Identifying the Barriers to Women's Agency in Domestic Violence: The Tensions between Women's Personal Experiences and Systemic Responses

Abstract

Despite advances in knowledge and understanding about the impacts of domestic violence on women's lives, global research on violence against women shows there is a need for research that not only places women centre stage in research praxis, but also that involves them more collaboratively in genuine dialogue about their experiences, including their agentic stances. This is especially the case for marginalised and socially excluded women victims of domestic violence, such as those who are not known or do not present to services and who survive abusive relationships alone or with little outside support. Evidence from two studies reported here—secondary analysis of women with severe and enduring mental health problems and a collaborative narrative project with unsupported women victims of domestic violence—suggest that women's capacity for agency are compromised by a number of critical factors, and that these are also reflected in the tensions between micro–macro analyses and understanding of the impact of domestic violence on women. This article considers the barriers to women's agency from the women's perspective and in the context of broader, systemic dynamics, including the denial or obscuring of abuse by governments and states and the consequences of stringent fiscal retrenchment that put women at increased risk of domestic violence.

‘This statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief’: a provisional assessment of the utility of police victim statements in the qualitative understanding of domestic violence and abuse

“…This remains the case despite observations regarding methodological limitations in the dominant PQ research programme. For example, it has been argued that a fuller qualitative account of the intricacies of DVA victim experience remains elusive not least due to a serious participant recruitment problem; only victims with sufficient confidence to share their sensitive experiences of DVA for the purposes of a research interview will typically volunteer (Aldridge, 2013). This problem is, moreover, likely to be amplified when using focus groups.…”

Foto-Elicitación e indagación narrativa visual en estudio de casos y grupos de discusión

“…En el ámbito de la investigación psicosocial, la indagación narrativa se ha empleado para trabajar la auto-etnografía con trabajadoras sexuales (Smith, 2015), promover la reflexión con personas que viven en ambientes vulnerables (Copes, Tchoula, Brookman, & Ragland, 2018), o acceder a la experiencia de personas sin hogar en situaciones de adicción para proponer mejoras en la atención primaria (Sestito et al, 2017). Se ha utilizado también para dar voz a las mujeres que han sufrido violencia de género, involucrarlas en la investigación y darles un papel activo en el proceso (Aldridge, 2013).…”

“Not an Either/or Situation”: The Minimization of Violence Against Women In United Kingdom “Domestic Abuse” Policy

“…One of the outcomes for survivors like Tula is that the inequalities in their lives, that both contribute to and help sustain the public myth and private pain of DVA, are also overlooked as critical indicators in the risk to women of DVA victimization and its perpetuation. Decades of feminist research, politics, and activism have shown us that women’s inequality (economically, politically, their access to services, and so on) also makes them more likely to become trapped in violent and abusive relationships (see, for example, Aldridge, 2013; Nixon & Humphreys, 2010). Underlining this eternal return argument—inequality = victimization = inequality—many commentators argue that it is also “coercive controlling violence” (Hester et al, 2017) in intimate relationships that demonstrates, reinforces, and helps to perpetuate women’s inequality in their own lives and in society more broadly.…”

“…For many women, this situation has only worsened since the economic crash of 2008; in the United Kingdom, for example, this has also occurred as a consequence of more than a decade of austerity that has led to pernicious changes to the benefits system and sweeping cuts to essential DVA services. Research conducted in the United Kingdom by the Guardian newspaper in 2018 showed that local council funding for women’s refuges alone had been cut by just under £7 million since 2010 (Grierson, 2018; see also Aldridge, 2013). McRobie (2013, p. 1) argues that collaterally more than 10 years of austerity in the United Kingdom has resulted not only in a lack of support services for women victims—survivors of DVA, but also to an increase in DVA prevalence.…”

“…In response, the British government’s objectives in addressing DVA—strategies set out in the DAB—include greater focus on the safety of victims, and transforming the justice process. The latter is not an inconsiderable task given the sweeping cuts to essential services that have occurred as a result of more than 10 years of austerity measures (see, for example, Aldridge, 2013) in the United Kingdom, as well as the legacy of police and criminal justice failings in response to DVA incidents and cases (see Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, 2014). Nevertheless, the government is committed to the latter through, it is claimed, greater focus on victims’ safety in both the criminal and family courts, as well as through a review of the perpetrator journey “from identification to rehabilitation” (HM Government, 2019).…”