was fantastic work being done, however, we couldn't shift that into systems change and it was all very focused on individual cases and that particular family at hand. So we really wanted to step into how do we enable this great practice on the ground to meet in the middle with top-down policy and systems change with children's social care. That's what triggered this piece of work specifically looking at what is happening throughout the system for children's social care in relation to the perpetrator of domestic abuse not just focusing on mum and the victim-survivor.   

[What the evidence base tells us about working with people who perpetrate harm] 

Dez: Thank you and it's been a really fascinating piece of work for us at Research in Practice to be a little bit involved in and really chimes with the messages that we hear from children's social care colleagues about that sense of sometimes helplessness, I use that word deliberately, a feeling sometimes described as, 'We don't have anything in our tool kit other than traditional child protection approaches.' Which some would argue almost inherently responsible the parent being harmed which disproportionately is the mother, you know, not exclusively but I think we would all recognise that disproportionately it's mothers who are responsibilised for abuse where children's social care take that approach. So really interesting bit of work and fair to say not an area of work where there was a pre-existing randomised control trial or manualised programme that you could simply role out as the same goes which brings me to the notion of evidence. Olumide, one of the myths that we've sometimes heard in this space is the idea that there's no evidence and I think probably all four of us on this call would disagree with that narrative. I'm interested from your academic perspective what do you think the evidence base or narrative about that evidence base currently tells us about work with people who perpetrate harm?  

Olumide: That's a very interesting question actually, so I think it's to kind of do an overview or, sort of, map how evidence is, sort of, developed in this particular area in the UK. I mean one good place to start is perhaps to look at project Mirabal, I'm sure Jo can say much more about that project because she's involved with that, but I think was a piece of work, research that was done by Professor Nicole Westmoreland and Professor Liz Kelly. I think around 2010 really, so really quite early in terms of the conversations around whether or not we should begin to work with, you know, those who use harmful behaviours. And so in some ways, it was seen as being a very innovative approach to start trying to, sort of, change attitudes in terms of how we should be investing in its area of work and I think another very interesting piece of work actually was looking at this. So Professor Erica Bowen she obviously did this, sort of, meta-analysis of all the studies, I think about ten US (United States)-based studies, to just try to understand how maybe does that type of every day or that type of practice could be translated within the UK (United Kingdom) setting. And she also did find out that there were no published British outcome studies at the time about created programmes, so, you know, I suppose that, sort of, sets apart project Mirabal at the time because it was beginning to ask questions around, you know, can we actually begin to capture new ways or new outcomes in terms of what counts as success. So that was a really interesting piece of work and I know there are reports in 2015 that looked at about twelve Respect accredited domestic violence perpetrator programmes.   

So I think for me I think it's probably still the most comprehensive research on perpetrator programmes in the UK to date, having said that obviously enter Drive and some of what Kyla's been saying and some of the work that they've been doing. You know, the evaluation that they did as well has really contributed to that evidence base and ongoing evidence base, we are seeing much more of a surge of interest in this particular area of work which is really encouraging. And I think that because we now see more research around community-based programmes we're beginning to have a greater understanding of different outcomes that may not necessarily be going to be linked to recidivism but might be linked to outcomes around education, the wellbeing of the victim/survivor. You know, looking at really bigger, greater outcomes that actually do matter in terms of not just tackling domestic abuse but also in terms of preventing domestic abuse as well in the future. So anyway I think that for me, in a nutshell, one of the last pieces of research that I'm going to mention is one that my colleagues did actually. So Professor Emma Bond in 2016 undertook a systematic review of about 53 perpetrator focused interventions and they found that actually that a lot of the evidence was still quite sparse for the UK, but most of them were obviously based on either the Duluth Model or CBT (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy) programmes as well. So it does raise a lot of questions around actually because of the underpinning of all of these programmes there is room for us to begin to look at contextual understanding or contextual evidence building rather than just focusing only on our cities if that makes sense?  

Dez: It absolutely does make sense and like you, I was very, very struck by the Mirabal project, it seemed to me it was possibly the first example of really offering a new way of assessing impact, moving beyond recidivism and centring a bit on survivor's voice. Jo, I know that you in respect were central to that I'm interested in your reflections, are you seeing change in the evidence base, do you root that in different approaches to assessing impact?    

Jo: Yes, there's been a huge change I think over the last twenty years so years, change to the just the amount of work that's happening and the amount of interest in perpetrators but then also to measuring success. And I think we were stuck in the early days of a really kind of what works in terms of police call-outs and convictions of perpetrators kind of framework, so a recidivism framework which wasn't terribly helpful, it's a very blunt instrument if you want to understand whether or not an intervention is having a positive impact. So an example of that is, if you just see a measure of success being that there are fewer police call-outs it could be that the survivor is too scared to phone the police or that her experience of phoning the police has been negative so she doesn't bother anymore. So it's not a good tool for really understanding if it's about perpetrator change or not. So you need a much more detailed piece of work, qualitative as well as quantitative, I think that's really important. I think the research that really matters is the research that listens to survivors in a really detailed way, asks really searching questions of the impact of the intervention or the response generally to him, on her, on the children, on her safety, but also on her freedom.   

And I think that's something that as Olumide was saying was really pulled out in Mirabal for the first time and Professor Liz Kelly and Professor Nicole Westmoreland really focused, the six indicators of success were particularly radical I think in talking about the expanded space for action for women. So it was a concept that I think Liz had been working on already but in the perpetrator context was really important. So what that means is if he is on a behaviour changer programme, which is what Mirabal were focused on, does that have an impact on her independence, her individual agency, her space for actions, her space to be a citizen in the world, to make decisions for herself, to be a fully functioning person. And that's really important because it goes so much further than, 'Is he still hitting her?' Into what women really want which is their own freedom and agency, so I think that set for what all research should focus on now is not just safety but freedom and I think that's where I'd like to see the research going. I think it's also really important that as well as listening to survivors that we listen to practitioners. Now I would say that because we're a membership organisation and we represent loads of organisations around the country that have been working for decades with perpetrators and they really know their stuff, they know what works, they also know how diverse the cohort of perpetrators are.  

I mean on behaviour change programmes the assessment process means that it should only be men that are ready, willing and able to change that are on those programmes, so it is a very specific element of the whole perpetrator cohort. But when working with those perpetrators there's still a huge amount of diversity within them, they're from all kinds of backgrounds, all kinds of personality types, some have experienced trauma, some are living in environments where violence is very normalised, some will have experienced it as children and some won't. And so they are working with that diversity and I really think that listening to the voice of those practitioners about how they do it in the room, what's it actually like in a room of perpetrators trying to change their behaviour. How does that actually work is something we're really keen to keep understanding and I just think it's kind of getting get to the nub of what the point of research is, the point of research is several fold but one of the key things is to influence practice. It's that feedback loop so that what happens in these programmes can be evaluated through research, the research will then find things that can then influence how practice develops and I think if we can utilise or kind of make use of research in that way it's really important.   

Dez: You're making some really important points there about practice informed research and we hear much more about research informed practice but I think you're really highlighting the need for reflexivity there. And also strikes me that what you're describing is a congruence between practice values and research methods and impact measures. If our practice values in this space are about disrupting the cohesion, the control, the voicelessness, the constrictions that victim survivors have faced we must surely go about evaluating impact in a way which gives them voice, centres their expertise and creates more freedom. And offers a narrative so really shifting away from that, sort of, passivity that can sometimes pervade the narrative, so I think quite an important call to action about congruence, the way we do our practice should mirror the way we do or research. Olumide, I'm sure you've got lots of reflections to offer on that?    

Olumide: Absolutely, I think those are really very interesting from Jo. I think obviously one of the things that peeked my interest was when she talked about diversity within the programming and also how we develop perpetrator programmes, I mean there is a lot we can say about that because we know that there is a lot of work to still be done in that area. Because when we talk about diversity what do we mean, you know, you can obviously talk about diversity because, you know, the background or trauma that someone might face, but at the same time if we're talking about it in relation to intersectionality then we know that we still have a lot of room to travel in terms of actually how we design programmes. And actually piece of work that myself, Mina and Catherine my colleague here at the university we did, you know, which was, sort of quite sculpted by Kyla and Drive actually was because of that we notice that, you know, the conversations around black and, you know, other racially minoritised communities were just not really happening You know, we're not really seeing that inclusivity that we wanted to see, we're not really seeing that conversation, you know.   

I mean even on ground in one or two of the community based programmes that I'm familiar with, you know, they're turning away people that might need an interpreter because it just made it very difficult to be delivering group sessions with men when you have non-native English speakers within the cohort. And that then raised question about, 'Well, where do those men then go from that point?' If that makes sense? So I think that one of the things around that small piece of research we did was actually we found that there was a need to have culturally sensitive interventions, to actually ensure there's adequate funding to specialist organisations, and actually the work first developed may need to be looked at as well. Obviously, this is things that practitioners did, you know, mention and I think 58% were responses from professionals and practitioners. So, you know, I agree with Jo that we need to listen to practitioners but I also think that we should also be mindful that even within the group of practitioners there is a place for really identifying the gaps and actually ensuring that we are meeting the needs of a diverse group of men as well.   

Dez: And that point about diversity which was comes through again and again and beyond this field of research as well of course I've heard it argued, I have some sympathy for this, but some of the traditional methods of undertaking research and evaluation, traditionally understood to be good quality research they can actually obscure diversity. So you can end up with what some researchers call a meanification that, you know, the numbers of people in this cohort who were from minoritised groups were relatively small so actually they got kind of smoothed out through the aggregation of data. So research methods that don't centre victim survivor voices indeed the voice of those who perpetrate harm and the practitioners who serve them can loose some of the richness that's required to have intersectionally responsive kind of approaches in our work. Jo, would you like to come in on that point?    

[The disaggregation of data and its benefits] 

Jo: Well, disaggregation is our friend isn't it, that's what we need, you know, if we've got data rather than meanifying it to use your word actually doing the opposite, actually drilling down into it. Making sure you're capturing enough in the data to start with and then drilling down because that's what you really want to understand is, you know, just having a one size fits all broad brush view of the whole cohort of perpetrators is not going to get you very far, you need to understand in the data what the differences are and then to try and draw conclusions that are helpful I think. So yes, disaggregation is always helpful. I take Olumide's point about where programmes are at in the UK, I think there's a lot of really interesting work happening in the global south looking at different ways of engaging perpetrators that we need to learn from here in the west. I think that often gets overlooked, so when we look at international research often what comes to the surface is the USA, Australia, Canada, Europe and often what's obscured because sometimes the intervention on the ground don't look like what we're doing here.   

So that it's not necessarily structured behaviour change work, it's not necessarily criminal justice interventions, it's much more community based grass roots approaches to engagement and kind of to shift thinking from the ground up. I think those approaches are really interesting and we need to look much further afield, I know there's interesting work that's happened in Nicaragua, I think they've got some really interesting stats after twenty years of this kind of very grass roots intervention work that are really interesting around perpetration. And that's just taken a more social change view of the issue rather than an individual change view, so that's something at Respect that we're really looking at now is I don't think it's either/or. We want to focus on individual change, systems change, so that's the kind of children's social care, policing, probation, health that, you know, that we've been touching on already, but also what do we need to do to bring about social change. Whether that's across the UK, whether that's in specific communities, whether we're looking particularly at certain ethnic groups, in certain groups within a city or a town, you know, geographical or whether we're looking at religious based ways of engaging and changing. Changing thinking, changing culture and society, I don't think any of that is simple but I think, you know, there's work going on India, in South Africa and I'm sure there's loads that I don't know about that I'd like to find out more about. So I think if we can have that much more kind of let's all just kind of stop looking down into our own little frame works and look up a bit and see what other people are doing that doesn't look like what we're doing but can be, yes we can learn from.   

Dez: What a great call to act on, of course, we can't drill down and disaggregate whilst honouring qualitative methods, engaging people's voices, so I think that does have quite important implications for what we consider to be good research in this territory. And I can see certainly that trying to understand the impact of community-based interventions that necessitates quite a different evaluative approach, so all sorts of challenges and complexities there. Kyla, come on in.    

Kyla: Yes, I just wanted to reflect on what Jo was saying, I think, you know, I couldn't agree more and it just really struck me your point about we need to stop looking down and in and look up and I feel that, you know, actually there's so many factors that play into the ability to do that. And I think the looking down and looking in for many years it needs to be contextualised, so responding to perpetrators of abuse for too long has been, you know, a tiny little corner of work, a tiny little corner of policy and commissioning. So very fragmented funding flowing through to service providers for short periods of time and often a battle for resources, I find that context so important in any discussion about what's the evidence base, how deep is it, how rich is it because it's framed by this context.   

And the reason that it's just so interesting at the minute is we are at a moment where that context is changing and we are able to zoom out and to look at a lot of the discussion from Olumide and Jo has been about the, you know, winding the scope of what measures are important to look at, not just criminal justice but victim-survivor space for action. What are the different cohorts, profiles of perpetrators that need to be considered, we talked about victim-survivor impact and voice equally we can be looking at children's impact and voice. And I think that with the change in public narrative particularly we're at a moment where that we can zoom out and it's zooming out in terms of practice, policy, commissioning and the framing for research. So I think there is a real opportunity to be looking at all of these different layers because they are deep and wide and the sector just has not had the opportunity to have that stretch for many years and hopefully that change is coming.   

[Why we need to think differently about who sets the research agenda, power and impact] 

Dez: It certainly feels like a bit of a moment in time both in terms of how people respect, no pun intended, work with those who cause harm, the national policy attention and message for change for example. Also perhaps an evolution in how we think about evidence, I'm hearing much more kind of discussion around what might work best for whom under which circumstances which are, you know, necessarily less shorthand than what works and I think speaks to a point about diversity within diversity and diverse methods and being more expansive. Is it the case, and Olumide you might have a particular view on this. Is it the case that some of what needs to change is the way people think about impact? As you three colleagues were talking I kept reflecting on notions of power which of course is central to working with people experiencing domestic abuse, but I think is also central to how we think about impact. If a small group of relatively powerful people set the agenda for what effective looks like what does that then do to the sector's ability to innovate or think expansively or make mistakes? I don't have an answer for that myself, but that's the question that's come up to me as you've been talking.    

Olumide: Yes, that's, you know, a fantastic question really. I think one of the things I'm just going to say before I answer the question around power because they're sort of linked is actually that one of the things that I find very encouraging and for me is something that I've been, you know, like, obviously I'm focused on and I know Kyla's talked about really quite at length is around systems change and I know Jo mentioned the need for that as well. Interestingly looking at things to a system change length actually helps us to look up, you know, rather than looking down and particularly for work when we being to look at work globally, looking at work internationally. Because really systems change, you know, kind of when you apply systems thinking to something you're looking at the interconnectedness of things, you're looking at the interconnections of actors, of resources, of communities. You know, all of that stuff really lends itself nicely to sometimes the… maybe their own structures and I put that in quote and quote way that we say that working with perpetrators might manifest to actually is being done in other settings. Which does not necessarily mean that it's not good knowledge, you know, I think it's just really the way we look, you know, if we're kind of open-minded about, you know, the different types of knowledge as valid not just the one whereas I say, RCT (Randomised Control Trials) or is it coming from Europe, is it coming from US, is it coming from Sweden.  

I think if we're much more open-minded we might just be able to draw really good insights around really what works and really expanding the evidence base really quickly because then what that means is that we can draw on lessons from different settings and vice versa as well. And the last I'm going to say about power is that, I mean we could literally unpack this for the whole day because I feel like there's a lot to be said around who's at the table in conversations in relation to policy, but also in relation to even funding and conversations around commissioning. I think that these are things we cannot overlook particularly we're saying not only create systems change but we want to kind of answer that question what works for whom and under what conditions. We are kind of moving towards this more very realist grounding way of developing evidence from bottom-up rather than from top-down, I think that's really exciting. I also think that we're seeing more awareness of the need for core production in how knowledge is being generated and how training, workforce developing and all of that stuff needs to be happening. And I mean it's really interesting because I feel like we're seeing that in the perpetrator sector, I don't know if I should call it a perpetrator sector, but, you know, in the area of work in relation to perpetrators that actually could be in a way mirrored in other settings within the domestic abuse space actually. And I think it's probably testament to organisations like Drive, like Respect to really understand it and to really begin to I guess dismantle maybe or disrobe that way of doing as always being the norm, to kind of trying to open up new spaces of knowledge and new spaces of understanding. So, you know, for me I think that, you know, that's really refreshing to see.   

Jo: That's really interesting Olumide, I think what I was saying early about one of the audiences for research being practitioners in that practice loop, I think another audience for research is commissioners and policy makers. And it present a real challenge to us I think as practitioners at heart I guess we're kind of, you know, we're much more interested in what works on the ground in the room, but actually to move the work forward we need to make sure that what's being commissioned and how policy makers set the framework is right and we need research for that. And sometimes, you know, what commissioners really want is a cost benefit analysis which seems really dry to those of us that like to be in the room, but actually it's quite important so that there is confidence amongst commissioners, but I think I'll go back to the point of so that they're actually commissioning the right things. And I think the worry as funding streams are created and we've seen, you know, I think you mentioned it Dez, but the reality is we've had no central government funding ever for this work until last year when £10,000,000 came out of the Home Office and then this year £25,000,000 came from the Home Office. And if there's anything, you know, if that's sustained that's a lot of money that needs to be spent well and there's a real risk that it could be spent badly and there's a real risk that if there isn't an evidence base that is fuelling the way that money is spent, the people making the decisions about that money won't necessarily know how to make the right decisions.   

So that's another really important facet of research which is not the sexiest element of research by a long way but is really key, it helps to underpin, I mean the Respect Standard is now going into its fourth edition, we've got accreditation and perpetrators services, we need that evidence base. But we need commissioners and policymakers to understand why it's important why safety in the work is important, what effectiveness looks like, how it's different for different interventions. So a Drive intervention that's got case management of high-risk perpetrators who have already caused high levels of harm are likely to cause further high levels of harm, they're resident to change, they're bouncing around in and out of the criminal justice system but without any real grip on stopping them until an intervention like Drive comes along. So research that underpins what works for them is going to look very different to the Mirabal type research around behaviour change with men who recognise they've got a problem, want to change, are kind of invested in that journey. So it's really important that we are able to kind of tolerate or create the environment for loads of different types of research, the kind of big multi-sites are really needed, it would be great to have some more RCT's, doing an ethical RCT in this area is a real challenge but it's possible, but expensive, in brackets, always that. But also just drilling down into really niche kind of things to investigate as well, it can be really fruitful, so I'd like to see that diversification of just the scope and the grandeur versus smallness of the research landscape I suppose.   

[The role of different parts of the system in creating a better evidence base] 

Dez: Thank you and I guess another lens on the systems change needed is exactly this kind of system dynamic where practice and the voices of victims, survivors and they are not mutually exclusive sources of knowledge of course, where they inform research which in turn informs commissioning and policy which in turn then can fund a more generative system. So really seeing evidence as part of the system change or trying to influence. Kyla, would you like to come in now?    

Kyla: Yes, it's just picking up on several threads of the discussion really and looking at diversification and also value and different kinds of impacts and the policy landscape, but looking at… so if we're looking at that diversifying, looking at placing equal value on different types of impact it just brings to my mind the importance of also triangulation and how these different measures interface with each other. So domestic abuse is about how whole families and often extended families and communities and these issues interface and overlap and we know that the importance of getting the victim-survivor view, the children's view, the criminal justice impact in terms of recidivism. They're all important and research needs to take that into account and have that triangulation of impact and findings and it's complicated. And one of the things that's really particularly complicated I think anyway but particularly when we're working with high home, high-risk cases of domestic abuse is the trauma that is involved for victim-survivors and children and that's not an easy to go in and start doing research and collection evidence. So it's something about the importance of triangulation, but also acknowledging some of the challenges of this work and they are significant, it's very difficult to do ethical research in that context of trauma and collecting data in relation to victim-survivors and children.   

It needs time, resources and a lot of thinking through and then I'd also link that to the triangulation of policy thinking which also is linked to the source of funding for research. So Jo touched on the funding that's flowing through the Home Office which, you know, is very welcome, but we need more departments involved, invested in the research and the shaping of the research and the outcomes of the research and it's hugely important for many reasons to being it's a whole family issue. So we need to be looking at the issue from many angles and in particular we're looking at the impact of interventions on children, you know, one source of evidence for impact is the children's voice but also impact on school attendance, wellbeing and we know from, you know, case studies and anecdotally that we do see this impact. Gathering that data is incredibly difficult, having access to that information and data is incredibly difficult, so we might have the Home Office involved and providing and a framework and a context for research, but if we don't have the department for education in the game and backing that up it's incredibly difficult to set up these research projects and have the level of information sharing that we need. So that's kind of like travelling right down into some of the really logistical challenges of this research and I suppose coming back up to what's the interface between these different sources of evidence and impact measures and how do we join them together.   

Dez: I know I'd observed that some of these dilemmas and challenges that you colleagues are articulating so well are absolutely replicated in the children's social care space as luck would have it given the interface you're interested in. And I think children's social care as a sector are similarly facing the issue of, you know, what works and what matters and how they overlap, but they're not entirely coterminous and how you gather rich evidence from multiple sources in a way that actually accords with your professional values and speaks to the needs of commissions and policymakers. So I think there's a shared struggle actually at both parts of this system.    

Jo: One of the things that we haven't mentioned is listening to perpetrators and it's a challenge I think but an interesting one and I think it's one of the things that the research on Mirabal concluded that actually we really need to hear from those who have used harmful behaviours, been controlling in their relationships. And hear what is going on, what is it that fuels that behaviour, what has helped them to change and at the moment we're not very good at doing that, we've been resistant to doing that I think. And I think part of that resistance is not wanting to give their voices equal weight with the voices of survivors and of course, that's right. We're listening to survivors as the voice of experience who can talk about the impact, but actually, those who cause harm often have insights into what they're doing and why that we need to listen to. So I think, you know, I've mentioned listening to practitioners, listening to survivors. I would add in listening to perpetrators. That doesn't mean we listen to them uncritically and we will be expecting depending on where they are at in a process of change, but we will be expecting levels of minimisation and justification and blaming and those things. But I know the Mirabal research has found over time that when there was success in the behaviour change work that those things diminished and that men at the end of the programme were able to reflect much more on themselves, the impact of their behaviours, where they were at, what was going to keep them safe going forward. And so I do think that's something for research to think about, is how do you incorporate the voice of perpetrators in a meaningful, respectful way and in a way that's respectful to survivors as well.   

Dez: I think that's a really important observation and in fact, as you've been talking I've been quite struck by the ways in which you've referenced the trauma experienced by many people in perpetrator harm or their own needs in their own rights. I suppose it struck me because that's not always in a conversation and Olumide you might have a particular view on this, but it seems to me that many people enter practice, whether that's children's social care or working in domestic abuse services, often because of their own personal views, experiences and desire for change often rooted in their lived experience. The same I think may be true for research roles in its territory, but that sense of personal drive may for some colleagues make them not very inclined to foreground the voice of those who cause harm, I think that would be an entirely human response. But what perhaps is more relevant is that the social narrative, the public narrative for quite a long time has been there are goodies and baddies, there are goodies and baddies in this scenario and listening to the baddies is a betrayal of victim/survivors. So moving beyond that into a more sophisticated space I think is very difficult not only for structural reasons but also for some quite personal reasons for some people and I think naming that could be key. Olumide, any observations on Jo's call to action there around really hearing the voices and views of those who cause harm and doing so in a way that's respectful to victim-survivors?   

Olumide: Yes, no absolutely that's a very key point that Jo has made actually because if we're also going to capture impact I mean surely we should be capturing, you know, the impacts on the service users who obviously in this case are perpetrators, so we can't actually move away from that. But I think one of things I did want to say though and I was obviously thinking with my hat on as an academic is that it's very important that we work with… so we've been talking about research a lot, someone might ask them, you know, 'What do you mean by this research, who's driving the research?' I think it's very important to involve academics and the reason why I say this is because of the ethical aspects of it which are obviously some of the issues that have been raised anyway and I think that you at least in some ways have some sense of comfort that the ethical questions have been, sort of, at least explored around how do you engage with vulnerable groups, how do you engage with survivors, how do you even as a practitioner who might have experienced domestic abuse yourself. You know, if you're going to then involve somebody like that within your participant group, how are you making sure that you're keeping them safe, how are you taking sure that, you know, they can actually engage in the best possible way that doesn't re-traumatise or, sort of, trigger them. So I think those are really important things why it's important that if we're doing research that we take a very collaborative approach where you bring academics, you bring practitioners and you bring survivors to the table, I mean that's how we do our research anyway at the university.   

You know, and I think that a number of universities also follow that approach, but I think that is what's… looking into when it's going back to this commissioning loop around research that those questions are being asked about who is doing the research. Because for me, my worry with this, sort of, sudden interest is like I said it’s a positive thing to see this plethora of research happening, but at the same time we need to be raising questions as well about have we really put an ethical framework in place to really make sure that this research is not going to be causing more harm. You know, which is the whole idea we don't want it to cause any harm actually, not even more harm, but, you know, it shouldn't really be harmful to participants at all. So I think that's what I would say about perhaps one of the observations I had in my mind and the other thing as well around listening to perpetrators, I think also there's something to be said about programmes that already by design incorporate support services for survivors already. I think that for me personally, just from my own experience of evaluating the community based programmes, I think that it's really interesting when you have that type of design because what happens is that you kind of speak to the perpetrators but at the same time you can also speak to the survivors as well. So by nature of that you're already kind of speaking to both groups and so you're not, sort of, privileging one voice above the other and I think actually a lot of times I find that survivors themselves want to actually feed into the research and they want to talk about their experiences. So sometimes I think people think, 'Oh, you know, you're delivering the same service in the same space.' And you know a lot of those questions they tend to happen.   

But actually no, you know, I think this the reason why accreditation is very important and actually ensuring that a lot of programmes meet the quality standards that are required and Jo's not paid me to say this, but, you know, this is where sometimes the Respect's standards do come in. You know, where at least you do have some sense that there is a framework for these programmes and looking at their quality, their quality of service, but also the safety, you know, of survivors even as they're delivering the service as well. When you do that you know that you are likely to get not just only better data, but you're also ensuring that you're already working within, sort of, ethical framework that ensures that you are already understanding the place for the service user's voice and the place for the survivor's voice as well, if that makes sense?   

Dez: It makes a lot of sense and it should not need saying, but it does still need saying that whether in practice or research we start by aiming to do no harm, I think a really salutary message there. Kyla, then Jo and then I'm going to move on to the final question colleagues.   

Kyla: Thanks Dez. I think I'm really just backing up what has been said around perpetrator's voice and I just wanted to say I think that there is an opportunity for collaboration between our practice and researchers on really looking at the right methodology. So tapping into a lot of what Olumide has been saying about the place for perpetrator voice and victim-survivor voice, I know that within Drive we've been thinking a lot about what is the right approach and I think there's more work to be done with research colleagues around methodologies. And as practitioners and service providers we could really do with that kind of collaboration to help us think and learn and build up that evidence base, that literature base to guide methodologies and build up thinking around methodologies for gaining perpetrator's voice.   

And I think also just to add, you know, some insights from The University of Bristol's research onto the Drive project, so working with high harm, high-risk perpetrators and conducting those interviews. So there were some really valuable insights, more works need to be done on this but we certainly were really struck by insights into the role of mental health particularly, rates of suicide and suicide ideation that came to the floor through some of that research. And of course mental health, mental ill-health is not an excuse for domestic abuse, it plays into the context and there are important things for us to learn in that interface, that was something that came out strongly from perpetrator's voice the role and the impact that interventions had on that and similarly the role that children have to play in the process of change. So some particular perpetrator response feedback on how reflecting on their own experiences of abuse as a child, then as a springboard to explore how their behaviour is impacting on their children really was coming through as a trigger for engagement. What we need more research in is did that translated significantly into a trigger for long term change, so we're getting these insights and we need more long term research to really see how that can be followed through effectively, that's coming from the perpetrator's voice.   

Dez: And what's so important there Kyla, in what you're sharing and you're modelling it very well I think, this both/and mindset. We can both be absolutely clear who responsibility sits with for causing harm and acknowledge those people causing harm might have a multitude of needs, adversities, difficult life experiences. None of which is to excuse but it can help us understand and I think that might, you know, that's easy to say I think it's a very, very difficult path to navigate sometimes when you're in practice and research can unlock some of that for us done well and done with nuance. Jo?    

Jo: I just wanted to flag to anyone that isn't really aware of the Respect standard that do know harm is our first principle, so it's right at the top. One of the things that I'm interested about and Olumide was talking about it was the ethical framework for research, obviously, our standard is about an ethical framework for practice and for response to perpetrators. But for research the four Women's Aid federations in November last year published their research integratory framework on domestic violence and abuse and I think that's something for us to look at and to work with them on and to think about how might we create something similar around research and perpetrators of domestic abuse, so that's something I'd like to see happen. I think right at the end of our conversation I just want to flag that we framed it very much around men's violence against women and that's obviously there's loads of reasons for that, it is the majority we started off talking about children's social care and mothers and so that's the context.   

But also I think we're really interested in the context in which women use violence as well and I mean in its broadest form, so women who are the primary coercively controlling perpetrator in a relationship and what that looks like and is that different and how is it similar and there's very little research in that sphere and also that impacts of course on male victims who are very invisible in that space. But also we haven't mentioned at all same-sex relationships and I think again it's an area-, so there's lots of I suppose I mean I always call it parts of the cohort because I do think of, you know, anyone that's causing harm in their families and in their relationship are part of a cohort. You know, even if it's a small kind of segment that we can desegregate into it's really important to understand. I think with same-sex domestic abuse obviously Catherine Donovan has done some really interesting research but it feels it's very much in its infancy and something we need to explore further and then I think just in terms of where the kind of under research elements of the cohort. I think there's lots more to understand about how adults as well as young people who are on the autism spectrum or have learning disabilities or brain injuries, how their use of violence and abuse differs or is similar to, you know, our understanding of perpetrators of violence against women. So, you know, there are some challenges really in the research field for understanding those who don't fit within the main framing f how we view the issue and how we move forward and create the right research to get to the right answers.   

[The responsibilities of colleagues in services and the actions that they can take] 

Dez: Thank you Jo, that certainly came through in the research and the literature, you know, so far as we could say the evidence suggests or the evidence supports, there was always that caveat but we don't actually know if this remains true for, you know, people in same-sex relationships using violence or people from other minoritised groups and I think it's an enduring challenge. I'd like if I may to finish this by playing back what I think the three of you have made such a strong case for, that given, you know, there are numerous challenges associated with continuously improving the evidence base in this territory, the ethical issues, the information… it's the most practical methodological issues. The complex local systems in which effective practice is happening and then alongside that the considerable unarguable capacity and resource constraints facing most if not all of the act is in those local systems and the implication that then has for those who are particularly… I'm thinking smaller community-based organisations. What role can they play in generating the evidence when they are, you know, faced with such considerable resource challenges? You highlighted the tensions that can appear where you have, you know, narrow constructs of what constitutes evidence, narrow constructs of impact.    

You've highlighted the policy fragmentation that can exist, multiple responsibilities across different parts of central government for example and then how that can then play out in terms of fragmented research agendas and indeed fragmented local responses. You've highlighted the need for much more diverse perspectives hearing from many, many different voices around what helps, what matters and indeed where we're lucky what works, they are different but connected things. The need to have much more practice-informed evidence, lived experience informing practice and evidence and there's our policy that is informed by the evidence. The need to really avoid narrow, blunt reductive approaches to impact measurement because if we follow that path any further we're not really going to create the kind of diverse and nuanced based evidence base that all three of you have argued for so well. That nuance and multi-dimension approach to build in the evidence base it seems to me requires and you've said this many times, a much more collaborative approach, if we're to get away from the binary thinking we have to engage in critical thinking and that relies on I think a collaborative endeavour.   

So my question to you for $64,000,000 is if creating better evidence is everybody's responsibility, everybody's business to use a cliché term what role do you think different parts of the system need to play? I'm thinking Jo, you might particularly have a view around how practitioners and service providers could play a role here. Kyla, you might have a view on how local systems can play a role and of course, Olumide come in and tell us what you think the research community needs to be doing. How do we achieve this more nuanced, sophisticated reflective and reflexive evidence base, who needs to do what?   

Olumide: Okay, I will go first. So I think one of the things I wanted to say actually, just I know you've done a really wonderful summary, is I know when Jo was listing some of the gaps in our knowledge I think I would also add our understanding around older people as well. I think that's something that we also need to be focusing on in terms of you know interventions and understanding what the complexities are around that area, I think that's one thing that's not been looked at. So I mean it obviously goes down to the diversifying of the knowledge base and obviously, when we begin to talk about intersectionality it would touch on things around same-sex, it would talk about things like religion, faith and all that stuff and so that's very important. So I think leading nicely into what I want to see, I actually think that there's a role for the research community to like you said be more collaborative with the practice side of things. So I think there's already some really good practice already happening, good partnership work already happening with what some Drive is doing, with what some of Respect. I think there's a lot of collaborations with universities already happening anyway, but I think that one of the things that I probably want us to do is even expand our understanding of who researchers are. So as much as we know we have academic researchers like myself we should also embrace community researchers so those who might actually have a, sort of, hybrid or you might call them, 'Pracademic' where they kind of straddle.   

I don't know if that's… if just made up words now, is that a real word? Right, so, like, you know, those that are coming from some of that practice and academic background. And I think that it's very important to value that knowledge as well, you know, and especially for those might even be survivors themselves and then gone into academia as well and, you know, like, I think understanding that, you know, the journey and the stories and the experiences that people bring to the table where they're lived experiences are so valuable and so vital to this conversation. And also I think going back to what Jo was saying about also being open to even bringing perpetrators or those that have been onto the programme to the table especially after they've actually been on a programme. You know, there was a conference, I think it probably got shelved because of the pandemic, but I remember that they were going to invite one of the men that had been on the programme, I'm not going to mention the name of the conference. I think there was a lot of controversy because of like, 'Oh is this person going to come and speak to, you know, a group of conference attendees about their behaviour?' And all of that stuff. But I think we need to get to that place of being open to listen to the men that have been on the perpetrator programmes themselves to understand more not only about their motivation for change, but also understanding how they want to again create their journey post the programme. So, you know, I mean from some of the men I've spoken to we're seeing conversations where they tell me, 'Oh I want to give back now, I want to really go into the community and talk to more men to understand the impact of domestic abuse and to actually understand how you can change your behaviour and things like that.'   

So I think that we need to begin to change our perspective about how we see perpetrators in this binary lens of, you know, as if they cannot ever be rehabilitated. I think we need to try and change that, you know, I think that for those that are well motivated to want to change whether for the reasons relating to their, you know, they want to be better dads or they want to be, you know, they just really want to be better. And, you know, in terms of their relationships we need to give them the opportunity to change as well, so I think it's being open about that as well. So I think the research community does have a role to play in terms of helping to develop the evidence base further. I mean I'm personally invested in that to kind of ensure that we can actually begin to look at the area of work as not something that… as you're going back to what you said at the beginning, Dez, that people say that, 'Oh there's no evidence.' But actually we know that there is growing evidence, so we need to just portray that evidence more, we need to share that evidence more, we need to be talking about and we need to be ensuring that we're bringing the right people to the table, so academics, practitioners, survivors from different backgrounds and I think valuing different voices is very important.   

Dez: Thank you, a strong call there for greater interdisciplinarity, but also greater inclusivity and I could see that requires not just change from the research community but some pretty significant change to the social discourse on this stuff, none of it's easy as you were saying Jo. So what actions or responsibilities would you like to see being taken by colleagues in practice, colleagues delivering services? I mean I'm old enough to say without embarrassment, I used to think when I worked in a real job that evaluation was a thing that they did to me, constantly trying to prove that we were good enough to someone over there who was miles and miles away from what really mattered. It was certainly one of the prejudices I held when I delivered services, have things changed, what role could colleagues doing the work play in a better evidence base?    

Kyla: Yes, I have some thoughts on that certainly there are things that we can do. So one is I think we can be more open to more nuanced discussions around the evidence base, based on the conversation that we've had today we know that there is evidence there and there are different types of evidence there. But I think we can also be open and hold our hands up to the fact that it's a beginning of a picture and there's a lot more to do and I think at times the conversation could be more nuanced in recognising where current approaches to research and research that's very connected to practice and delivery can open up into a broader space. And I suppose to put it bluntly maybe not in a particularly helpful way, but to get past conversations that are about, 'There's no evidence.' 'Yes, there is.' 'There's no evidence.' ‘Yes, there is.’ There's a huge bridge between those two view points and I think as a sector we can do it better, we can have those conversations and I certainly take that on myself to really encourage that kind of conversation, we don't need to be defensive about this. The other area that I would really like to play my part in improving within the sector is how we collaborate and manage our data. There's an absolute wealth of information and data across services, perpetrator services and I think we can do a lot more within the sector harness that and to really lift it up as a collective set of data that gives inroads into, you know, different kinds of analysis and research and evaluation. But there's some practical and logistical things that we need to put in place across, you know, a high number of services to really start to make better use of the data that we have, so I think they would be the two things that I would say from a provider and a service provider perspective that we could do better. I do think there are things that commissioners can do better too but I'll leave that to Jo, I'm sure she's got thoughts on that.   

Jo: So I was very struck with Olumide's 'pracademic.' And, you know, I think that's great to invent a word and also a concept, I'm going to do my own pun here, we need to drive I think a proactive strategic approach to research and that needs to be a collaborative approach. So what I mean is that those from academia, from practice, from policy, from commissioning need to work together to set a strategic framework for what research is needed, so we get away from this ad-hoc piece meal approach and really think about what would help to build an evidence base that's of value. And that's not just big pieces of research, it's value in all different types. I think Kyla's right we need better data to really understand, we need more qualitative to really get into the data and the nuance of not just what works but how it works and I think that's a really important distinction. You know, I hope we're based the ‘does it work’ and people are beginning to ask, 'How does it work and for whom and in what ways?' So I'd like to see that kind of nuance. So there is something, you know, kind of aspirational about us all working together and, you know, trying to kind of create that atmosphere where we can develop that evidence base.   

Kyla: If I could just jump in I suppose one of the things that I didn't say when I was, you know, holding hands up to what we can do ourselves, I'd like to see commissioners see themselves as part of the solution. So yes, I can see that for them there are probably gaps in the coherence of the information that they have to inform their use of public money, but it's about shifting that thinking to understand the context that we've been talking about today. You know, why are we in the position that we're in and to be part of addressing that by commissioning good evaluation research and services, seeing themselves as part of filling in those gaps that they have rather than passively expecting an under-resourced sector to miraculously be able to provide them all of a sudden. And I think that's particularly when it comes to really wanting to build up an evidence base over a long period of time and looking at, you know, what's happening now but what does that look like in two, three, five years’ time.   

Olumide: This is very important because I think what you've just said about commissioning and just looking at some of the experiences of how some of this work has been commissioned at the community level. I think that commissioners do have a role to play around the transparency of how money is being spent for perpetrator programmes. I mean, one of the questions around social value, I know Jo mentioned cost benefit analysis and all that stuff. I really think that questions around even the social value of those programmes need to be answered and let that evidence inform the direction. You know, I think that actually also nicely ties in to what Jo was saying about the strategic approach, like, you know, it needs to be very place-based in some ways, but also we need to be aware that there's also work that would be happening at the national level and bringing those together. And I think it still goes back to this thing around local system change, national systems change and joining those dots.   

Dez: Thank you colleagues you've made a really I think powerful and compelling case for a much more coherent, collective and collaborative approach where no party gets to see themselves as passive in the face of the evidence base and everybody has their role to play in generating a more useful, more nuance, more sophisticated evidence base. And you've clearly demonstrated the role that all of us in our different guises can play to contributing to that future. Thanks again colleagues.    

Professional Standards

PQS:KSS - Abuse and neglect of children | Relationships and effective direct work | Shaping and influencing the practice system | Designing a system to support effective practice

PCF - Critical reflection and analysis

Related Content

Domestic abuse

Working with people who perpetrate domestic violence and abuse in families: Strategic Briefing (2021)

This strategic briefing discusses work with people who perpetrate domestic violence and / or abuse (DVA), with a specific emphasis on people who perpetrate DVA in families, involved with children’s social care.

Working with people who perpetrate domestic violence and abuse in families: Evidence Review (2021)

The purpose of this report is to provide a summarised account of a rapid literature review on approaches and models for work with people who perpetrate domestic violence and abuse (DVA), particularly in the context of families.

Child protection

Domestic abuse and child protection: Changing the conversation, making a difference for children and families 

These resources are intended to support practitioners and policy makers in service design and practice with families where there is a perpetrator of Domestic Violence or Abuse.

Coercive control: Impacts on children and young people in the family environment: Literature Review (2018)

It is recognised that coercive control is a key feature of abusive relationships. It is therefore essential that the conceptualisation of coercive control and the impact it has on the whole family is recognised and understood.

Child neglect

Domestic violence and abuse: Research Summary November 2021

To mark the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women (25 Nov 2021) and 16 Days of Action against Domestic Violence (25 Nov – 10 Dec 2021), the research summarised this month focuses on practice to support people who may be experiencing domestic violence and abuse.

NSPCC Domestic Abuse Recovering Together

Focus on the affects of domestic abuse on the mother and child relationship, via a discussion of the NSPCC's DART programme.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.7(3); 2017

Qualitative study to explore the health and well-being impacts on adults providing informal support to female domestic violence survivors

Alison gregory.

1 Centre for Academic Primary Care, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

2 School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Burwood, Victoria, Australia

Emma Williamson

3 Centre for Gender and Violence Research, University of Bristol, Social Science Complex, Bristol, UK

Domestic violence (DV) is hazardous to survivors' health, from injuries sustained and from resultant chronic physical and mental health problems. Support from friends and relatives is significant in the lives of DV survivors; research shows associations between positive support and the health, well-being and safety of survivors. Little is known about how people close to survivors are impacted. The aim of this study was exploratory, with the following research question: what are the health and well-being impacts on adults who provide informal support to female DV survivors?

A qualitative study using semistructured interviews conducted face to face, by telephone or using Skype. A thematic analysis of the narratives was carried out.

Community-based, across the UK.

Participants

People were eligible to take part if they had had a close relationship (either as friend, colleague or family member) with a woman who had experienced DV, and were aged 16 or over during the time they knew the survivor. Participants were recruited via posters in community venues, social media and radio advertisement. 23 participants were recruited and interviewed; the majority were women, most were white and ages ranged from mid-20s to 80.

Generated themes included: negative impacts on psychological and emotional well-being of informal supporters, and related physical health impacts. Some psychological impacts were over a limited period; others were chronic and had the potential to be severe and enduring. The impacts described suggested that those providing informal support to survivors may be experiencing secondary traumatic stress as they journey alongside the survivor.

Conclusions

Friends and relatives of DV survivors experience substantial impact on their own health and well-being. There are no direct services to support this group. These findings have practical and policy implications, so that the needs of informal supporters are legitimised and met.

Strengths and limitations of this study

• This study provides an indepth exploration of the health and well-being impacts experienced by friends and family members supporting a woman who is experiencing domestic violence (DV).
• A key strength of this research is the novelty of perspective, because it accessed the experiences of friends and relatives directly, which is vital if we are to understand the wider context and implications of DV.
• The data came from face-to-face interviews, but the main researcher (AG) also kept a reflective diary and fieldnotes. AG also carried out a member-checking process during the interviews to increase rigour and validity of results.
• This study shows that friends, colleagues and relatives of survivors experience substantial impact on health and well-being and may, in some cases, be experiencing secondary traumatic stress.
• One of the limitations of this research was that the sample lacked breadth, particularly in terms of ethnicity. It will be important to try to address this in future research.

Introduction

Domestic violence (DV) is a global issue to which no age group, culture or socioeconomic group is insusceptible. 1 The United Nations Development Fund for Women estimates that, throughout the world, one in three women will experience violence in their lifetime, and in most cases, the abuser will be a family member. 2

The Council of Europe, the WHO and the United Nations have all identified violence against women as a major public health issue. 2–4 The most obvious health consequence is physical injury, with 70% of DV incidents resulting in injury. 5 Less apparent are chronic health problems which result; research demonstrates links between DV and gynaecological problems, 6 chronic pain, 7 gastrointestinal disorders 8 9 and cardiovascular conditions. 10 There is also substantial evidence for the harmful consequences on mental health, with depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance abuse and suicidal ideation commonly experienced by survivors. 11 12

Research suggests that the majority of female DV survivors choose to access support (practical and emotional) from adults around them. 13–16 In a study by Parker and Lee, 14 89% of DV survivors disclosed the abuse they were experiencing to friends and relatives. While many survivors rely on informal support alongside professional and specialist services, there are a large number who rely initially, predominantly or exclusively on friends, relatives and colleagues. 13 16 17 Research has demonstrated that positive social support buffers against effects of abuse on survivors' physical health, mental health and quality of life, and that it can be preventive against them experiencing further abuse. 18–21

Exposure to violence can be traumatic in its own right. 22–24 Indeed, the most recent edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) 25 recognises the experiences of people who have witnessed traumatic events, and those who have learnt about events that have happened to close relatives and friends. Historically, this idea of secondary traumatic stress (STS)—sometimes referred to as indirect trauma, compassion fatigue or vicarious trauma—has only been applied to people working as professionals with traumatised patients or clients. More recently, however, researchers have begun to direct attention towards those providing support in an informal capacity, noting the overlap with impacts that professionals in caring roles experience. 26

In summary, there is substantial evidence that women experiencing DV draw support from people in their social network and that, when this is positive, there are important benefits. However, because the direct study of people in DV survivors' social networks is rare, little is known about the possible diffusion of impacts, including the possibility of STS. 17 27 28

This qualitative study was conducted in the UK. The aim of the research was exploratory, with the following research question: what are the health and well-being impacts on adults who provide informal support to female DV survivors? Owing to the emotive nature of the topic, individual interviews were considered the most appropriate mode of data collection.

Maximum variation sampling was used to recruit participants with a range of experiences, attitudes and beliefs. It is an approach which aims to capture and describe themes that cut across a great deal of participant variation, so that common patterns that do emerge are of value and interest. In order to access a diverse range of people, advertisement of the study included: posters in local healthcare and community settings, social media and web-advertisement, and promotion on local radio. Particular emphasis was placed on attempting to recruit participants with an ethnic background other than White British, in recognition of the general under-representation of individuals from minority ethnic backgrounds in health research. 29 For this reason, the study was also advertised by agencies in Bristol working with black and minority ethnic groups.

Participants were eligible if they had had a close relationship with a female survivor of DV, and were aged 16 or over during the time they knew the survivor.

DV was defined according to the UK Home Office definition:

Any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive, threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are, or have been, intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality. The abuse can encompass, but is not limited to: psychological, physical, sexual, financial & emotional. 30

Owing to the gender asymmetry around DV, particularly in terms of impact, 31–33 and because much less is known about the ways men experiencing DV interact with their social networks, 34 35 it was decided to focus this work on the friends and relatives of female survivors, though the perpetrator could be of either gender.

Twenty-three participants were recruited and interviewed. A further 63 people expressed an interest in the study: 33 were ineligible (27 were survivors rather than informal supporters, 5 had been exposed to DV during childhood rather than adulthood, and 1 was not based in the UK), 28 made no further response after initial contact and 2 were recruited but failed to attend the arranged interview. The relationships that participants had to a survivor were: mother (4), father (2), sister (2), niece (1), daughter-in-law (1), current partner (3), friend (15) and work colleague (2). There were more than 23 different relationships described, because some participants had known multiple survivors. The majority of participants were women (18), most were white (including ‘White British’, ‘White European’ and ‘White Other’ ethnicities) and their ages ranged from mid-20s to 80.

Procedures and data collection

People who were interested in taking part, having seen the posters or online advertisements for the study, contacted the first author (AG) by telephone or email. They were given a study information leaflet and a copy of the consent form (via email or mail) at least 48 hours prior to participating in an interview. Written consent was obtained from each participant. For safety, face-to-face interviews took place in university buildings or community premises (eg, private rooms in local council offices). Participants also had the option to be interviewed over the telephone or using Skype. Only AG and each participant were present during the interviews, and participants were only interviewed once. Sociodemographic data were collected to inform the analysis, contextualise participants and guide recruitment strategies. Participant confidentiality and anonymity were of paramount importance, thus only AG knew who had participated in the study. Transcripts of the data were cleaned to remove identifying information prior to sharing with the team for analysis, and all data were held securely in accordance with University of Bristol regulations. The limits of confidentiality, particularly reporting requirements for safeguarding issues, were explained to participants. To reduce the likelihood of distress, the voluntary nature of the research was emphasised throughout, and the researcher was attentive to participants' emotional state.

The interviews were conducted between August 2012 and April 2013 by the first author. A topic guide (which had been pilot tested) was used, with questions and prompts to elicit information pertinent to the research question. In addition, a form of member-checking was undertaken by AG throughout the interviews, by restating and summarising information to check accuracy of understanding with participants. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and imported into NVivo10 software. The interviews ranged in length from 35 to 90 min, and saturation of themes was reached after 23 interviews. Following the interviews, an information sheet detailing local and national DV services and counselling services was shared with participants.

Researcher reflexivity

Part of ensuring the rigour of qualitative research is for investigators to recognise that they themselves necessarily form part of the context for interactions with participants, and that they bring their traditions, values and personal qualities to each aspect of the study. 36 For this reason, it is also important for the reader to have an understanding of who conducted the research: the first author (AG) is a woman, white and was in her late 30s when she carried out the interviews as part of her PhD. She had been a senior research associate for 4 years prior to her PhD studentship, and continued to work as a counsellor alongside her research (participants were informed that AG was a PhD student, but not that she had an additional counselling role). AG had had no prior contact with participants. Reflexivity also involves an active noticing by the researcher as she journeys through the research process, which for this study included keeping a reflective diary and detailed fieldnotes to capture reflections on: context, interview process, thoughts about participants, and about the relationships created during the interviews. At the interview stage, the recording of these reflections helped AG to consider what had gone well and what could have been performed differently, in order to hone interview skills and use of the topic guide. At the analysis stage, the noted descriptions of key messages from the interviews were revisited, in order to check that the developed themes reflected these.

Data analysis

A thematic analysis of the data was carried out and was undertaken in parallel with the interviews. In thematic analysis, transcripts are read multiple times in conjunction with fieldnotes, and key concepts noted. 37 These concepts form a list of initial codes which are applied line-by-line to the transcripts (for this study, using NVivo10 software). Initial descriptive codes are grouped into themes which were refined using constant comparison : a process throughout the analysis of comparing units of data with the entire data set and emerging theories, to modify constructs and relationships between them. 38 For this study, AG analysed all of the transcripts, and EW and GF each analysed a subset. The researchers familiarised themselves with the data, identifying text that was relevant to the research question. AG generated initial descriptive codes, a vast index to encompass everything that might be of interest. AG then collated linked codes in tentative groupings at the broader level of themes. The themes were honed, through discussion, until consensus between the authors was reached, and any relationships between the coded data were noted—this was an iterative process which distilled and refined in a cyclical fashion. 39

In the end stages, fieldnotes were revisited to check whether the honed themes reflected the key messages recorded immediately postinterview.

In the presentation of findings, illustrative quotes from participants' narratives are used. The parentheses after each quote contain the participant's pseudonym and their relationship to the survivor.

The generated themes described a variety of different types of impact on health and well-being experienced by informal supporters of survivors. For clarity, the impacts on psychological and emotional well-being have been split into two sections. The first describes the impacts people experienced following the witnessing (either visually or by description) of incidents, such as shock, fear and panic. The second relates to impacts that were connected with the overall strain and pressure of the situation, including: anger, frustration, anxiety, distress, sadness, confusion and guilt. In the final section of the findings, the impacts on physical health are described; where the stress of the situation had begun to take a toll on people's functioning and physiology.

Psychological and emotional impacts

A large theme that emerged from the interviews was the impact on psychological and emotional well-being, which one participant described as the emotional burden. People talked about the recurrence or persistence of these impacts, with several suffering ill-effects long after abusive relationships had ended. Many of the impacts were experienced concurrently or in succession; thus, there was a cumulative effect on people's well-being.

Impacts following the witnessing of incidents

Shock and horror.

Several participants spoke of their shock when they first heard about the abuse, witnessed it first-hand or witnessed the aftermath. For a few participants, this shock was particularly triggered by seeing survivors' injuries following physical violence, or by unfolding revelations about the extent of the violence.

Fear and panic

This shock, at what the perpetrator was capable of, could lead to fear and panic, in response to a sense of threat that participants felt for their own safety: Suzie (a mother to a survivor) spoke about how frightened she was when the perpetrator was threatening to kill her . For Vicky, it was a growing sense that the perpetrator was a very dangerous man:

I thought, ‘If he's worked out that I'm interfering and trying to pull her away from him, trying to help her to escape, he may well do anything irrational to me to stop me from interfering.’…I had to really train myself to remember that the bogey man wasn't there, [the perpetrator] wasn't there, I'd parked my car, there was nobody around, walk with purpose, be confident, he's not gonna attack you. (Vicky, Work colleague)

For other people, fear was linked with situations they recognised as highly dangerous for the survivor. These fears were proportional and realistic about potential outcomes, including: the abduction or harming of children and the death or serious injury of the woman. Emily described how panic could ensue during periods when the survivor's future was in doubt:

I was kind of living on adrenalin, I was sort of just walking from room to room. I couldn't sit down, I couldn't concentrate. My mind was just racing, I was just in a state of panic. (Emily, Mother)

Impacts resulting from the overall strain of the situation

Anger and frustration.

Most participants talked about feelings of anger and frustration. For people who felt these emotions, the predominant cause was the perpetrators' behaviour towards survivors and children:

I felt this anger welling up inside of me, and I just felt that I needed to sort of move away from him. … It's building up, and I can feel it. I just feel that, I mean I want to go round there and give him a good hiding, and I'm 70. (Eric, Father)

Several people also mentioned anger towards professionals or relatives, who they felt had responded insufficiently. Often tied with these feelings was a strong sense of injustice; that what was right had not prevailed:

I feel very angry that no one helped her. And now I know that it was Social Services' responsibility to help the child and to help her. It was their responsibility… I still feel angry, because I think the way they did it, the baby could have died, they were putting the baby at risk. (Zakia, Friend)

For many, there was nothing short-lived about their anger, particularly where the perpetrator continued to be abusive towards the survivor via his contact with their children. In addition to anger, people often mentioned a level of frustration they felt towards the survivor, largely when they believed she was not using her capacity to act.

Anxiety and worry

All of the participants described feeling anxious or worried about the situation, and for many people, these feelings, and the associated thoughts, pervaded their lives for a period of weeks, months or even years. Some people described worry in the initial stages of the relationship, before they knew about the abuse, which manifested as nagging concern:

It was when we were on holiday and I saw how he was towards my granddaughter that I was very worried, and when we came home I said to my husband that I was very concerned… (Eve, Mother)

Others described anxiety about their interactions with the survivor, or the perpetrator, wanting to guard against making the situation worse. People also mentioned ongoing concerns they had for the survivor after the abusive relationship ended, particularly the continuing potential for harm:

I still worry now that he'll hurt her, I don't ever feel 100% that something bad isn't gonna happen. (Gwen, Sister)

Fear, following exposure to abuse, could manifest as anxiety longer term, as people began to imagine all the possible outcomes of the situation. This was true for Emily, who had feared that her daughter would re-enter the abusive relationship:

I was just pacing the floor, just crying, just hysterical, I was like close to the edge. I couldn't go to work, I had to take weeks off work, ‘cos I couldn't focus, I couldn't go to work; I was just beside myself, absolutely beside myself. I really thought that there was a possibility my daughter would end up dead, if she went back, to that relationship. (Emily, Mother)

For many participants, anxious thoughts had persisted, particularly where the survivor was viewed as vulnerable, for example: by being young, by living far from their support network or by having recently exited the relationship.

Distress and upset

The feelings of distress and upset that people described were sometimes connected with changes in their relationship with the survivor, and sometimes with thoughts about the abuse the survivor had suffered. For Stacey, it was her friend Hannah's decision to remain in the relationship that was incredibly upsetting:

I haven't been able to contact her, because it's just too upsetting to me… ‘He's now hurting you. How's it gone from there to there?’ And then I've told her, and then that's all I can do. I can't do anymore ‘cos I'm just so upset. (Stacey, Friend)

In describing what her team of colleagues had been exposed to, Vicky spoke metaphorically of a little container of terrible distress , an awfulness that was not easy to shake, due to the nature and frequency of abuse their colleague suffered.

Several participants talked about the longevity of distress. Suzie, for example, spoke of continued pain evoked by memories of harrowing times while supporting her daughter. People who had been in an abusive relationship themselves, or who had been exposed to DV during childhood, spoke of their distress as memories of their own past resurfaced:

To watch it happening to somebody else I found very distressing…I was very frightened of my father at that age. (Lily, Friend)

Overwhelm and saturation

Some participants spoke about having reached a point where they felt overwhelmed or saturated, using words like, breaking point , exhausted and drained to convey the all-consuming nature of the situation. Others described peaks and troughs of intensity, and the need to take time out on occasion, to protect their own sense of well-being.

Tension and turmoil

Linked with feelings of shock, that some people experienced when they first heard about the situation, several participants also described the longer term challenges to their core beliefs about: humanity, justice and safety in the world. The way people described these impacts intimated the unsettling nature of having foundational assumptions called into question. Josie discovered that three women she knew had been abused by partners, which challenged her ideas about DV not happening to women who were professional or strong . Lily also struggled with the idea that her intelligent and dynamic friend chose to remain in an abusive relationship, and Emily was unsettled by the idea that DV could happen to people who were like her. For others, it was the fact that the survivor was prepared to remain with a violent man that led to their bewilderment :

I didn't know how people could live like that, how you could treat someone like that, or even how you could go back to someone after they'd treated you like that. (Anne, Friend)

Many participants also described inner dissonance; conflicting pressures within themselves, leaving them ill-at-ease. Before they had understood the situation, Sally and Eric experienced tension between their love for their daughter, and frustration at the way Amanda was behaving towards them. A few participants also spoke of the tension between the desire to intervene and the need to respect the survivor's wishes:

She had her plan and we wanted to respect that. But the stress that came with not hiring a van, going there, dealing with him … the stress of that was monumental at times. (Louise, Friend)

Sense of responsibility

Some participants found themselves in a position of feeling a burden, a duty or a weight of responsibility because of the nature of the situation. These people spoke of putting their own priorities on hold, of substantially altering life-plans and of the all-consuming nature of supporting a survivor through intense periods. Where there was complexity in the situation, the sense of responsibility was compounded; for example, where the survivor had an addiction, had children with the perpetrator, had a mental health condition or where she lacked additional social support.

Feeling disempowered

Another description which appeared in people's narratives was disempowerment. Participants spoke about feeling impotent to intervene during the relationship, and to protect and support sufficiently in the aftermath:

I felt really helpless that she was going back to situations where we knew she was gonna be hurt, but by then understanding domestic violence, knowing that for her safety that's what she wanted to do. And we only had to go with what she wanted … (Gwen, Sister)

Several people spoke about the persistence of this sense of powerlessness; that months or years after the end of abusive relationship, they still felt unable to stop the perpetrator impacting on the lives of their loved ones:

I just feel as if I want to protect my daughter and my grandchildren … it's very, very painful, very painful. But I don't seem to be able to do anything about it. My hands are tied and I need to get her out of this mess. (Eric, Father)

There was also a sense that some people lacked voice; that their experiences and their viewpoints were often disregarded, seen as unimportant or invalidated. Silencing came in many forms; sometimes it was professionals or employers not acting on information, and sometimes the survivor herself, either intentionally or unwittingly, prevented expression. Occasionally, participants silenced themselves by questioning the legitimacy of their feelings:

I do [get opportunity to voice those thoughts] a bit, but I guess to some extent I feel that I should be supportive of Judy, because she is the victim and I kind of think I should just be able to be a bit more detached, not feel that way myself, and just be there to support her. (Richard, Partner)

Sadness and depression

Many participants spoke of having felt low at some point; most of these people described a dip in mood that indicated despondency or a temporary sense of hopelessness, but some had been diagnosed with depression, taken antidepressants or had had suicidal thoughts. Suzie mentioned taking antidepressants at a point where she had started to feel numb:

I just I remember sitting in an armchair in my living room, literally with the duvet over me and I just couldn't move or I just lost it, I didn't really feel anything and then depression … (Suzie, Mother)

During this time, Suzie considered ending her life, because the circumstances felt so desperate. Likewise, Sally hit a similar point where she could not see a way forward:

I decided I'd kill myself (crying) … I felt just done with everything; I was just going to jump in the sea … I remember going, choosing the place. (Sally, Mother)

Confusion and uncertainty

All participants described periods of confusion, not only about the situation itself, and what the trajectory might be, but also about how to best support the survivor and protect themselves. At the point where people knew very little, they described feeling in the dark and trying to work it out ; a piece-meal process to draw their own conclusions about the relationship, which they often discovered were inaccurate or partial:

I thought perhaps I'd upset them in some way and I wasn't sure what or how … my assumption was that they had financial troubles, and I was trying to probe to see what it was … I was worried about her. But I didn't know what I was worried about. (Barry, Father)

Stacey made the point that with health conditions, it was possible to have some sense of trajectory and outcome, unlike DV:

I think if you have a friend who's got cancer or diabetes or something like, you kinda know what's happening next…But when you're supporting someone who's in a violent relationship, you don't really know when it's gonna end, how long they're gonna need you to support them, or how much worse it's gonna get. (Stacey, Friend)

Guilt and self-blame

The most frequent causes of guilt described by informal supporters were not having known sooner about the DV, and not having understood what the behaviours they had witnessed meant:

I'm sad, that we couldn't help her sooner, or that we didn't prevent it from happening, it makes me sort of sad with myself really, I think, and angry at myself and, for not being supportive sooner, and doubting her. (Gwen, Sister)

Several people also described guilt they felt in relation to offering support that felt inferior. This was especially the case where their relationship with the survivor had become strained, or was lost completely. For Kate, a sense of guilt, which had persisted for many years, was her over-riding emotion:

I felt really guilty about that … I didn't feel like I could be honest with her anymore… I felt bad about it. Which was horrible of me, I still feel I've been horrible to her, because I didn't, well I don't know if I did the right thing, I still don't know if I did the right thing. (Kate, Friend)

For others, there were feelings of guilt when positive things happened in their own lives, for example, Anne described feelings akin to survivor guilt because she had fled an abusive relationship, started a new relationship, and become a mother, while her friend Sarah remained with her partner, and had been coerced into having an abortion.

Physical health impacts

In addition to psychological and emotional impacts, many people talked about the stress of the situation; a summary term, which they used to describe some of the physical health impacts they experienced.

Physical symptoms and ailments

Mostly, the health repercussions participants mentioned were those which had resulted from heightened states of panic, anxiety, fear, powerlessness and anger, describing feeling sick, shaky and physically unsettled:

For me that comes with a physical feeling of almost not being able to breathe and feeling churned up inside… (Suzie, Mother)

A few people mentioned less transient physical ailments that they felt had resulted from the stress of supporting a survivor: back and neck tension, migraines, shortness of breath and tight-chestedness. Eric, in particular, felt his symptoms (similar to those of a heart attack) were connected with the anger and powerlessness he felt.

Sleep difficulties

Friends and relatives of survivors described broken sleep for a period of time, linked with relentless concerns for the survivor, or worries regarding their role. Relatives and partners, in particular, reported loss of sleep at critical times:

I was close to breaking point, I didn't sleep. … And I thought, this means she'll go back to him, and I remember I didn't sleep at all that week, I was just pacing the floor. (Emily, Mother)

People who mentioned sleep difficulties talked about the impact of late evening communication with the survivor, or with others involved. Some proposed an association between reduction in quality of sleep and the intense emotions experienced.

Appetite and weight loss

Mark and Emily mentioned loss of appetite and weight loss when discussing their health, describing it as their bodies' default response to stressful events. For Mark, it was triggered when he tried to relieve the pressure on his wife by dealing with reams of solicitor correspondence. For Emily, it happened during a time of huge anxiety, while trying to persuade her daughter from returning to the perpetrator.

The interviews highlighted that impacts on health and well-being of informal supporters of DV survivors were many and varied. There was a spectrum of experience in terms of severity and longevity of impact, with informal supporters describing different impacts from one another, and also changes in impact at different stages in their individual journeys. The identification of subgroups of participants with differing experiences was complex, for example, while the relationship between the informal supporter and the survivor was important, it was not whether they were relatives, friends or colleagues, but rather the quality of the relationship which mattered. The gender of the informal supporter, whether or not the survivor had children, and the level of abuse the informal supporter knew about were additional mediators of impact. Further research is needed for a greater understanding of how variance in the DV situation and in the characteristics of informal supporters influence impact.

Many of these impacts, such as anger, fear, sadness, helplessness and disruptions to sleep and to core beliefs, are sequelae of trauma; the same symptoms as those known to be experienced by people following direct exposure to traumatic events. 40 41

One of the suggested mechanisms through which traumatic experiences have health implications is the stress-process framework. 42 43 Within this framework, external stressors provoke physiological and psychological responses, 43 44 which impact on health and well-being, particularly if the stressors are over a long period. Given that the average length of an abusive relationship is 5 years, 45 those involved are certainly at risk of chronic stress and its sequelae. More than 20 years ago, Figley 46 47 suggested that these effects were not limited to the person experiencing traumatic events; that emergency responders and therapists could also be affected, particularly when repeatedly exposed to incidents or disclosures over time. More recently, changes to the DSM-5 have drawn attention to those providing informal support as well as those providing professional support. 25 The findings from this study add weight to the idea of risk of STS for people providing informal support in the particular scenario of DV. In addition, research suggests differential experiences of traumatic stress dependent on factors such as personal characteristics, sociodemography, social support and aggregate life events. 42 43 46 48 The variation in reported impacts (in terms of type, severity and longevity) by participants in this study lends support to this idea.

Moreover, there is overlap between the findings from this study, and research with people providing informal support to relatives or friends who have experienced other forms of trauma. For example, one in three spouses of Holocaust survivors were found to be suffering from psychological distress and STS symptoms, 49 and Christiansen et al 24 reported that relatives, friends and partners of men and women who had been raped showed ‘significant levels of traumatization’ , with 25% suffering from PTSD.

Implications for policy, practice and research

The findings from this research indicate that the health and well-being of informal supporters are affected in situations of DV. In terms of policy, the social context of survivors is rarely visible, which needs to be addressed, so that the needs of informal supporters are considered. In addition, there is need for professionals who work in positions where they routinely come into contact with survivors to attend to other people within the situation; reflecting on who might be experiencing impact, and providing opportunities for disclosure, and for legitimisation of concerns. Healthcare providers, in particular, are well placed to respond to all parties affected by DV, which is why training around this issue for doctors, nurses and allied health professionals is vital. 50–52

Research about informal supporters is crucial for understanding the context of survivors' lives. 53 Specifically, with the intention of improving outcomes for informal supporters and for survivors, research is needed to develop and test interventions directly targeting those in the social networks of survivors.

Strengths and limitations

One of the limitations of this research is that the sample lacked breadth for certain sociodemographic characteristics, ethnicity in particular. People from minority ethnic backgrounds are frequently under-represented in research 29 and, while substantial effort was made to recruit people from a variety of ethnic backgrounds, this was not especially successful. Moreover, though a wide definition of DV was used (to include perpetrators who were other family members), the experiences captured were almost exclusively those of informal supporters of survivors of intimate partner violence. The reported findings relate specifically to this sample, so it is possible that the experiences of other people providing informal support to a survivor would differ.

A key strength of this study is the novelty of perspective because it accessed the experiences of informal supporters of survivors directly, which is vital in order to understand the wider context and implications of DV.

Research has drawn attention to the extent to which women experiencing violence seek support from their friends, colleagues and family members, and the advantages this can have for their well-being and safety. The impact that this has on the health and well-being of people providing informal support has previously been unexplored. Findings from this study indicate the physical, psychological and emotional impacts on people providing informal support, suggesting that this is a group of people who may be at risk of STS. In order to prevent and reduce these impacts, informal supporters of survivors would benefit from recognition of their predicament, and provision of support, so that their own well-being, quality of life, capacity and coping are not diminished. These findings have practical and policy implications, so that the experiences and needs of the full range of people in DV scenarios are legitimised and met.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge and sincerely thank all the participants who took part in this research.

Contributors: As part of her PhD, AG secured the funding, designed the reported study and carried out the data collection. AG analysed the data in collaboration with EW, AT and GF. AG wrote the first draft of the manuscript. All authors critically revised the manuscript and approved the final version.

Funding: This research was conducted as part of PhD study which was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research and was hosted by the University of Bristol.

Competing interests: None declared.

Ethics approval: Research Ethics Committee in the School for Policy Studies at the University of Bristol.

Provenance and peer review: Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Data sharing statement: No additional data are available.

153 Domestic Violence Topics & Essay Examples

A domestic violence essay can deal with society, gender, family, and youth. To help you decide which aspect to research, our team provided this list of 153 topics .

📑 Aspects to Cover in a Domestic Violence Essay

🏆 best domestic violence titles & essay examples, ⭐ interesting domestic violence topics for an essay, 🎓 good research topics about domestic violence, ❓ research questions on domestic violence.

Domestic violence is a significant problem and one of the acute topics of today’s society. It affects people of all genders and sexualities.

Domestic violence involves many types of abuse, including sexual and emotional one. Essays on domestic violence can enhance students’ awareness of the issue and its causes. Our tips will be useful for those wanting to write outstanding domestic violence essays.

Start with choosing a topic for your paper. Here are some examples of domestic violence essay titles:

• Causes of domestic violence and the ways to eliminate them
• The consequences of domestic violence
• The importance of public domestic violence speech
• Ways to reduce domestic violence
• The prevalence of domestic violence in the United States (or other countries)
• The link between domestic violence and mental health problems among children

Now that you have selected one of the titles for your essay, you can start working on the paper. We have prepared some tips on the aspects you should cover in your work:

• Start with researching the issue you have selected. Analyze its causes, consequences, and effects. Remember that you should include some of the findings in the paper using in-text citations.
• Develop a domestic violence essay outline. The structure of your paper will depend on the problem you have selected. In general, there should be an introductory and a concluding paragraph, as well as three (or more) body paragraphs. Hint: Keep in mind the purpose of your essay while developing its structure.
• Present your domestic violence essay thesis clearly. The last sentence of your introductory paragraph should be the thesis statement. Here are some examples of a thesis statement:

Domestic violence has a crucial impact on children’s mental health. / Domestic violence affects women more than men.

• Present a definition of domestic violence. What actions does the term involve? Include several possible perspectives on domestic violence.
• Discuss the victims of domestic violence and the impact it has on them too. Provide statistical data, if possible.
• Help your audience to understand the issue better by discussing the consequences of domestic violence, even if it is not the primary purpose of your paper. The essay should show why it is necessary to eliminate this problem.
• You can include some relevant quotes on domestic violence to make your arguments more persuasive. Remember to use citations from relevant sources only. Such sources include peer-reviewed articles and scholarly publications. If you are not sure whether you can use a piece of literature, consult your professor to avoid possible mistakes.
• Support your claims with evidence. Ask your professor in advance about the sources you can use in your paper. Avoid utilizing Wikipedia, as this website is not reliable.
• Stick to a formal language. Although you may want to criticize domestic violence, do not use offensive terms. Your paper should look professional.
• Pay attention to the type of paper you should write. If it is an argumentative essay, discuss opposing views on domestic violence and prove that they are unreliable.
• Remember that you should include a domestic violence essay conclusion in your paper too. This section of the paper should present your main ideas and findings. Remember not to present any new information or citations in the concluding paragraph.

There are some free samples we have prepared for you, too. Check them out!

• Domestic Violence and Conflict Theory in Society The Conflict Theory explains remarkable events in history and the changing patterns of race and gender relations and also emphasizes the struggles to explain the impact of technological development on society and the changes to […]
• Domestic Violence against Women Domestic violence against women refers to “any act of gender-based violence that results in or is likely to result in physical, sexual, and mental harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts as […]
• Break the Silence: Domestic Violence Case The campaign in question aimed to instruct victims of domestic violence on how to cope with the problem and where to address to get assistance.
• Domestic Violence and Repeat Victimisation Theory Domestic violence is a crime which often happens because of a bad relationship between a man and woman and usually continues to be repeated until one of the parties leaves the relationship; hence victims of […]
• Domestic Violence: Reason, Forms and Measures The main aim of this paper is to determine the reason behind the rapid increase of domestic violence, forms of domestic violence and measures that should be taken to reduce its effects.
• Behind Closed Doors: Domestic Violence The term “domestic violence” is used to denote the physical or emotional abuse that occurs in the homes. Therefore, it has contributed to the spread of domestic violence in the country.
• Annotated Bibliography on Domestic Violence Against Women They evaluate 134 studies from various countries that provide enough evidence of the prevalence of domestic violence against women and the adverse effects the vice has had for a decade.
• Alcohol and Domestic Violence in Day-To-Day Social Life My paper will have a comprehensive literature review that will seek to analyze the above topic in order to assist the reader understand the alcohol contributions in the domestic and social violence in our society.
• Domestic Violence Ethical Dilemmas in Criminal Justice Various ethical issues such as the code of silence, the mental status of the offender, and limited evidence play a vital role in challenging the discretion of police officers in arresting the DV perpetrators.
• What Causes Domestic Violence? Domestic abuse, which is also known as domestic violence, is a dominance of one family member over another or the other. As a result, the probability of them becoming abusers later in life is considerably […]
• Ambivalence on Part of the Police in Response to Domestic Violence The police have been accused of ambivalence by their dismissive attitudes and through sexism and empathy towards perpetrators of violence against women.
• Domestic Violence: Qualitative & Quantitative Research This research seeks to determine the impacts of domestic violence orders in reducing the escalating cases of family brutality in most households. N1: There is a significant relationship between domestic violence orders and the occurrence […]
• Effects of Domestic Violence on Children’s Social and Emotional Development In the case of wife-husband violence, always, one parent will be the offender and the other one the victim; in an ideal situation, a child needs the love of a both parents. When brought up […]
• Social Marketing Campaign on Domestic Violence In this marketing campaign strategy the focus would be centered on violence against women, as a form of domestic violence that is currently experience in many countries across the globe.
• Alcoholism, Domestic Violence and Drug Abuse Kaur and Ajinkya researched to investigate the “psychological impact of adult alcoholism on spouses and children”. The work of Kaur and Ajinkya, reveals a link between chronic alcoholism and emotional problems on the spouse and […]
• Supporting Female Victims of Domestic Violence and Abuse: NGO Establishment The presence of such a model continues to transform lives and make it easier for more women to support and provide basic education to their children.
• Substance Abuse and Domestic Violence: Comprehensive Discussion Substance abuse refers to the misuse of a drug or any other chemical resulting in its dependence, leading to harmful mental and physical effects to the individual and the wellbeing of the society.
• Domestic Violence in Marriage and Family While there are enormous reports of intimate partner homicides, murders, rapes, and assaults, it is important to note that victims of all this violence find it very difficult to explain the matter and incidents to […]
• Affordable, Effective Legal Assistance for Victims of Domestic Violence Legal assistance significantly increases the chances for domestic abuse victims to obtain restraining orders, divorce, and custody of their children. Helping victims of domestic violence with inexpensive legal aid is a critical step in assisting […]
• Domestic Violence: Far-Right Conspiracy Theory in Australia’s Culture Wars The phenomenon of violence is directly related to the violation of human rights and requires legal punishment for the perpetrators and support for the victims.
• Domestic Violence and Black Women’s Experiences Overall, the story’s exploration of the reality of life for an African American married woman in a patriarchal society, and the challenges faced by black women, is relevant to the broader reality of domestic violence […]
• Domestic Violence: Criminal Justice In addition, the usage of illegal substances such as bhang, cocaine, and other drugs contributes to the increasing DV in society.
• Witnessed Domestic Violence and Juvenile Detention Research The primary purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between witnessed domestic violence and juvenile detention. Research has pointed to a relationship between witnessed violence and juvenile delinquency, and this study holds that […]
• Domestic Violence Against Women in Melbourne Thus, it is possible to introduce the hypothesis that unemployment and related financial struggles determined by pandemic restrictions lead to increased rates of domestic violence against women in Melbourne.
• Domestic Violence and Its Main Signs In general, the providers should be able to identify the markers of abuse by paying closer attention to the people they serve, treat, teach, or work with.
• Intersectionality in Domestic Violence Another way an organization that serves racial minorities may address the unique needs of domestic violence victims is to offer additional educational and consultancy activities for women of color.
• Domestic Violence and Primordial Prevention In addition, the promotion of social norms against violence and increased penalties for domestic and sexual abuse need to be supported at the legislative level.
• Healthcare Testing of a Domestic Violence Victim Accordingly, the negative aspects of this exam include difficulties in identifying and predicting the further outcome of events and the course of side effects.
• Financial Insecurity: Impact on Domestic Violence Therefore, this problem is global and widespread, and it would be wrong to assume that spousal abuse only exists when couples are poor.
• Domestic Violence, Child Abuse, or Elder Abuse In every health facility, a nurse who notices the signs of abuse and domestic violence must report them to the relevant authorities.
• Educational Services for Children in Domestic Violence Shelters In order to meet the objectives of the research, Chanmugam et al.needed to reach out to the representatives of emergency domestic violence shelters located in the state of Texas well-aware of the shelters’ and schools’ […]
• The Domestic Violence Arrest Laws According to the National Institute of Justice, mandatory arrest laws are the most prevalent in US states, indicating a widespread agreement on their effectiveness.
• Environmental Scan for Hart City Domestic Violence Resource Center In particular, it identifies the target population, outlines the key resources, and provides an overview of data sources for assessing key factors and trends that may affect the Resource Center in the future.
• Domestic Violence Investigation Procedure If they claim guilty, the case is proceeded to the hearing to estimate the sentencing based on the defendant’s criminal record and the scope of assault. The issue of domestic abuse in households is terrifyingly […]
• Educational Group Session on Domestic Violence This will be the first counseling activity where the counselor assists the women to appreciate the concepts of domestic violence and the ways of identifying the various kinds of violence.
• Domestic Violence and COVID-19: Literature Review The “stay safe, stay at home” mantra used by the governments and public health organizations was the opposite of safety for the victims of domestic violence.
• Domestic Violence and COVID-19 in the United States Anurudran et al.argue that the new measures taken to fight COVID-19 infections heightened the risk of domestic abuse. The pandemic paradox: The consequences of COVID 19 on domestic violence.
• Rachel Louise Snyder’s Research on Domestic Violence Language and framing play a significant role in manipulating people’s understanding of domestic violence and the nature of the problem. However, it is challenging to gather precise data on the affected people and keep track […]
• Domestic Violence Prevention and Restraining Order Since upon the expiry of a restraining order, a victim can file a renewal petition the current task is to determine whether the original DVRO of our client has expired, the burden of obtaining a […]
• Domestic Violence Counselling Program Evaluation The evaluation will be based upon the mission of the program and the objectives it states for the participants. The counselors arrange treatment for both sides of the conflict: the victims and offenders, and special […]
• Domestic Violence and Suicide Risk Hence, considering these facts, it is necessary to put the notion of suicide risk in perspective when related to the issue of domestic violence.
• The Roles of Domestic Violence Advocates Domestic conflict advocates assist victims in getting the help needed to cope and move forward. Moreover, these advocates help the survivors in communicating to employers, family members, and lawyers.
• Domestic Violence and Home Visit Intervention As the study concludes, despite the increase in general awareness concerning domestic violence cases, it is still a significant threat to the victims and their children.
• Domestic Violence: How Is It Adressed? At this stage, when the family members of the battered women do this to them, it becomes the responsibility of the people to do something about this.
• Victimology and Domestic Violence In this situation there are many victims; Anne is a victim of domestic violence and the children are also victims of the same as well as the tragic death of their father.
• Domestic Violence Among Police Officers The objective of this research is to establish the level of domestic violence among police officers and relative the behavior to stress, divorce, police subculture, and child mistreatment.
• “The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment” by Sherman and Berk The experiment conducted by the authors throws light on the three stages of the research circle. This is one of the arguments that can be advanced.
• Domestic Violence and Diversion Strategies of Drug Offenders in Australian The article is very informative since outlines a couple of the reasons behind the rampant increase in cases of negligence and lack of concern, especially from the government.
• An Investigation on Domestic Violence This particular experiment aimed to evaluate the nature of relationship and the magnitude of domestic violence meted on either of the partners.
• Educational Program on Domestic Violence The reason why I have chosen this as the topic for my educational program is that victims of domestic violence often feel that they do not have any rights and hence are compelled to live […]
• Family and Domestic Violence: Enhancing Protective Factors Current partner Previous partner Percentage of children When children are exposed to violence, they encounter numerous difficulties in their various levels of development.
• Domestic Violence and Women in Abusive Relationships Despite the fact the author of the article discusses a controversial problem of domestic violence against women based on the data from recent researches and focusing on such causes for violence as the problematic economic […]
• Parenting in Battered Women: The Effects of Domestic Violence In this study, ‘Parenting in Battered Women: The Effects of Domestic Violence on Women and their Children,’ Alytia A. It is commendable that at this stage in stating the problem the journalists seek to conclude […]
• Domestic Violence Types and Causes This is acknowledged by the law in most countries of the world as one of the most brutal symbols of inequality.
• Power and Control: Domestic Violence in America The abusive spouse wants to feel powerful and in control of the family so he, usually the abusive spouse is the man, beats his wife and children to assert his superiority.
• Domestic or Intimate Partner Violence Intervention Purpose of the study: The safety promoting behavior of the abused women is to be increased using a telephone intervention. They were allocated to either of the groups by virtue of the week of enrolment […]
• Federal and State Legislative Action on Domestic Violence In 2004, the state of New York decided to look into some of the ways of preventing this form of domestic violence by forming an Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence in 2005, employers […]
• Environmental Trends and Conditions: Domestic Violence in the Workplace Despite the fact that on average the literacy rate and the rate of civilization in the world have been increasing in the past few decades, the statistics for domestic violence have been increasing on an […]
• Domestic Violence in the Organizations Despite the fact that on average the literacy rate and the rate of civilization in the world has been increasing in the past few decades, the statistics for domestic violence have been increasing on an […]
• Domestic Violence and Honor Killing Analysis Justice and gender equality are important aspects of the totality of mankind that measure social and economic development in the world. The cultural justification is to maintain the dignity and seniority framework of the family.
• Facts About Domestic Violence All aspects of the society – which starts from the smallest unit, that is the family, to the church and even to the government sectors are all keen on finding solutions on how to eliminate, […]
• One-Group Posttest-Only Design in the Context of Domestic Violence Problem This application must unveil the risks and their solutions by researching the variables and the threats to the validity of the research.
• Help-Seeking Amongst Women Survivors of Domestic Violence First, the article explains the necessity of the research conduction, which includes the relevance of the abuse problem and the drawbacks of solving and studying it.
• Domestic Violence as a Social Issue It is one of the main factors which stimulate the study’s conduction, and among the rest, one can also mention the number of unexplored violence questions yet to be answered.
• Reflections on Domestic Violence in the Case of Dr. Mile Crawford Nevertheless, the only way out of this situation is to escape and seek help from the legal system. From a personal standpoint, to help her would be the right thing to do.
• Gender Studies: Combating Domestic Violence The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed description of domestic violence, as well as the development of an action plan that can help in this situation.
• Domestic Violence Perpetration and Its Predictors The implementation of sound research can help in addressing the problem and decreasing the incidence of domestic violence, which will contribute to the development of American society.
• Domestic Violence Funding and Impact on Society The number of domestic violence cases in the US, both reported and unreported, is significant. The recent decision of Trump’s administration to reduce the expenses for domestic violence victims from $480,000,000 to $40,000,000 in the […]
• Domestic Violence and Millennium Development Goals As a result, a review of the potential of MDGs for resolving the issue needs to analyze the contribution of the goals to the resolution of the instances, consequences, and causes of DV.
• Campaign against Domestic Violence: Program Plan In addition, men who used to witness aggressive behavior at home or in the family as children, or learned about it from stories, are two times more disposed to practice violence against their partners than […]
• Domestic Violence and Bullying in Schools It also states the major variables related to bullying in schools. They will confirm that social-economic status, gender, and race can contribute to bullying in schools.
• Domestic Violence Within the US Military In most of the recorded domestic violence cases, females are mostly the victims of the dispute while the males are the aggressors of the violence.
• Domestic Violence and Married Couples’ Issues There are different types and causes of domestic violence, but the desire to take control over relationships is the most common cause.
• Domestic Violence Impact on Child Maltreatment Reporting The present research aims to address both the general population and social workers to examine the overall attitudes to the reporting of child maltreatment.
• Domestic Violence Management and Budget Cuts On the other hand, the allocation of financial resources with the focus on awareness campaigns has also led to a lack of financial support for centres that provide the frontline services to victims of domestic […]
• Domestic Violence and Its Impact on Victims This paper highlights some of the recent cases of the violence, the forms of abuse involved, and their overall impacts on the victims.
• Family and Domestic Violence Legislation in the US In fact, this law is a landmark pointing to the recognition of the concept of domestic violence at the legal level and acknowledging that it is a key problem of the society.
• Domestic Violence and Social Interventions In conclusion, social learning theory supports the idea that children have a high likelihood of learning and simulating domestic violence through experiences at home.
• Domestic Violence Victims’ Right to Sue Authorities Victims of child abuse and domestic violence have the right to seek legal recourse in case of violation of their rights.
• Domestic Violence and Child’s Brain Development The video “First Impressions: Exposure to Violence and a Child’s Developing Brain” answers some questions of the dependence of exposure to domestic violence and the development of brain structures of children. At the beginning of […]
• Local Domestic Violence Victim Resources in Kent The focus of this paper is to document the local domestic violence victim resources found within a community in Kent County, Delaware, and also to discuss the importance of these resources to the community.
• Domestic Violence Activism in Law and Society I also suppose that some of these people may start lifting their voices against the law, paying particular attention to the idea that it is theoretically allowable that the law can punish people for other […]
• Domestic Violence Abuse: Laws in Maryland The Peace and Protective Orders-Burden of Proof regulation in Maryland and the Violence against Women Act are some of the laws that have been created to deal with domestic violence.
• Theories of Domestic Violence It is important to point out that women have received the short end of the stick in regards to domestic violence. A third reason why people commit domestic violence according to the Family Violence Theory […]
• Domestic Violence in Australia: Policy Issue In this paper, DV in Australia will be regarded as a problem that requires policy decision-making, and the related terminology and theory will be used to gain insights into the reasons for the persistence of […]
• Nondiscriminatory Education Against Domestic Violence The recent event that prompted the proposed advocacy is the criticism of a banner that depicts a man as the victim of abuse.
• Domestic Violence in International Criminal Justice The United Nations organization is deeply concerned with the high level of violence experienced by women in the family, the number of women killed, and the latency of sexual violence.
• Project Reset and the Domestic Violence Court The majority of the decisions in courts are aimed to mitigate the effects of the strict criminal justice system of the United States.
• Same-Sex Domestic Violence Problem Domestic violence in gay or lesbian relationships is a serious matter since the rates of domestic violence in such relationships are almost equivalent to domestic violence in heterosexual relationships. There are a number of misconceptions […]
• Domestic, Dating and Sexual Violence Dating violence is the sexual or physical violence in a relationship which includes verbal and emotional violence. The rate of sexual violence in other nations like Japan and Ethiopia, range from 15 to 71 percent.
• Anger Management Counseling and Treatment of Domestic Violence by the Capital Area Michigan Works These aspects include: the problem that the program intends to solve, the results produced by the program, the activities of the program, and the resources that are used to achieve the overall goal.
• Understanding Women’s Responses to Domestic Violence The author’s research orientation is a mix of interpretive, positivism and critical science – interpretive in informing social workers or practitioners on how to enhance their effectiveness as they deal with cases related to violence […]
• Poverty and Domestic Violence It is based on this that in the next section, I have utilized my educational experience in order to create a method to address the issue of domestic violence from the perspective of a social […]
• Teenage Dating and Domestic Violence That is why it is important to report about the violence to the police and support groups in order to be safe and start a new life.
• National Coalition Against Domestic Violence In addition, NCADV hopes to make the public know that the symbol of the purple ribbon represents the mission of the organization, which is to bring peace to all American households.
• Evaluation of the Partnership Against Domestic Violence According to the official mission statement of the organization, PADV is aimed at improving the overall wellbeing of families all over the world and helping those that suffer from domestic violence The organization’s primary goal […]
• Cross-Cultural Aspects of Domestic Violence This is one of the limitations that should be taken account. This is one of the problems that should not be overlooked.
• Domestic Violence in the Lives of Women She gives particular focus on the social and traditional aspects of the community that heavily contribute to the eruption and sustenance of violence against women in households. In the part 1 of the book, Renzetti […]
• Financial Planning and Management for Domestic Violence Victims Acquisition of resources used in criminal justice require financial resources hence the need to manage the same so as to provide the best machines and equipments.
• Violence against Women: Domestic, National, and Global Rape as a weapon for the enemy Majority of cultures in war zones still accept and regard rape to be a weapon of war that an enemy should be punished with.
• Effects of Domestic Violence on Children Development In cases where children are exposed to such violence, then they become emotionally troubled: In the above, case them the dependent variable is children emotions while the independent variable is domestic violence: Emotions = f […]
• Evaluation of Anger Management Counseling and Treatment of Domestic Violence by the Capital Area Michigan Works These aspects include: the problem that the program intends to solve, the results produced by the program, the activities of the program, and the resources that are used to achieve the overall goal.
• Knowledge and Attitudes of Nurses Regarding Domestic Violence and Their Effect on the Identification of Battered Women In conducting this research, the authors sought the consent of the prospective participants where the purpose of the study was explained to participants and confidentiality of information to be collected was reassured.
• Domestic Violence Dangers Mount With Economic, Seasonal Pressures These variables are believed to be able to prompt the family to explore the experiences and meanings of stress and stress management.
• Impact of the Economic Status on Domestic Violence This article investigates the possible factors that may help in explaining the status of women who are homeless and their capacity to experience domestic violence.
• Dominance and “Power Plays” in Relationships to Assist Clients to Leave Domestic Violence According to psychologists, the problem of domestic violence is based on the fact that one partner needs to be in control of the other.
• Art Therapy With Women Who Have Suffered Domestic Violence One of the most significant benefits of art therapy is the fact the patients get to understand and interpret their own situations which puts them in a better position to creatively participate in own healing […]
• Collaborative Crisis Intervention at a Domestic Violence Shelter The first visit is meant to collect the information that the professional in domestic violence deem crucial concerning the precipitating incidence and history of violence.
• Domestic Violence Exposure in Colombian Adolescents In this topic, the authors intend to discover the extent of association of drug abuse to domestic violence exposure, violent and prosocial behavior among adolescents.
• Domestic Violence and Its Classification Sexual abuse is the other common form of maltreatment which is on the rise and refers to any circumstance in which force is utilized to get involvement in undesired intimate action. Emotional maltreatment entails inconsistent […]
• Domestic Violence and Social Initiatives in Solving the Problem The absence of the correct social programs at schools and the lack of desire of government and police to pay more attention to the prevention of the problem while it is not too late are […]
• Domestic Violence in the African American Community Previous research has suggested this due to the many causes and effects that are experienced by the members and especially the male members of the African American community.
• Domestic Violence: Predicting and Solutions There are several factors which predict the state of domestic violence in the future and this will help in preventing domestic violence.
• Domestic Violence: Signs of Abuse and Abusive Relationships The unprecedented rejuvenation of such a vile act, prompted the formation of factions within society, that are sensitive to the plight of women, and fight for the cognizance of their rights in society.
• Domestic Violence against South Asian Women Again, this strategy is premised on the idea that domestic violence can be explained by the financial dependence of women in these communities.
• The Effects of Domestic Violence According to statistics and research provided in the handout, women are at a higher risk of being victims of domestic violence.
• Effect of Domestic Violence on Children This is done with the aim of ensuring that the child is disciplined and is meant as a legitimate punishment. Most of our children have been neglected and this has contributed to the increase in […]
• Domestic Violence and Elderly Abuse- A Policy Statement Though this figure has been changing with the change in the method of survey that was conducted and the nature of samples that were taken during the research process, it is widely accepted fact that […]
• Domestic Violence as a Social and Public Health Problem The article, authored by Lisa Simpson Strange, discusses the extent of domestic violence especially in women and the dangers it exposes the victims to, insisting that severe actions should be taken against those who commit […]
• Guilty until Proven Otherwise: Domestic Violence Cases The presumption of the guilt of a man in domestic violence cases is further proven by the decision of the court in which the man is required to post a bond despite the fact that […]
• Community and Domestic Violence: Elder Abuse In addition, the fact the elderly people cannot defend themselves because of the physical frailty that they encounter, they will experience most of the elderly abuse.
• Community and Domestic Violence; Gang Violence Solitude, peer pressure, need to belong, esteem, and the excitement of the odds of arrest entice adolescents to join these youth gangs.
• Fighting Domestic Violence in Pocatello, Idaho Having realized the need to involve the family unit in dealing with this vice, Walmart has organized a sensitization program that will involve the education of whole family to increase awareness on the issue. The […]
• What Is the Purpose of Studying Domestic Violence?
• What Does Theory Explain Domestic Violence?
• What Is the Difference Between IPV and Domestic Violence?
• What Age Group Does Domestic Violence Affect Most?
• When Domestic Violence Becomes the Norm?
• How Are Domestic Violence Problems Solved in American and Other Cultures?
• What Are the 3 Phases in the Domestic Violence Cycle?
• How Can Domestic Violence Be Explained?
• How Many Deaths Are Caused by Domestic Violence?
• When Was Domestic Violence First Defined?
• How Is a Domestic Violence Prevention?
• How Race, Class, and Gender Influences Domestic Violence?
• Why Do Victims of Abuse Sometimes Stay Silent?
• How Does Domestic Violence Affect the Brain?
• Is Mental Illness Often Associated With Domestic Violence?
• How Does Domestic Violence Affect a Person Emotionally?
• How Does Domestic Violence Affect Children’s Cognitive Development?
• Why Should Employers Pay Attention to Domestic Violence?
• What Are the Causes of Domestic Violence?
• What Country Has the Highest Rate of Domestic Violence?
• How Does Domestic Violence Affect the Lives of Its Victims?
• What Are the Possible Causes and Signs of Domestic Violence?
• How Does Socioeconomic Status Affect Domestic Violence?
• How Does the Australian Criminal Justice System Respond to Domestic Violence?
• How Does Culture Affect Domestic Violence in the UK?
• What Is the Psychology of an Abuser?
• What Is Police Doing About Domestic Violence?
• How Does the Government Define Domestic Violence?
• What Profession Has the Highest Rate of Domestic Violence?
• What Percent of Domestic Violence Is Alcohol-Related?
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, February 26). 153 Domestic Violence Topics & Essay Examples. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/domestic-violence-essay-examples/

"153 Domestic Violence Topics & Essay Examples." IvyPanda , 26 Feb. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/topic/domestic-violence-essay-examples/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '153 Domestic Violence Topics & Essay Examples'. 26 February.

IvyPanda . 2024. "153 Domestic Violence Topics & Essay Examples." February 26, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/domestic-violence-essay-examples/.

1. IvyPanda . "153 Domestic Violence Topics & Essay Examples." February 26, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/domestic-violence-essay-examples/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "153 Domestic Violence Topics & Essay Examples." February 26, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/topic/domestic-violence-essay-examples/.

• Family Problems Questions
• Child Abuse Essay Topics
• Children’s Rights Research Ideas
• Bullying Research Topics
• Childcare Research Topics
• Youth Violence Research Topics
• Abuse Research Topics
• Family Relationships Research Ideas
• Alcohol Abuse Paper Topics
• Drug Abuse Research Topics
• Child Welfare Essay Ideas
• Childhood Essay Topics
• Sexual Abuse Essay Titles
• Divorce Research Ideas
• Gender Stereotypes Essay Titles

Domestic violence survivors seek homeless services from a system that often leaves them homeless

Published: Apr 11, 2024

By: Magazine Editor

Written by Nkiru Nnawulezi , associate professor of psychology at UMBC, and Lauren Cattaneo , George Mason University

About 1 in every 3 women, and 1 in 4 men, will experience domestic violence over their lifetime. Since domestic violence can escalate to the point of serious injury or murder, survivors must take action to increase their safety – potentially even fleeing their homes.

Of the total homicides that occurred in the U.S. in 2020, 34% of women and 6% of men were murdered by their intimate partners .

Research has clearly shown the connection between domestic violence and homelessness. For example, a California study found that domestic violence survivors were four times more likely to experience housing instability compared with those who hadn’t experienced domestic violence.

We are two psychologists based in Washington D.C., who study the experiences, struggles and strengths of domestic violence survivors.

In Washington, 1 in 4 people experiencing homelessness report a history of domestic violence, with nearly half citing it as the direct reason for their homelessness .

Domestic violence and housing instability

Housing instability brings its own set of problems for survivors, including poor health , economic insecurity and the risk of future violence . These stresses can lead survivors back to the abusive relationship or into other unsafe housing situations.

Because the vicious cycle between domestic violence and housing instability is well known, domestic violence experts have argued for policies to provide quick, specialized assistance for survivors who seek emergency housing support .

Too often, however, these policies fall flat. Our 2018-2019 study of domestic violence survivors in the city’s services for homelessness found that out of 41 participants, only four received immediate housing , with either a bed in a shelter or a hotel.

We collaborate with domestic violence advocates and attorneys as members of the Domestic Violence Action Research Collective , a project of the DC Coalition Against Domestic Violence . This group collectively decides on research questions through discussions about what hinders community practitioners’ ability to support domestic violence survivors.

Domestic violence advocates and attorneys in our group alerted us to repeated stories about how the district government’s homelessness services system was failing survivors. The group designed a study to find out why.

Survivors’ access to homelessness services

From May 2018 to May 2019, our team recruited study participants in the waiting room of the Virginia Williams Family Resource Center , which is the gateway for families needing emergency housing in Washington.

Of 779 clients we screened, 183 responded that domestic violence was the reason for their housing instability; 41 of those agreed to interviews about their experiences accessing homelessness services.

A Washington law states that survivors of domestic violence do not have to prove their residency in the district in order to be eligible for homeless services. Policy also dictates that survivors should be asked questions to sensitively assess their circumstances and should meet with an on-site domestic violence housing coordinator to connect them with resources.

Instead of receiving this specialized assistance, many of our participants said they found the intake process confusing and unpredictable. Almost half said they waited more than three hours to meet with staff, sometimes only to find out they needed different information to prove eligibility and would have to restart the process another day.

Participants told us that they hesitated to disclose their domestic violence experiences to staff and described inconsistent responses when they did. Of 20 participants who said they did disclose experiences with domestic violence during their intake, only 11 said they were asked about their experiences by staff, and only two met with the domestic violence specialist at the facility. Several participants shared that when they revealed experiences of domestic violence, staff members simply moved on without asking for further details.

The lack of assistance in response to the disclosure of domestic violence left many participants in distress. As one participant described it: “I left feeling discouraged and embarrassed that I told all of these people I did not know my business, just for them to say it wasn’t good enough.”

The impact of homelessness services on survivors

Many participants felt that staff ignored their safety concerns, especially when staff insisted that survivors stay with friends, family or their abusive partner, rather than using public resources. Participants said that staff sometimes even contacted those individuals without survivors’ knowledge.

Only 22 of our 41 participants were deemed eligible for services. Four received immediate shelter. Eighteen participants received referrals to public or private sources of housing assistance, or both, but too often these resources were also dead ends. Participants were put on long waitlists, landlords didn’t accept vouchers, or referral options were not responsive to participants’ immediate needs.

For example, a frequent referral was “rapid rehousing” – a program that provides governmental rental subsidies for up to one year, after which people must pay their own rent. Survivors who are eligible for rapid rehousing must find affordable housing in the district, which is a formidable obstacle to program effectiveness.

As one survivor put it: “Where am I going to be able to rent at, that’s not a slumlord, or not in certain dangerous neighborhoods? I’m looking for safety. Running to safety doesn’t mean that I’m trying to run into harm.”

The 19 survivors ineligible for services were given varied reasons, often involving their inability to prove they were homeless. Ten participants told us that at the time they left Virginia Williams, they and their children had nowhere to go. Leaving without assistance prompted difficult choices, including maxing out credit cards to stay in hotels or begging to stay with family and friends in conditions that created new problems.

Some of the people we interviewed believed that the denial of assistance was due to racist and classist stereotypes of Black women seeking to “exploit the system.” Given that 39 of the 41 participants in this study were Black, as was the majority of the clientele at the center, we believe the possibility that racial bias influenced the frequent denial of services is significant.

Underserving domestic violence survivors

If we focus just on the interaction between staff and participants, the simplest interpretation of these results could be that staff are uninformed, unfeeling or both. Or one might wonder whether something is amiss with the survivors seeking assistance – that they are being turned away because they are not following the right steps to receive help.

We believe those interpretations miss the larger context: In our estimation, these interactions are the predictable result of service providers and survivors trying to function within an unworkable system in a context that has very little housing support available to the community.

The need at housing programs in our area dramatically outstrips capacity. This drives survivors who lack resources into an unaffordable rental market, setting off a series of cascading problems. There is a disproportionate impact on communities already subject to structural and interpersonal discrimination, such as the Black women in our study.

Our study shows that this translates into a system that is more focused on determining eligibility than determining needs and restricting spending rather than increasing survivors’ safety, because staff are in the unenviable position of meting out insufficient assistance to many desperate people.

These interactions leave many without good options. One of the participants we interviewed summed up her experience this way: “I was upset. I was discouraged. And it just left me with the thought, well, maybe I’m not in so much danger. Maybe I can just stick it out a little bit longer, just try not to make him upset or anything. I was just trying to make it the best that I could.”

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Tags: CAHSS , CAHSS_research , Psychology , Research

Related Posts

• Science & Tech

First data from UMBC’s HARP2 instrument on NASA PACE mission goes public

• Perspectives

Bollywood is playing a large supporting role in India’s elections

Chinese migration to US is nothing new – but the reasons for recent surge at Southern border are

Search UMBC Search

• Accreditation
• Consumer Information
• Equal Opportunity
• Privacy PDF Download
• Web Accessibility

Search UMBC.edu

Safety Starts with Anti-Racism. Click here to read more.

Understanding the Intersections

Interpersonal violence is a leading cause of homelessness for women and children, and the need for safe and affordable housing is one of the most pressing concerns for survivors of violence and abuse. Many survivors face unique barriers to accessing shelter and affordable housing due to the power and control dynamics involved in these types of abuse and the economic and trauma impacts that result. These barriers are often exacerbated for those most marginalized in our society and with the least access to resources, including many survivors of color, Native Americans, immigrants, those living in poverty and geographically isolated, survivors with disabilities, and others. In addition, systemic factors such as institutional discrimination and the lack of affordable housing in communities create further challenges for many survivors. At the same time, housing programs can provide critical services for survivors and are often a key component in helping survivors find safety and stability.

  = web resource       = downloadable file

Learn more about the intersections between domestic violence, sexual assault, housing, and homelessness from available studies, literature reviews, and reports.

RESEARCH BRIEF: 'There's Just All These Moving Parts:' Helping Domestic Violence Survivors Obtain Housing

Advocates working with domestic violence (DV) survivors to obtain housing are committed to the principles of Housing First and Rapid Rehousing that recommend getting clients into permanent housing as quickly as possible. They struggle, however, with how “as quickly as possible” may be defined by funders and policy makers who do not fully understand the intricacies of their efforts. The purpose of this study was to better understand the complexities involved in helping IPV survivors obtain safe and stable housing.

RESEARCH BRIEF: IPV Survivors' Perceptions of How a Flexible Funding Housing Intervention Impacted Their Children

An estimated 15.5 million American children are exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV) every year. Such exposure negatively impacts children’s health, development and academic performance and may also be accompanied by housing instability or homelessness. Children growing up with periods of homelessness or housing instability are at risk for many of the same detrimental outcomes as children exposed to IPV. This brief highlights key findings from a qualitative, longitudinal study examining mothers’ perceptions of how receipt of flexible funding designed to increase their housing stability may have also impacted their children’s safety, stress, mood and behavior.

Common Ground, Complementary Approaches: Adapting the Housing First Model for Domestic Violence Survivors

The Housing First model has been shown to be a highly effective approach to achieving permanent housing for chronically homeless individuals with serious mental illness and chemical dependency. There are numerous components of the model that lend themselves toward achieving similar goals for homeless domestic violence (DV) survivors and their children. A leading cause of homelessness for women, many of whom are mothers, is DV. This article describes the commonalities between the Housing First model and the tenets of DV victim advocacy work and explores how Housing First can be adapted to effectively achieve safe and stable housing for DV survivors and their children. Preliminary evidence for the adapted model – termed Domestic Violence Housing First – is provided, and policy implications are discussed.

Creating Safe Housing Options for Survivors: Learning From and Expanding Research

This research brief provides a brief overview of the current and expanding evidence behind best practices in helping domestic violence survivors obtain safe and stable housing. It begins with evidence for three common core components of this work: mobile advocacy, flexible funding, and attending to safety. It then provides evidence for how services should be provided: survivor-driven, trauma-informed, and voluntary.

Flexible Funding: Assessing the Impact of DASH’s Survivor Resilience Fund on Survivor Well-Being

Describes results of an evaluation of DASH's Survivor Resilience Fund, a low-barrier and trauma informed approach to homelessness prevention for survivors.

From Organizational Culture to Survivor Outcomes: A Process And Outcome Evaluation Of The District Alliance For Safe Housing

The District Alliance for Safe Housing (DASH) is a large, community-based organization located in Washington, D.C. It aims to provide services that promote self-determination, autonomy and safety for all survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV), sexual assault, sex trafficking, same-sex IPV, and homelessness. DASH also engages in systems advocacy to increase survivors’ safe housing options throughout the housing continuum. DASH uses low-barrier, voluntary, trauma-informed approaches to service delivery in order to enact their core beliefs:integrity, sovereignty, empowerment, accountability, partnerships, compassion, and re-centering. In 2013, evaluators from Michigan State University’s Research Consortium on Gender Based Violence collaborated with DASH to implement a process and outcome evaluation of DASH's program model. This document summarizes their findings.

A Promising Approach to Prevent Homelessness for Domestic Violence Survivors

This presentation describes how flexible funds are employed in a DV housing program in Washington DC as a means to prevent homelessness for survivors. Further, it discusses the elements and results of a longitudinal pilot study that tested whether this project (DASH's Survivor Resiliency Fund) represents a promising strategy to prevent homelessness for survivors of intimate partner violence.

Establishing Domestic Violence Housing First in California: A Process Evaluation

In 2016, 8 agencies in California piloted the Domestic Violence Housing First Model (DVHF), an initiative that focuses on helping survivors get into safe and stable housing as quickly as possible, and on providing services to help them move forward with their lives. This process evaluation documents what it takes for agencies to implement the DVHF model and provides preliminary evidence for its impact on the lives of survivors and their children.

TECHNICAL REPORT: Exploring Domestic Violence Survivors' Need for Transitional Housing

One approach for DV survivors who require housing assistance and supportive services for a longer period of time is transitional housing (TH), which provides an apartment or rental unit, along with rental assistance and supportive services for up to two years, allowing survivors time to work on any barriers they face to securing permanent housing and to heal from the trauma they have experienced. Another approach for DV survivors is rapid re-housing (RRH), which allows DV survivors to locate their own apartment and to receive rental assistance and supportive services for a period of time.This study explored the ways in which DV survivors experienced a TH program that they were currently enrolled in, as well as their perceptions about whether RRH would have been a good fit for them given different durations of rental assistance and supportive services.

2017 Safe Housing Needs Assessment: Results Overview

In 2017, the National Alliance for Safe Housing, in collaboration with the Domestic Violence and Housing TA Consortium and other key partners, developed and disseminated a national Safe Housing Needs Assessment to gather input from community service providers, coalitions and continuums of care. This assessment -- the first of its kind -- aimed at simultaneously reaching the domestic and sexual violence field and the homeless and housing field. It gathered information on topics ranging from the extent to which both fields coordinate to provide safety and access to services for domestic and sexual violence survivors within the homeless system, to ways in which programs are implementing innovative models to promote long-term housing stability for survivors and their families. This report provides an overview of the key findings from the 2,000+ people who participated in the needs assessment.

Housing Barriers and Emerging Practices to Centering Survivors: Findings from the NRCDV Needs Assessment

In 2022, NRCDV conducted a Needs Assessment project to document the current and emerging barriers to safe, stable, and accessible housing for BIPOC survivors, as well as the innovative practices implemented by grassroots organizations and community-based agencies to address survivors' housing needs. It included a desk review, listening sessions with service providers and survivor-advocates, and interviews with researchers. 

Needs Assessment Report: Promising Practices and Interventions to Address the Housing Needs of Domestic Violence Survivors

The National Resource Center on Domestic Violence (NRCDV) conducted a two-part needs assessment project. The first part of the assessment documented domestic violence survivors' current and emerging housing needs, centering on the perspectives of marginalized populations, particularly Black and Brown communities. The second part of the assessment documented the innovative practices, promising housing approaches, and interventions implemented in the field by grassroots organizations and community-based agencies to address the housing needs of survivors. 

Viviendo Con Dignidad: Las Experiencias de Sobrevivientes Latinas Inmigrantes (Infograph)

Lecciones aprendidas de una investigación participativa de base comunitaria. El equipo de investigación fue formado por personas de una organización de base comunitaria y otras personas de una institución académica.Todos los procedimientos del estudio, incluyendo la recopilación de datos, análisis e interpretación de datos se realizaron en español.

This infograph highlights the lessons learned from the community-based participatory research study Viviendo Con Dignidad: Las Experiencias de Sobrevivientes Latinas Inmigrantes" (Translation: Living with Dignity: Lived Experiences of Latina Immigrant Survivors). The research team was made up of people from community-based organizations and others from academic institutions. All study procedures, including data collection, data analysis, and interpretation were conducted in Spanish. The study and infograph were then translated into English. 

Viviendo Con Dignidad: Las Experiencias de Sobrevivientes Latinas Inmigrantes

Este informe es una construcción colectiva de conocimiento en la que articulamos la sabiduría de un grupo de mujeres sobrevivientes de violencia de género de una organización de base comunitaria desde sus propias vivencias junto con los conocimientos metodológicos de un equipo de investigación académico. Es nuestra intención reconocer la capacidad y el poder profundo de los grupos comunitarios de crear conocimiento, como también resaltar nuestro compromiso con estudios de investigación que no son extractivistas del conocimiento y el saber de las comunidades de la mayoría global a través de procesos de investigación participativa. Nuestra colaboración es entre Madre Tierra, una organización Latina de base comunitaria que provee servicios de apoyo a sobrevivientes de violencia de género en Virginia, Maryland y Washington DC y la División de Justicia Lingüística del Consorcio de Investigación en Violencia de Género de la Universidad Estatal de Michigan.

Process Evaluation of a Flexible Funding Pilot Program to Prevent Homelessness among BIPOC and LGBTQ+ Survivors (Report)

The LGBT Center of Central Pennsylvania (PA) received funding from the National Resource Center on Domestic Violence (NRCDV) to pilot a flexible financial assistance model. This process evaluation was undertaken to document the organization's background and service model, what it takes for the organization to implement the flexible financial assistance model, and to provide preliminary evidence for its impact on the lives of BIPOC and LGBTQ+ survivors. This report summarizes the findings from this evaluation to offer guidance to other organizations. This includes the challenges encountered and lessons learned in the implementation process along with preliminary evidence of the success of the flexible financial assistance model. 

Process Evaluation of a Flexible Funding Pilot Program to Prevent Homelessness among BIPOC and LGBTQ+ Survivors (Infograph)

This infograph highlights the information presented within the report titled "Process Evaluation of a Flexible Funding Pilot Program to Prevent Homelessness among BIPOC and LGBTQ+ Survivors". It identifies what the guiding principles of flexible funding are, how funds were distributed, outcomes, and lessons learned from the evaluation. 

The State of Homelessness in America 2016

The State of Homelessness in America 2016 is the sixth in a series of reports charting progress in ending homelessness in the United States. It is intended to serve as a desktop reference for policymakers, journalists, and community and state leaders.

Out of Reach 2018: The High Cost of Housing

NLIHC’s annual report, Out of Reach, documents the gap between wages and the price of housing across the United States. The report’s Housing Wage is an estimate of the hourly wage that a full-time worker must earn to afford a modest and safe rental home without spending more than 30% of his or her income on rent and utility costs. The report indicates that housing costs are "out of reach" for both for the average renter and for millions of low-wage workers, seniors and people with disabilities living on fixed incomes, and other low-income households. In no county, even those where the minimum wage has been set above the federal level, can a minimum wage renter working a 40-hour work week afford a modest two-bedroom rental unit. 

Downtown Women's Needs Assessment

The 2016 Downtown Womens' Needs Assessment is a community-based research project, and the sixth in a series of comprehensive surveys on the needs, characteristics, and conditions facing homeless and extremely low-income women living in downtown Los Angeles.

Domestic Violence and Homeless Services Coalition Focus Group Report: Survivor Solutions to Program and Systems Change

In Los Angeles County, the number of women experiencing homelessness increased by a staggering 55% between 2013 and 2016. Research shows that domestic violence is a primary driver into homelessness for women and that gender-based violence is the most significant difference between men and women experiencing homelessness. The purpose of this report is to give voice to the opinions and perspectives of those with lived experience to guide client-centered systems change and develop coordinated community responses that meet the direct needs of this population.

Housing & Sexual Violence Research Brief

This research brief explores the relationship between housing issues, homelessness, and sexual violence. The research reviewed indicates that residents of subsidized housing and people who are homeless experience disproportionate rates of sexual violence.

Women Need Safe, Stable, Affordable Housing: A Study of Social, Private and Co-op Housing in Winnipeg

This study looked at gender-specific issues related to housing programs in Winnipeg, Canada. Among other findings, safety was a key concern among women looking for housing. Researchers noted that many women have experienced domestic violence in their homes, and that women are more likely to stay in unsafe situations because of their inability to find other housing. Women in the study described having experienced sexual harassment from landlords, and reported that safety features such as lighting sensors and cameras in stairwells and elevators made them feel safer. The authors strongly recommend implementation of gender-based analysis in all housing policies and programs, and note that cooperative (shared) housing is greatly assistive to women with low incomes.

RESEARCH: Moving from Rhetoric to Reality: Adapting Housing First for Homeless Individuals with Mental Illness from Ethno-racial Groups

This research paper presents findings from an evaluation of a Housing First program for homeless individuals with mental illness in five cities across Canada. Conclusions from this research include that adapting Housing First with anti-racism/anti-oppression principles offers a promising approach to serving the diverse needs of homeless people from ethno-racial groups and strengthening the service systems developed to support them.

RESEARCH: Housing First Enhanced with Antiracism Practices Can Improve Housing Stability

Because of known differences in health care experiences and outcomes by race and ethnicity, researchers in Toronto tested the effectiveness of a Housing First program enhanced with antiracism and antioppression practices. The main principles of the antiracism and antioppression services delivered include empowerment, education, alliance building, language use, and advocacy. The study’s findings have key policy implications for Housing First interventions and suggest that Housing First enhanced with anti-racism and anti-oppression practices can improve housing stability and community functioning.

NRCDV 2022 Policy Brief: Emerging Solutions to Increase Affordable Housing Options for Survivors

This document covers the common barriers and challenges survivors have brought forth related to accessing housing security. It provides concrete steps and policy solutions that seeks to shift the landscape of housing access, inventory, and sustainability.

• DV, SV, & Homelessness
• Equity & Accessibility
• Featured Research
• District Alliance for Safe Housing and the Domestic Violence and Housing Taskforce
• Kentucky Coalition Against Domestic Violence Rapid Rehousing Program
• Emergency Shelters
• Transitional Housing
• Responding to Funder Requirements
• Partnering with and Participating in Homeless Continuums of Care
• Coordinated Entry and Intake/Assessment Tools
• HMIS and Comparable Databases
• Rapid Re-Housing, Housing First, Housing Tax Credits, and Other A
• Low Barrier Programs
• Building Collaborative Relationships to Address Family Homelessness
• Flexible Funds
• Homelessness Prevention
• Federal, State, and Local Laws and Protections
• Confidentiality and Safety
• Voluntary Services and Trauma-Informed Approaches
• Working with Underserved or Marginalized Survivors
• Economic Advocacy and Empowerment
• Children and Youth
• Survivor Toolkits
• Advocate Toolkits
• Technical Assistance
• About The Consortium

Domestic violence survivors seek homeless services from a system that often leaves them homeless

Associate Professor of Community Psychology, University of Maryland, Baltimore County

Associate Professor of Clinical Psychology, George Mason University

Disclosure statement

Nkiru Nnawulezi has received from the National Institute of Health, Office of Family Violence Prevention and Services, and the Center for Victim Research.

Lauren Cattaneo has received funding from the Spencer Foundation New Civics Initiative, and the Center for Victim Research, Office of Victims of Crime, US Department of Justice.

University of Maryland, Baltimore County provides funding as a member of The Conversation US.

View all partners

About 1 in every 3 women, and 1 in 4 men, will experience domestic violence over their lifetime. Since domestic violence can escalate to the point of serious injury or murder, survivors must take action to increase their safety – potentially even fleeing their homes.

Of the total homicides that occurred in the U.S. in 2020, 34% of women and 6% of men were murdered by their intimate partners .

Research has clearly shown the connection between domestic violence and homelessness. For example, a California study found that domestic violence survivors were four times more likely to experience housing instability compared with those who hadn’t experienced domestic violence.

We are two psychologists based in Washington D.C., who study the experiences, struggles and strengths of domestic violence survivors.

In Washington, 1 in 4 people experiencing homelessness report a history of domestic violence, with nearly half citing it as the direct reason for their homelessness .

Domestic violence and housing instability

Housing instability brings its own set of problems for survivors, including poor health , economic insecurity and the risk of future violence . These stresses can lead survivors back to the abusive relationship or into other unsafe housing situations.

Because the vicious cycle between domestic violence and housing instability is well known, domestic violence experts have argued for policies to provide quick, specialized assistance for survivors who seek emergency housing support .

Too often, however, these policies fall flat. Our 2018-2019 study of domestic violence survivors in the city’s services for homelessness found that out of 41 participants, only four received immediate housing , with either a bed in a shelter or a hotel.

We collaborate with domestic violence advocates and attorneys as members of the Domestic Violence Action Research Collective , a project of the DC Coalition Against Domestic Violence . This group collectively decides on research questions through discussions about what hinders community practitioners’ ability to support domestic violence survivors.

Domestic violence advocates and attorneys in our group alerted us to repeated stories about how the district government’s homelessness services system was failing survivors. The group designed a study to find out why.

Survivors’ access to homelessness services

From May 2018 to May 2019, our team recruited study participants in the waiting room of the Virginia Williams Family Resource Center , which is the gateway for families needing emergency housing in Washington.

Of 779 clients we screened, 183 responded that domestic violence was the reason for their housing instability; 41 of those agreed to interviews about their experiences accessing homelessness services.

A Washington law states that survivors of domestic violence do not have to prove their residency in the district in order to be eligible for homeless services. Policy also dictates that survivors should be asked questions to sensitively assess their circumstances and should meet with an on-site domestic violence housing coordinator to connect them with resources.

Instead of receiving this specialized assistance, many of our participants said they found the intake process confusing and unpredictable. Almost half said they waited more than three hours to meet with staff, sometimes only to find out they needed different information to prove eligibility and would have to restart the process another day.

Participants told us that they hesitated to disclose their domestic violence experiences to staff and described inconsistent responses when they did. Of 20 participants who said they did disclose experiences with domestic violence during their intake, only 11 said they were asked about their experiences by staff, and only two met with the domestic violence specialist at the facility. Several participants shared that when they revealed experiences of domestic violence, staff members simply moved on without asking for further details.

The lack of assistance in response to the disclosure of domestic violence left many participants in distress. As one participant described it: “I left feeling discouraged and embarrassed that I told all of these people I did not know my business, just for them to say it wasn’t good enough.”

The impact of homelessness services on survivors

Many participants felt that staff ignored their safety concerns, especially when staff insisted that survivors stay with friends, family or their abusive partner, rather than using public resources. Participants said that staff sometimes even contacted those individuals without survivors’ knowledge.

Only 22 of our 41 participants were deemed eligible for services. Four received immediate shelter. Eighteen participants received referrals to public or private sources of housing assistance, or both, but too often these resources were also dead ends. Participants were put on long waitlists, landlords didn’t accept vouchers, or referral options were not responsive to participants’ immediate needs.

For example, a frequent referral was “rapid rehousing” – a program that provides governmental rental subsidies for up to one year, after which people must pay their own rent. Survivors who are eligible for rapid rehousing must find affordable housing in the district, which is a formidable obstacle to program effectiveness.

As one survivor put it: “Where am I going to be able to rent at, that’s not a slumlord, or not in certain dangerous neighborhoods? I’m looking for safety. Running to safety doesn’t mean that I’m trying to run into harm.”

The 19 survivors ineligible for services were given varied reasons, often involving their inability to prove they were homeless. Ten participants told us that at the time they left Virginia Williams, they and their children had nowhere to go. Leaving without assistance prompted difficult choices, including maxing out credit cards to stay in hotels or begging to stay with family and friends in conditions that created new problems.

Some of the people we interviewed believed that the denial of assistance was due to racist and classist stereotypes of Black women seeking to “exploit the system.” Given that 39 of the 41 participants in this study were Black, as was the majority of the clientele at the center, we believe the possibility that racial bias influenced the frequent denial of services is significant.

Underserving domestic violence survivors

If we focus just on the interaction between staff and participants, the simplest interpretation of these results could be that staff are uninformed, unfeeling or both. Or one might wonder whether something is amiss with the survivors seeking assistance – that they are being turned away because they are not following the right steps to receive help.

We believe those interpretations miss the larger context: In our estimation, these interactions are the predictable result of service providers and survivors trying to function within an unworkable system in a context that has very little housing support available to the community.

The need at housing programs in our area dramatically outstrips capacity. This drives survivors who lack resources into an unaffordable rental market, setting off a series of cascading problems. There is a disproportionate impact on communities already subject to structural and interpersonal discrimination, such as the Black women in our study.

Our study shows that this translates into a system that is more focused on determining eligibility than determining needs and restricting spending rather than increasing survivors’ safety, because staff are in the unenviable position of meting out insufficient assistance to many desperate people.

These interactions leave many without good options. One of the participants we interviewed summed up her experience this way: “I was upset. I was discouraged. And it just left me with the thought, well, maybe I’m not in so much danger. Maybe I can just stick it out a little bit longer, just try not to make him upset or anything. I was just trying to make it the best that I could.”

• Domestic violence
• Social services
• Homelessness
• Unaffordable housing
• Housing shortage
• Domestic violence shelter
• domestic violence survivors

Senior Enrolment Advisor

Associate Professor, Occupational Therapy

GRAINS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CHAIRPERSON

Faculty of Law - Academic Appointment Opportunities

Audience Development Coordinator (fixed-term maternity cover)

Read our research on: Gun Policy | International Conflict | Election 2024

Regions & Countries

Political typology quiz.

Notice: Beginning April 18th community groups will be temporarily unavailable for extended maintenance. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Where do you fit in the political typology?

Are you a faith and flag conservative progressive left or somewhere in between.

Take our quiz to find out which one of our nine political typology groups is your best match, compared with a nationally representative survey of more than 10,000 U.S. adults by Pew Research Center. You may find some of these questions are difficult to answer. That’s OK. In those cases, pick the answer that comes closest to your view, even if it isn’t exactly right.

About Pew Research Center Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of The Pew Charitable Trusts .