The Challenges of Conducting Qualitative Research on “couples” in Abusive Intimate Partner Relationships Involving Substance Use

Abstract

Undertaking qualitative dyad or couple interviews involving intimate partner abuse and substance use presents considerable ethical, safeguarding, and theoretical challenges throughout the research process from recruitment to conducting interviews and analysis. These challenges and how they were managed are outlined using the experience from a qualitative study of 14 heterosexual “couples” that explored the complex interplay between intimate partner abuse and substance use. Managing these challenges for participants, their families, and researchers included the use of safeguarding protocols and procedures to manage risk and the provision of clinical support for experienced researchers. Researchers often felt drawn into the conflicts and complex dynamics of opposing accounts from the male and females’ relationship which could be emotionally and methodologically taxing. Researchers discussing their analysis and felt experiences with each other provided a reflexive space to manage emotions and stay close to the theoretical underpinnings.

The feasibility of delivering the ADVANCE digital intervention to reduce intimate partner abuse by men receiving substance use treatment: protocol for a non-randomised multi-centre feasibility study and embedded process evaluation

“…All interviews and focus groups will be conducted by one of the seven researchers. Different researchers will interview the male participant and female (ex) partner from each dyad to ensure that no information is inadvertently shared [ 69 ]. The interviews and focus groups with facilitators and ISS workers will be conducted by a researcher not responsible for recruitment at that site.…”

Substance Use and Intimate Partner Abuse (IPA): A Descriptive Model of the Pathways Between Substance Use and IPA Perpetration for Men

“…Men who had not perpetrated IPA were excluded from the qualitative interviews, as were those who had an order preventing them from contacting their partner, or who were not able to communicate in English. Participants were asked for biographical accounts of their substance use and IPA perpetration, referring to men's reports in the screening questionnaire of having perpetrated psychological, physical, sexual, and financial abuse, which were used to form pen portraits for each man (See Gadd et al, 2019;Radcliffe et al, 2019 andLove et al, 2021 for a description of data collection methods). This enabled insight into the frequency, severity, type and stability of IPA perpetration and the role of substance use (i.e., intoxication, acquisition, craving and withdrawal) in this behaviour (Gilchrist et al, 2019).…”

“…For example, all partners were proactively offered support irrespective of their partner status (in or out of the study); different interviewers interviewed men and women and only information pertinent to risk was ever shared with the professionals supporting the research; all contact was arranged in safe spaces. All data were anonymised, depersonalised and, if needed, altered to mitigate the possibility of being identified in our published work in our published work (Love et al, 2021). All interviews were digitally recorded with the participants' consent and transcribed verbatim using pseudonyms.…”

Perspectives on Motivation and Change in an Intervention for Men Who Use Substances and Perpetrate Intimate Partner Abuse: Findings From a Qualitative Evaluation of the Advance Intervention

“…We report on this elsewhere in detail ( Gilchrist et al, 2021 ). Our multidisciplinary research team collaboratively developed materials based on this development work, informed by a systematic review of evidence ( Stephens-Lewis et al, 2021 ) and primary research with dyads ( Love et al, 2021 ). We sought feedback on materials from a “learning alliance” (professionals and academics) and a public and patient involvement group.…”

“…We designed the Advance intervention by translating evidence around IPA and substance use into an integrated program by following the steps of the Behavior Change Wheel (Michie et al, 2011). We report on this elsewhere in detail (Gilchrist et al, 2021). Our multidisciplinary research team collaboratively developed materials based on this development work, informed by a systematic review of evidence 20 1) and primary research with dyads (Love et al, 2021).…”