Domestic Violence, Home and Refuge
A content analysis of the services provided by shelters to the
victims of domestic violence in the United Kingdom and the
Netherlands
Gabriela Gutiérrez Gómez
UvAnetID: 10785620
Master’s in Sociology
Track: Social Problems and Social Policy
University of Amsterdam
Supervisor: Professor Dr. Jan Willem Duyvendak
Second Reader: Dr. Loes Jansen Verplanke
Abstract
Violence at home is not a recent phenomenon, it is only in the last years, especially with the interventions of governments and supra national organizations such as the EU, the United Nations and the World Health Organization, that it has become a widely discussed issue of public
concern. It has become evident that this form of violence has an effect on victims, perpetrators and witnesses alike, therefore, providing the right control, care, shelter and support is essential to avoid further violent incidents and for the complete eradication of this form of violence. After leaving the perpetrator, victims find themselves in a vulnerable position: without home, support or family, and with great emotional and physical pain. The institutions that provide accommodations must become ‘temporary homes’ for them and must provide all support needed. With this in mind, this research is concerned with answering the questions: What do victims of domestic violence need and look for in the support and facilities provided by shelters? And In what ways do the shelters and the support they provide to the victims of domestic violence resemble home?
In order to do this, numerous stories of domestic violence survivors and official documents of institutions that provide support (in the form of shelters) were analyzed. Three main conclusions stem from this analysis: first, domestic violence is a public issue that that affects many and should not be regarded as a private matter. Second, regardless of their differences in personal
characteristics, in general, victims show a common need to look for home elements after fleeing the abuser. Third, the hidden shelters studied here provide elements of home that address the victim’s immediate needs. However, keeping the shelters and the victims hidden does not cater in the most effective way to the victim’s long term needs in terms of not being ashamed or
powerless and could become a threat to the idea of making domestic violence a public issue.
Acknowledgments
Foremost, I would like to thank my dad, whose optimism and unconditional support as editor, adviser and fan kept me going and made of this, the work I proudly present as my dissertation thesis.
Additionally I would like to mention my mom and sister, given that their encouragement, support and understanding were essential for me in the process of finishing this Master’s and writing this thesis.
Also, my sincere thanks to my supervisor, Jan Willem Duyvendak, whose expertise, work and guidance were essential for the creation and result of this thesis.
Last, I would like to expresses my gratitude to all the people that directly or indirectly helped and supported me these last years of hard work and fun.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ...2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...3
INTRODUCTION ...5
APPROACH & METHODOLOGY...7
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE... 10
EU OVERVIEW...11
VICTIMS...12
SHELTERS...13
HOME... 14
HOME: AN INTRODUCTION...15
PHYSICAL HOME...15
SAFETY & SECURITY...16
BELONGING...16
IDENTITY...17
PRIVACY...17
FINAL REMARKS...18
FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS... 19
FIRST RESEARCH QUESTION: CONTENT ANALYSIS...19
FINDINGS...21
Reasons to stay or return...21
Reasons to flee ...22
Consequences of the abuse after fleeing...23
Rebuilding process...24
ANALYSIS...24
SECOND RESEARCH QUESTION: CONTENT ANALYSIS...25
Findings: the NL case...26
Findings: UK cases ...28
ANALYSIS...29 CONCLUSION ... 31
BIBLIOGRAPHY... 35
Introduction
Domestic violence (DV) is a multilayered and multifaceted issue that encompasses different forms of physical, economic and psychological aggression (European Union Agency for
Fundamental Rights, 2014, p. 9). Because of its brutality, in many cases, the victims of DV suffer from physical and emotional trauma, conditions that make them highly vulnerable and prone to become homeless or dependent on their abusive partner (Gorde, Helfrich, & Finlayson, 2004, p. 691).
Even though it is known that many women, children and men are victims of violence at home, it is not easy to provide adequate or full support for these victims, who avoid exposing their abuser scared of their perpetrator and of the stigma that becoming a victim can bring upon them
(Römkens, de Jong, & Harömkens, 2014, p. 35). The fact that this form of abuse takes place at home presents two major obstacles to effective action; first, the victims are more reluctant to expose the perpetrator, arguing it is a private matter that they can solve themselves; and second, acknowledging the fact that they are victims defies the established concepts of the ideal protective and supportive family and the safe and nurturing home (Frost, 1999, p. 589) and accept them as places of danger, isolation and vulnerability.
For many years DV was considered a private matter in which the state was not expected to intervene. However, in the last decades it has become clear that this form of violence is a health issue of epidemic proportions (Römkens, de Jong, & Harömkens, 2014, p. 9) that can take place in any social context. In this sense, awareness of the impact of DV on the victim, the family, the witnesses and the community, has moved home abuse to the public sphere. Approaching this problem as a matter of public concern, has brought together different actors –– activist groups, humanitarian organizations and state institutions –– and disciplines ––such as Psychology, Criminology, Sociology, Political science, Gender studies and others–– with the aim of defining, understanding and acting upon DV, supporting in this way victims, families and perpetrators. Since DV – and more specifically DV against women - has been considered a violation of basic human rights, several organizations have asked for “political and civil action in all sectors of society” (World Health Organization, 2005, p. vii) in order to completely eradicate this form of abuse. For instance in the European Union (EU), under the Istanbul Convention, the signing parties must take action to prevent, protect and create awareness about DV (Römkens, de Jong, & Harömkens, 2014, p. 43). In order to adhere to the convention, several measures and approaches have been used in different countries to protect the individuals affected by this kind of violence; for instance, the creation of shelters has been key to provide accommodation and assistance to the victims that must flee home.
Shelters, as a holistic form of assistance, should offer physical and psychological protection, guidance and treatment to those seeking help; they must become a refuge for fragile victims that arrive with a severe trauma. Because “leaving domestic abuse is a process not an event” (NHS Lothian, 2007, p. 9), before leaving an abusive relationship, the victims have usually experienced an average of 35 abuse incidents (ibid), hence when they are admitted to a shelter they are highly vulnerable. Feeling like they have lost everything – home, security, the relationships, personal belongings, etc. - the victims try to rebuild what they are and what they have, and the shelters must provide the support to allow them to get back on their feet and start a life free from violence (Blank, Lesur, & Logar, 2015, p. 18). In this respect, the ideal shelter should not only be a
physical accommodation in which to find refuge, but it should also be a safe place that allows victims to regain their sense of belonging and were they can explore their feelings and identity in a judgment and violence-free environment; in this sense, shelter should ideally resemble ‘home’. Just as DV is a multilayered issue that must be addressed in a mindful manner, home is a concept that has several dimensions and cannot be given a simple and narrow definition, or one that is too general meaning. ‘Home’ and ‘feeling at home’ are terms commonly used, but not easily defined. However, they usually evoke feelings of “familiarity, safety, rest and acceptance” (Smith, 1997, p. 177); overall they represent different physical and psychological interactions. One must not assume though that ‘home’ is only regarded as a positive term, since to many, it is a space of repression and abuse (Mallett, 2004, p. 64). For this reason, the personal experience of the resident should not be neglected when trying to understand this construct. Conversely, evidence has shown that homelessness can be very harmful, since it leads to feelings of painful loss, distress and helplessness (Fox, 2002, p. 602); consequently, providing a home for the victims of DV is also helping them avoid the physical and mental distress that homelessness creates.
Understanding what home represents is not an easy task. Effort should be made to define some elements of what it might entail, in order to have guidelines for institutions that must provide ‘home’ to the vulnerable (as it is the case with elderly homes, mental health centers and women’s and other forms of shelter). It would be a mistake to state these components without looking at the context of home and the background of the resident in question; however, one should try to look at the elements that are most frequently associated with ‘home’, assessing their
consequences for the construction of the term (Silva, 2009, p. 694). Furthermore, vulnerable groups hosted in these institutions should not be considered only as ‘victims’, given that their personal reality – experience, gender, ethnicity, etc – highly determines their condition and the meaning they attach to home (Wardaugh, 1999, p. 96). For this reason, when trying to resemble home, institutions must be careful to address the special needs of the people looking for their help. Without careful consideration of the context and background of the individual, they would most likely fail to provide the integral assistance they seek to offer.
There are numerous challenges in providing a home for the individual victims of domestic abuse. Efforts to contribute to the creation of a more supportive and all-encompassing system might begin by understanding the services that are currently provided and comparing them with what the victims need. In this context, the aim of this thesis will be to answer the questions:
What do victims of domestic violence need and look for in the support and facilities provided by shelters?
In what ways do the shelters and the support they provide to the victims of domestic violence resemble home?
Initially, providing an account of what the concepts of ‘home’ and ‘feeling at home’ mean – through the elements they are associated with – this research will then try to assess which aspects of ‘home’ are said to be ‘needed’ by the victim and which ones are present in the support services offered by the shelters for victims of DV. This will be done by analyzing texts, provided by shelters, governments and survivor’s stories, examining in this way the manner in which the shelters are proving the expected elements of home to the victim. Throughout the investigation, an effort is made to create a balance between the ideal and the real construction of home, since they both determine what the individual expects from it (Chapman, 2001, p. 144).
The first section of this thesis will present the methodological framework of the approach used, the process and the possible limitations of the research. The second part will touch on the issue of DV by first, providing some definitions; second, addressing the particular situation of the EU; and third, by presenting the idea of the shelters as an initiative to stop DV and help victims. The third section will center on the concept of home highlighting the elements that make up a home. The fourth part will look at the victim’s expectations, by assessing what they look for in the support provided by the shelters. The fifth section will provide an analysis of the resemblance of home and the services provided by selected shelters. The last two sections will present a discussion of the findings and conclusions; additionally some suggestions for future research will be provided. Approach & Methodology
This section will explain in detail the methodology and approach used to answer the questions postulated in this thesis:
What do victims of domestic violence need and look for in the support and facilities provided by shelters?
In what ways do the shelters and the support they provide to the victims of domestic violence resemble home?
This section will also highlight the general benefits and limitations of the method used. There will also be an explanation on how sources were selected and how documents were sampled. Then, the author will explain how the research was carried out following the proposed method; hence it will deal with the specificities of the methodology used for the investigation. The section will also present some ethical considerations, and will show the value and the limitations of this research.
Approach
Content analysis (CA) is a method used in social research, in which existing texts are analyzed in form and content. This approach is judged to be more complex than the standard qualitative approach, since it is less standardized and the results might be highly influenced by the writer’s style and abilities (Elo & Kyngas, 2008, p. 113). Regardless of this, CA is a powerful tool, given that the texts in question are produced by someone in a particular context and are addressed to a particular audience (Krippendorff, 2003, p. 19); they provide information about the author and audience’s reality. Also, by analyzing existing documents, this research method is less intrusive and protects both the studied group and the investigator, from harmful repercussions that may arise as a consequence of the study; in other words, this method is said to be unobtrusive and non-reactive(Prasad, 2008, p. 174). In this sense, if carried out correctly, this technique allows the investigator to have a better understanding of the context in which the text was written and avoid significant negative ethical consequences.
Several methods are used for CA, since different questions require different approaches. To answer the questions formulated in this thesis, the author will use a qualitative approach, in the sense that the texts will be carefully read and interpreted, without emphasis on the quantitative analysis of the document. For the first question – as far as we can determine, what do victims of
domestic violence need and look for in the support and facilities provided by shelters? – an
inductive CA will be used, where instead of creating preconceived categories to guide the analysis, the researcher creates an open coding system, where the categories are determined with the information collected from the text (Elo & Kyngas, 2008, p. 109). For the second question –
in what ways do the support provided by shelters to the victims of domestic violence resemble home? – a deductive approach will be used, were initial categories and themes are determined
beforehand with the use of previous research or existing theory(Hsieh & Shannon, 2005, p. 1281). Given that in this case the researcher has to decide what variables are necessary to effectively address the research question, the analysis becomes more challenging and more interesting (Elo & Kyngas, 2008, p. 113).
With regards to the process of selecting the texts to be examined, in this case, the research used the material collected from public documents provided by private or government sources. The first kind of documents are mainly annual reports, mission statements and other material provided by private institutions or organizations; the second is provided by the government, and contains acts or legislation, statistics and official reports. In both cases, the documents were obtained from government or the organization’s web site, and are, hence, available to the general public. Using these sources gives a precise idea of where an institution stands in regards to DV and its solution. However, one cannot look at these documents without close examining the context in which they were produced, as they are not free from bias or distortion (Bryman, 2008, p. 522).
The sampling procedure used for this research was purposive sampling. The investigation focused on gathering information from the most relevant sources available. In this sampling style, the researcher must decide what the best sources are and determine the number of sites or documents to sample (Prasad, 2008, p. 174). Even though this method may affect the validity of the
conclusion, later in this section it will be clearly stated how the documents were obtained and what criteria was used for their selection.
To assure the quality of the documents, Scott’s four criteria for assessing quality were used: authenticity, credibility, representativeness and meaning (Bryman, 2008, p. 516). First, authenticity is determined by evaluating the origin of the source and whether the evidence is genuine. Second, credibility can be assessed by checking if the data is free from error and distortion. Third, representativeness is assessed by verifying if the evidence is distinctive or typical of its kind, and if not, the reason for its unusualness. Last, assessing the meaning of the document includes evaluating whether the information is presented in a clear and understandable manner (ibid). This process is used in order to understand the origin and veracity of the source while placing the texts in context; also, it allows the research to detect possible bias that the text might have.
Methodology
The CA method was chosen for this research because it provides several advantages. First, talking or interviewing victims of DV is a task that requires great sensibility and experience, especially given that addressing the topic could be highly harmful and emotionally distressing for those interviewed; Second, given the high security in the shelters, to protect victims, their privacy and their recuperation process, many of these institutions do not allow external researchers to conduct investigations there. Third, even though it is not common for shelters to allow access to their facilities, they do make available a large amount of public documents in their websites, such as reports, victims’ stories, pamphlets, etc. Fourth and last, due to the language limitations of the researcher, getting access to experts or social workers that could talk about their experiences working at shelters or helping victims was not a very successful approach. In most instances language and cultural subtleties are key pieces of information, which could be missed altogether. In this sense, CA allowed the researcher to base this paper on valuable information, provided by official sources.
There are, nevertheless, certain limitations worth mentioning. For instance, the documents analyzed have been obtained from shelters, NGO’s or governmental institutions, hence all of them are prone to portray the positive side of their services and efforts to stop DV; for this reason the author carefully identified this bias in their texts. Also, even though the victim’s stories are very valuable since they are primary sources, one should not ignore the fact that they were published on the internet (public domain) by specific institutions, which might constrain the individual’s willingness to fully express him or herself. Additionally, most of the documents provided on the institution’s website have the organization as the author, hence it is not possible to attribute said the writings to a single actor; nonetheless, all the organizations from which the documents were obtained are internationally recognized institutions which certainly have access to the information they provide.
In this sense, two sets of documents were used: survivors’ stories and shelter-provided information posted on their web sites. The former were taken from sites such as: Violence Unsilenced, The Hidden Hurt, Domestic Violence Resource center Victoria, etc.; the later were obtained from the official material available in the web sites of institutions such as: Women’s Aid, Refuge, Huis van Orange, etc (this included mission statements, annual reports and other documents from the site). The documents sampled are all from the last ten years and are written in English, hence the sample for this research was considerably limited by these parameters. Most of the documents chosen needed to have an identifiable author, as an organization or individual, however, in the case of the victim’s stories the documents did not always have a clear author. In the cases where the name of the author was not clear, for instance due to the vulnerability of the individual, the origin of the source was carefully considered, in order to avoid unreliable information.
As explained before, in order to answer the first question, the researcher used an inductive approach, for this reason no codes were predetermined before the documents were read. Going through the survivor’s stories and other documents with the victim’s experiences, the author tried to determine the concepts that were frequently mentioned by the victims when referring to what they expected from the shelters. Even though all the stories analyzed were in English, the sources provided stories from a diverse group of victims, with different gender, social, cultural and economic realities. More than only looking for specific terms that could be related to the shelter expectations, the analysis tried to look for deeper or subtler expectations by also looking at what the victims lacked after leaving their abusive relationship and the fears they had before leaving it. After the careful analysis of the texts, the most recurrent terms were placed in categories,
allowing for the analysis to assess whether these categories are related or similar to the elements of home.
To answer the second question - In what ways do the shelters and the support they provide to the
victims of domestic violence resemble home? a deductive approach was used. In order to assess if
the shelters for DV victims provide some aspects of home, the researcher established categories before analyzing the texts. Documents were then read to find the main aspects (or the lack thereof) that define home: physical shelter, safety & security, belonging, identity and privacy. These categories will be defined in the theoretical framework of the thesis, however it is important to mention that the researcher did not only look specifically for these words, but for complete sentences or paragraphs that could be associated with these aspects. Even though this method has more structure than the inductive method used for the first question, the author tried to go carefully through the texts, trying not only to classify the information in either of these categories, but rather to gather the complete idea of the text and the context. The idea behind this was to understand the elements of home that could be found in the shelters under study, by looking at the information provided on their websites.
Since the structure and support provided in the shelters is dependent on the national programs and on the reality of a specific country, it was necessary to set some boundaries to answer the second question: for this reason all the documents used for this question were only collected from sources in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. While the former is one of the few countries that meet the requirements set by the EU with regards to the number of women’s shelters1, the
latter still needs numerous shelters to meet these standards2 (Woman Against Violence Europe, 2014). Given the conditions of these two countries, it is interesting to compare the shelter approach used by both nations, with the idea of assessing whether they resemble any aspect of home.
The victims’ stories were mainly collected from sites in English, therefore it includes UK and Australian sources. Even though the sites are run by individuals or organizations in these countries, the victims that shared their stories there were from different backgrounds – gender, age, culture, etc – allowing a grater diversity in the sample. The documents used to answer the second question were collected from women’s shelters in the UK and the Netherlands, obtained from women organizations or government institutions’ web sites.
It is important to highlight that despite the rigorous application of the method, this research is not based on a very large sample. For this reason, the conclusions of this research should be taken as a preliminary set of finding that could help and encourage further research, taking into
consideration more variables, a larger sample and perhaps, more cultural differences.
Domestic Violence
Not so long ago, in many patriarchal societies, violence at home was not seen as deviant; on the contrary it was culturally accepted (justified as a tradition) and condoned by law (Harne & Radford, 2008, p. 1). However, since the late 20th century, different groups have made it their task
to take action against this form of abuse and have encouraged important changes. Particularly, since the 1970’s, feminist movements have been the main instigators of change by trying to make DV a public and not private issue; this by encouraging research and changes in policy (ibid). Given that most of the victims of this type of abuse are women, feminists tried to induce action making emphasizing on the shared experience of the battered woman (Sokoloff & Dupont, 2005, p. 41); This approach has been heavily criticized, since victims do not necessarily fit the white, middle class female victim that the feminists portrayed (ibid). As we will show in the following paragraphs, domestic violence is not a simple matter, since it requires the understanding of different factors, such as the condition and context in which the aggression takes place and the personal experience and characteristics of the victim.
Nowadays most EU countries have taken legal and policy measures to work against DV, but it was not until 1999 that this form of violence ceased to be considered a private matter and became an issue of fundamental human rights (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2014, p. 7). Violence at home was judged as a threat to “the right to security, the right to freedom from discrimination and the right to health care” (Römkens, de Jong, & Harömkens, 2014, p. 7). This
1
The Woman Against Violence Europe (WAVE) report of 2014 shows that the Netherlands provides
1.608 shelters out of the 1.649 it should have considering its population size
2
The same WAVE report shows that the United Kingdom, given its population, should have 6.226
view encouraged more research and policy actions. To increase the sense of urgency the World Health Organization (WHO) has argued that domestic violence, in the form of violence against women, has an impact not only on the victim’s physical and psychological health but also on those who are witness of the abuse; for this reason they claim that this form of violence should be considered a public health issue which must be eradicated (World Health Organization, 2005, p. vii).
Heightened awareness of the severity of the issue and the danger it represents, induced the adoption, in recent years, of global initiatives to stop DV and binding policies to protect the perpetrators and support the victims of this form of abuse. For example, in 2011, the Council of Europe – following the United Nations human rights standards, which encourages effective and prompt state action against DV (Römkens & Lünnemann, 2008, p. 173) – presented the Istanbul Convention, encouraging prompt and effective measures to develop an integral approach to create social awareness, support the victims and perpetrators, support other people affected by the abuse (usually children) and avoid further violence. In this convention, DV was defined as “all acts of physical, sexual, psychological or economic violence that occur within the family or domestic unit, or between former or current spouses or partners, whether or not the perpetrator shares or has shared the same residence with the victim” (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2014, p. 9); for the purpose of this thesis, this definition will be used when talking about DV. There is no doubt that the efforts to stop DV have had several positive consequences, however due to the complexity of the issue, it is still quite problematic to completely eradicate this form of violence. In the following pages of this section I will present the current state of the discussion about DV in the EU and the initiatives to support victims. Since DV takes different forms depending on the context, so does the characterization of victims, the text will highlight the moments where oversimplifications or generalizations are made. This theoretical chapter will not deal with the perpetrator, however, it is acknowledged that implementing measures to support them is as important as supporting the victim.
EU overview
With the idea of assessing the current situation of DV and other forms of gender-based forms of violence in Europe and possibly encourage more actions to stop it, the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA) published in 2014 a EU-wide survey of violence against women. This report acknowledged the efforts of some member states to intervene in domestic violence cases by making it a public issue (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2014, p. 168); it also states that instead of trying to maintain the integrity of the family, additional and more effective measures should be taken to protect the rights of the victims of DV (pg.52). Furthermore, FRA research not only provided advise to policy makers and governments, but also formulated important questions about the reason and patters of DV.
For instance, the FRA survey results shows that one in three women has been victim of physical violence by a current or former partner since the age of 15 (pg.132) and that 39% of women have said to know in their circle of family or friends other women who are victims of DV (p.151). It also shows that only 14% of women reported their most serious intra-partner violence to the police or other institutions (p.60), which can be related to the fact that only one in five women is aware of the actual national legislation about protection or prevention of DV (p.150).
Additionally, the research reports that the high number of cases registered in countries such as Sweden, the Netherlands and Norway, might be due to the fact that in these countries women are more aware of the problem and are more wiling to talk about it and expose it (pg.158); whereas in
societies where DV is seen as a private matter, less incidents are reported to the police, shared with family members or reveled in a survey (p.150). With these data and figures, it becomes easier to develop effective interventions that take into consideration the specific needs of the victims within the context of their countries, while keeping in sight the European situation. Even though some countries still consider DV to be a private matter (p.101), and do not take action, most nations that do get involved make use of police forces, health institutions and victim support organizations. When the police is involved two approaches are taken; first, police officers can be granted the power to issue a restraining order for the perpetrator – this usually becomes a civil or a criminal case - or second, the police can arrest the perpetrator and then, either a public prosecutor or a court would have to issue the restraining order (p.68). While the first one leads to prompt action, the second one allows for a greater combined work of the public forces and the judiciary. At the same time, other methods can be used instead or together with the police approach, such as help lines, shelters and victim support organizations (Römkens, de Jong, & Harömkens, 2014, p. 36). All of these means are set in place for victims to have easier access to protection and support. However, since the first step towards finding this help is, in most cases, on the hands of the victim, their fear of the possible personal, social or legal repercussions makes them choose not to expose the abuse.
Following the Istanbul Convention standards for victim support - which include: assistance, protection and support to all victims (non-discrimination), holistic support to victims (integrated and comprehensive policies), awareness of gender-based violence and specialist support (through women support services, etc (Blank, Lesur, & Logar, 2015, p. 13) – several EU member States have implemented shelter services for DV victims. In order to have a more clear understanding about the services that shelters should provide, the remaining of this section will focus on the victim of DV and the importance of the shelters as a form of support.
Victims
Before actually going to a shelter or exposing their perpetrator, most victims report “external barriers such as no money, insurance or time” (Fugate, Landis, Riordan, Naureckas, & Engel, 2005, p. 298) as the reason for not taking action sooner; others mention shame, fear of the perpetrator or their belief that the abuse was either a private matter, or not important enough (Römkens, de Jong, & Harömkens, 2014, p. 35). Additionally, it is known that victim prefer not to go to a shelter - unless they feel it is extremely necessary – in order to avoid the stigma that is associated with the DV victim (Menard, Lyon, & Lane, 2008, p. 114), but also to avoid the challenges that living there presents, such as not “finding privacy, getting along with the other residents, and complying with shelter rules”(p. 83). In this context, the victim does not only fear the abuse experienced, but also the consequences that fleeing might have.
Leaving an abusive relationship and looking for help in a shelter is complicated, hence, not a lot of victims are willing to do it unless it is necessary. On the one hand, there is the victim’s trust on the perpetrator’s intention to change and the fear of losing home, children, financial security, etc (NHS Lothian, 2007, p. 5). On the other hand, some victims rather not risk fleeing and looking for refuge in a shelter, given that they might be turned down due to lack of capacity of the center or because of the fact that they are not currently being abused (even if they have been abused before) (Baker, Cook, & Norris, 2003, p. 759). Regardless of these obstacles, the victims that do manage to find help in the shelters, are supposed to receive protection, care and all the other support necessary for them to overcome their trauma; especially given the fact that
to offer proper assistance and support to the victims (Baker, Cook, & Norris, 2003, p. 757). It has been said, that the victim’s vulnerability - due to feeling unequipped in a different or unfamiliar environment, fear of becoming single or fear of being without the company of their family – gives the perpetrator the power to manipulate and control the victim, who becomes highly attached to the perpetrator (Keeling & Fisher, 2012, p. 1564). Because of this condition, some approaches to help the victims assume their incapability of making decisions on their own best interest, therefore they prefer to take this ‘burden’ away from them by not allowing them to make decisions about their life (Mc Dermott & Garofalo, 2004, p. 1264). For this reason, later research has criticized the above-mentioned method, and has put forward new approaches to empower victims promoting “individual advocacy and victim choice with the goal of improving women’s safety at home” (Morgan & Coombes, 2013, p. 534). In this sense, both, the vulnerable condition of the DV victim and their agency, should be taken into consideration when developing strategies to help them move on.
Furthermore, research shows that domestic abuse has long-lasting consequences in the victim’s physical and psychological health, that remain years after the abuse. For instance it has been shown that domestic abuse can result in chronic physical ill health, miscarriages, complex
posttraumatic disorder and mental illnesses (NHS Lothian, 2007, p. 6). For this reason the shelters and other support services must have the necessary facilities and personnel to handle the victim’s physical and emotional needs by creating a “targeted investment in specialized victim support services that can meet the needs of these women” (European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, 2014, p. 70). More than the initial challenge of getting the victims to come forward and seek help, the shelters and other organizations that support victims of DV have the task of providing assistance that takes into consideration the special needs of the victim (gender, race, religion, etc).
Shelters
Before starting this discussion, it is fundamental to state that regardless of the fact that men and other gender minorities are also victims of DV and need the support and protection of shelters, most of the literature on the topic addresses shelters as women’s shelters or refuge. While some initiatives include support for male victims, most of the institutions that provide accommodation to victims, only do so for female victims and their children. Therefore, in many cases, the word shelter has been used to talk about the “breadth of services that women's shelters, refuges, safe homes and anti-violence centers provide in various cultural contexts” (Global Network of Women's Shelters). Given the limited information about the other kind of refuges for male victims, this paper will mainly use information gathered from women’s shelters.
In this context, the first women’s shelter in Europe was founded in 1972 in London, after a woman too scared of going back home to her abusive husband, asked for refuge in a women’s community center. After this first woman asked for help, others did the same. Hence, after some time, the center became a refuge for battered women, with an open door policy (Elman, 2003, p. 96). Following this event, in 1974 autonomous feminist organizations formed Women’s Aid around the England, Scotland and Wales, which led to the creation of the National Women’s Aid Federation, the organization that in the following years would open numerous women’s shelters around the United Kingdom (ibid). Following the example of the women’s shelters in the UK, later that decade, shelters were opened too in Berlin (1976), Austria (1978) and Sweden (1979) (Logar, 2008, p. 5). Despite the resources provided by NGOs, volunteers and private donors, shelters were not able to tend to all the people that sought help, therefore many victims had to be
turned away (Elman, 2003, p. 96). With the years, the consolidation of the welfare system and the improvement of women’s position in society, the condition, support and services provided by shelters improved considerably, however it is still not entirely satisfactory (Logar, 2008, p. 11). DV shelters or refuges – as the most important form of emergency housing for victims (Walby, 2004, p. 73) – have to provide emotional and tangible support to the victims, given that because of their experience, some of them lack certain social skills and the ability to be able to function independently without the control of their partner (Gorde, Helfrich, & Finlayson, 2004, p. 691). Evidence of the importance of these places is shown in the study made by Lyon et al (2008) in which survivors of DV stated that without the support of the shelters they would have ended “being homeless, losing everything, acting out of desperation, uncertainty, and continued abuse/risk of death” (Menard, Lyon, & Lane, 2008, pp. 56-57). In this way, it is inevitable to ignore the importance of the shelters and the necessity of creating services, in which the support provided, lives up and even exceeds the expectations of the victims and others affected by the abuse.
Even though the IC demands better support for DV victims, currently almost no European state follows all its recommendations. As an example, this Convention requires all countries to have free 24/7 help lines, but only 16 of the 46 European countries have a help line that meets both requirements (Blank, Lesur, & Logar, 2015, p. 21). Furthermore, the Convention requires
member states to have shelters that can provide accommodation for one woman, for every 10,000 inhabitants; however, shelters in the EU have only 47% of the recommended capacity (p. 23). The inadequacy of the service provided by these institutions might be caused by the general state of the welfare system in each country – “only 12 out of the 27 EU Member States legally foresee state funding of specialized services for women victims of violence”(European Institute for Gender Equality, 2012) – given that most of the funding for these organizations comes from governments (Logar, 2008, p. 9), consequently they must also rely on NGO’s and other private donors. In order for the nations to provide proper support to victims, there is a simultaneous need for increased financial investments in these projects, and for a more efficient use of available resources.
With time, more attention has been placed in helping DV victims and providing them with the necessary support to recover from the traumatic experience, however, the current conditions of support in Europe are far from perfect. As shown here, the shelter initiative is necessary and should be encouraged, however, there are two main complications to this approach; first, not all countries have sufficient funds to economically support the shelters, therefore they either suffer from shortages, or have to rely on external funds; and second, most of the shelters only provide assistance and support to female victims and their children, excluding in this way a great number of victims that do not fit the profile. Furthermore, the particular condition of the shelter is highly dependent on the country’s state of affairs, for this reason, the particular case of the nation should be understood in order to make a better assessment and draw significant conclusions.
Home
This section will try to establish theoretical bounds around the concepts of ‘home’ and ‘feeling at home’, by analyzing elements that are associated with these constructs. Once the elements have been introduced and explained, the next section will make use of them to evaluate to what extent the support and services provided by shelters to victims of DV resemble home.
Home: an introduction
Home is a commonly used word, and most people would know what home is or how home feels, or should feel like. However, a complete and empirically tractable definition of the term is not so easy to come by. The Germanic word heim (home) can be traced back to the Indo-European kei, meaning “laying down, a bed or a couch, and something dear or beloved” (Hollander, 1991, p. 44); while the English term home, comes from the Anglo-Saxon word ham that means village, town, estate or possession (ibid). The etymology of the word shows that home could be
understood as a tangible territory of piece of land, or/and a feeling attached to the personal value given to the physical place. In sociological literature, home has been defined and associated with a multiplicity of feelings, structures and values; “house, family, haven, self, gender, and
journeying.” (Mallett, 2004, p. 62) adding an extra degree of complexity to this widely used concept.
There are some specific elements that are usually associated in literature with what home represents and feels like. For instance, the material form of home is usually associated with a house or a shelter. However a more encompassing view considers that it is not just a roof over one’s head: it is a space that provides physical security and health (Després, 1991, p. 100). The security that this shelter provides, allows individuals to feel safe from the dangers of the outside world (Wardaugh, 1999, p. 96). Another element that helps constructing a definition of home, is the fact that this space allows for the individual’s identity to be created and expressed, in the sense that it contains objects that reveal individual tastes and interests (Després, 1991, p. 98), while providing a safe environment to develop his/her personality (Tucker, 2000, p. 258). A final component associated with home, is privacy, which makes home a space free of public
surveillance (Mallett, 2004, p. 71), thus, a place in which to behave freely and autonomously. A closer look at these elements could help delineate the frontiers for this research.
Physical Home
In 17th Century Europe, the understanding of home was closely related to the ruling class’ ideas
of homeland and domestic morality. The first one encouraged nationalism and patriotism by protecting land and wealth; the second one intended to protect familiar property, including women and children (Mallett, 2004, p. 65). In this sense, home is not necessarily a shelter or a residence, but it can be seen as a concept that encompasses grater territories, such as the village, estate or town (Hollander, 1991, p. 44). The physical environment of home cannot be understood outside the cultural context, given that social norms or forces can determine the limits, experience and value of what home entails (Després, 1991, p. 105). As an example, with regards to the appearance of home, research has shown that the physical representations of home (design, order and organization) are abundant across cultures (Chapman, 2001, p. 140), providing evidence that looking for a standard form of home, without proper contextual considerations, would then be a grave mistake.
From a more functional approach, home has been described as the physical shelter, whose most basic function is to provide physical protection, in the form of a roof, security and health (Després, 1991, p. 100). Home as a shelter, is the place where things are familiar, providing a sense of ease and security (Duyvendak, 2011, p. 27). Even though these feelings are associated with home, they are not necessarily attached to any shelter or house, given that the ‘empty shell’ of these spaces, can only become home with “constant patterns of social interaction of those
living in the house” (Dupuis & Thorns, 1998, p. 31). Thus, home is a physical place in which interactions take place, a space that is bound by emotions and affections; not only determined by the personal experience of the inhabitants, but also by the social and cultural context.
Safety & Security
Closely related to physical home, security can be part of the physical need to be protected from danger, given that it can take the form of a roof above the head, a shelter and/or refuge. The social and material consistency provided by home, should allow individuals to feel secure and should provide the base for the construction of their identity (Dupuis & Thorns, 1998, p. 43). In this sense, home should be the place to provide physical and psychological safety. Additionally, home should not only offer security, but it should in itself be secured and protected, since it is the place where properties that are valuable to the insiders – and envied by others – are kept (Duyvendak, 2011, p. 24). Security, as a component of home, has a physical and emotional quality, which ideally generates positive associations. Furthermore, home has been understood as the ‘inside’ place that provides security and protection from the dangers of the ‘outside’; it said to be the ‘haven in a heartless world’ (Wardaugh, 1999, p. 96).
Belonging
While the past two elements are more concerned with the physical or material idea of home, this element is more related to feeling at home. When defining home, several authors talk about intimacy, togetherness and familiarity (Duyvendak, 2011, p. 24). It is defined as the space par
excellence in which to strengthen and secure “the relationship with the people one cares for”
(Després, 1991, p. 98). As an example of how important this element is, Smith states that even in undesirable circumstance, people try to maintain home as the nucleus of their life, since for many, it is the main form of experiencing belonging (Smith, 1997, p. 177). In this ideal context, home would then include the people and the conditions, which allow an individual to develop a feeling of belonging.
Like in the case of family – in a smaller scale – the community is an important factor in
generating the perception of belonging and feeling at home. Silva (2009) has defined home as the “place of belonging that points to your history, your past” (Silva, 2009, p. 694) in the sense that provides the individual and the future generations an understanding about their history and culture. In other words, home is not only the place where the individual becomes part of a community through shared values, ideas, traditions, cultures, etc; but also, the place where community is created by providing a space in which these similarities are discussed, redefined and passed on to other generations of individuals eager to belong. Consequently, “belonging to the group cannot be separated from the group's belonging to a place that is considered home” (Warner, 1994, p. 164); a place where culture, heritage and history play a determinant role. In order to be more encompassing I will include familiarity as an element of belonging. As explained by Bourdieu, familiarity is a felling which makes home the natural place to be
(Duyvendak, 2011, p. 27); this, to differentiate between the familiarity of feeling at home and the unfamiliarity of places that are not home (ibid). This idea suggests how belonging is an important element to define home since it helps to create an environment where the individual feels safe and at ease, which in turns contributes to the overall creation of the feeling at home.
Identity
In relation to the element of identity, home is defined as a place in which the personal, social and cultural identity is created and shown. As a way of exposing an identity, the physical structure of home – in the form of a house, shelter, refuge, etc – has been said to be the a symbolic
representation of the body (Wardaugh, 1999, p. 96), therefore a physical portrayal of the individual’s identity. In this context, home, as the space in which private belonging and decorations are kept, helps to illustrate the resident’s taste, personality and interests (Després, 1991, p. 98). In the same way, home can also be a sign of status, given that its economic value may indicate the socio-economic situation of the inhabitant, a fact that could considerably shape their identity. Indeed, the personal characteristics of the inhabitants, makes their home a
representation of their identity. However, this cannot be seen independently of the cultural and social norms that have shaped the environment, given that, to a certain extent, they are the foundation stones on which the identities are erected. Home, as a space in which identities are created, begins with the idea of a safe place where individuals feel comfortable enough to explore their uniqueness, allowing them to fulfill themselves and their personalities (Tucker, 2000, p. 258).
The lack of some of these elements can drastically change the nature of home. Research has shown that for victims of domestic violence and abuse (mostly women and children) home becomes a place of “fear and isolation, a prison, rather than a place of absolute freedom and ontological security” (Mallett, 2004, p. 72). Some people fear home, for instance when safety and autonomy, are replaced by danger (Fox, 2002, p. 594). This lack of security, this ‘inside danger,’ may give rise to feelings of homelessness (Wardaugh, 1999, p. 99).
Home is also bounded by norms that determine what ‘normal’ and ‘deviant’ identities look like. As an example, the second wave feminists “identified home as a site of oppression, tyranny and patriarchal domination of women” (Mallett, 2004, p. 75). In this respect, rather than developing their identity, women become subjected to the expectations society has placed upon them; making home a space of violence, unrest and hostility (Duyvendak, 2011, p. 44). The case is similar for immigrants or refugees, who, after losing their ‘home’ in the form of a nation, homeland and/or house – which includes culture, security, family, etc – find it extremely hard to gain and renew pride in their identity (Sarup, 1994, p.92). Despite the negative conditions portrayed by these cases, I claim that these places, although violent or oppressive, in many instances retain enough features to make their members consider them home. Evidence shows that people are willing to accept or make use of violence (Smith, 1997, p. 178) when they fear that resisting it would cause them to become homeless, and thus lose part of their identity.
Privacy
For years, home was the center stage of private life, associated with autonomy and independence generated by the lack of outside pressures (Després, 1991). However, in recent years, the line between the private and public sphere has blurred; on the one hand, technology and globalization have contributed to the changing perception of home. The increased mobility of goods and services (Duyvendak, 2011, p. 13) has made feeling at home away from home easier, since familiar goods and services can be found in many more places. On the other hand, the activities that before took place in the confinements of home – eating, showing emotions and talking intimately – are now also taking place in public spaces, still remaining private(Kumar & Makarova, 2008).
As an example of this duality, referring to African Americans in the USA, Hook (1999) explains that home can be private in the sense that it protects the individual from the aggression and marginalization of the outside world, while at the same time, it can be a space of public
gatherings and political formations, without losing the sense of privacy that home offers (pg. 37). There are two sides to home: on the one hand, it is the private space that gives its inhabitants autonomy, protection and the ability to choose and exclude the people that belong or not; on the other hand, home is the space where the marginalized groups of society are confined (women, immigrants, etc), making the public space an exclusive sphere out of their reach. The line between the private and the public is not very clear, however the author considers it to be a key consideration to be made on the nature of home; particularly in cases of DV, since the boundaries between the private and public are trespassed, in the sense that the state needs to take action against any abuse that takes place in the privacy of home.
Final remarks
To make the definition more precise, it is important to further take into consideration that home is not only determined by how each of these elements are currently observed by the individual. It is, instead, shaped by a combined construction of the real and expected situation of home. In other words, the definition of home does not emerge only from recollection of memories, interactions and emotions, but also from the idea of what home should be or could be, in the sense that “people construct it in memory and imagination” (Chapman, 2001, p. 144).
In this context, because the expectations of home could be based on “romanticized, mythologized, idealized memories” (Fox, 2002), just focusing on the ‘ideal home’ may lead to exceedingly positive and naive ideas of home, ignoring the real experiences of the individuals. Instead, understanding and evaluating the relation between the real and the ideal, could facilitate a holistic and more encompassing understanding of home, especially since “most people spend their lives in search of home, in the gap between the natural home and the particular ideal home where they would be completely fulfilled” (Tucker, 2000, p. 258)
In addition to the information that can be gathered by looking at the elements of home and the relation between the ideal and real home, another way of placing bounds on the meaning of this concept, is by understanding what the concept is not. Different researchers have argued that feeling at home can be better explained in terms of a lack of an affect or feeling, rather than on the basis of the feeling itself (Mallett, 2004, p. 79). In this respect homelessness will also be considered in this analysis.
Given that having a home allows individuals to receive legal and personal benefits (Fox, 2002, p. 599), not having a home would not only mean lack of shelter and physical security, but would also leave the homeless without important forms of protection. Because feeling at home is not only related to having a physical home, homelessness does not only mean not having a shelter, but, as is the case for victims of domestic violence (DV), a feeling of homelessness despite having a house or a shelter tend to feel homeless at home (Wardaugh, 1999, p. 96). The state of homelessness can improve the understanding of home, seeing that neither one of the concepts can be understood without the other one.
To sum up, defining home is not an easy task since it is defined by the real, as much as it is defined by the imagined; it is an abstract feeling, as much as a physical structure; and a subjective creation, as much as a commonly constructed idea. Home, far from being an undisputable
concept, is a changing construct, deeply embedded in social and cultural contexts. However, knowing the fact that “people want to feel at home somewhere, and will do anything to keep or regain that feeling” (Duyvendak, 2011, p. 41) should more than justify research on the topic. Findings and analysis
First Research Question: Content analysis
The survivor stories selected for this research were taken from five main sources - Violence Unsilenced, The Hiden Hurt, Domestic Violence Resource Center Victoria, Refuge and Women’s aid - which were found to be reliable after a quality assessment was done.
Violence UnSilenced is a resource site that originally started as an NGO and later became the project of one of its founders, Maggie Ginsber, who compiled hundreds of personal stories of domestic violence survivors. The site provides numerous stories that were collected from 2008 until 2014 with the purpose of allowing survivors to share their story as a healing and
empowering process, while encouraging victims to flee their abusive relations by “ensuring they were not alone, but part of a larger, sympathetic community” (Violence UnSilenced, n.d). The volunteers that are in charge of keeping up the website are not experts or professionals, for this reason, this source does not have a particular interest in showing the victims in a specific light or to encourage them to take a specific form of action. Also, this site has a mission to create
awareness about the shame and stigma associated with domestic violence, which leads to the victim’s victimization and the creation of false stereotypes (specific type of victim) that harm the victim and create obstacles for the eradication of this form of violence.
The site was selected because of the numerous stories it provided, giving firsthand accounts of what the victims experienced while they were abused and the aftermath. Given that the site did not have specific intentions to encourage to look for a precise form of support, it is possible to think that the stories were not censored or changed by the site owners. Because the stories were written in retrospect, some details about the abuse or the chronology of the facts might be
distorted, however, given the nature of this experiment, the survivor’s hindsight evaluation of the facts provides valuable material about the feelings and interpretations of the victim. From this site, a total of 12 stories were analyzed, cited as VU1 to VU12.
The Hidden Hurt is a web site based in the United Kingdom and was created by a domestic violence survivor with the intention of helping understand the types, effects and dynamics of domestic violence (Hidden Hurt, 2002). Aware of the fact that anyone can be a victim of DV, this site provides assistance for both men and women and encourages the survivors to share their surviving stories to help current victims feel supported and understood. This website is financially supported by private donations, hence, there is no evident control or involvement from outside entities with specific intentions. The stories from Hidden Hurt were randomly selected and included male and female victims from different backgrounds. The most important reason why this source was chosen was because a domestic violence survivor herself runs it. This fact gives a sense of confidentiality and sympathy towards the victims and survivors who might be too scared to share their stories with their families or the authorities in fear of being judged and stigmatized. 8 survivor’s stories were taken from this site, cited HH1 to HH8.
Another source used, was the Domestic Violence Resource Center Victoria, a site that provides assistance to victims, training to professionals and publishes research to help creating awareness
and eradicate this from of violence (The Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoria, 2003). It is an Australian source supported by the Victoria, Australia Department of Human Services. With the survivor’s stories published in the site, they want to create awareness and promote social change through debate. This source is particularly valuable given that it has numerous, very different stories: their database includes stories from women, men, people in same-sex
relationships, women with disabilities and young people. However, most of the survivor’s stories provided by this site ended by answering the questions: How did I cope? How did the situation changed? What helped me? and What would I say to others? In this sense, there was a structured to be followed by the victims, which limited their complete autonomy when writing; nevertheless, the answers given to the questions provided important information. Aware of the fact that this site is sponsored by a government institution, the author is conscious of the fact that it is possible that the stories offer a distorted image of the official services, for this reason, most of the attention was placed on the emotions felt by the victims and not their particular experiences with the service. A total of 12 stories were used from this site cited as VRC1 to VRC12.
Refuge is the largest service in the UK that provides support and housing to victims of DV(Refuge, n.d). Since 1971 this organization has been a pioneer in creating awareness and making DV a public issue. This organization aims at providing different services for victims and their children to help them heal and regain autonomy in their lives in a safe and secure
environment. Other than the services provided to the victims, this institution promotes the development of better policy to tackle DV and better implementation for the existing one by encouraging improvements on the quality and method of the services provided. The survivor’s stories provided by this site are not many, but they are valuable, given that they come from the UK, and more specifically from the organization that will be studied in the second part of this study. Aware of the fact that the information provided could be biased, given that the institution providing help was also publishing the stories, the author did not focus on the individual’s evaluation of the service, but rather on the nature of the service. A total of four cases were taken from this site, all from women that received help offered by refuge, cited as R1 to R4.
Women’s Aid, a charity that in the last 40 years has provided assistance to survivors of DV by coordinating responses to empower and protect victims of this form of violence, all around the UK(Women’s Aid Federation of England, 2005). With more than 300 lifesaving services, this federation of several organizations, has provided training to professionals and support to victims as part of their plan to eradicate this form of abuse. Also, Women’s aid has developed different awareness campaigns to encourage policy and social change, with the idea of hoping for a future where abuse is no longer accepted or tolerated. The stories taken from this site are part of the organizations Survivior’s Forum, which is said to be of great help for survivors and current victims. Given that this organization provides the services, the author was cautious when the services were evaluated by the victims, since the stories published could show a biased evaluation of the services. Like it was the case of Refuge, the stories here shared were from the UK, which provided information about the victims that might possibly access the UK shelters and their needs, valuable information for the second research question. The last 9 stories analyzed were taken from this site, cited WA1 to WA9.
Even though the stories here analyzed came from victims with clear differences - age, gender, social background, etc – it was possible to see how some aspects and elements of the narrations were mentioned once and again. In this sense, there are patterns of behavior and needs across victims, which show that domestic violence and its effects are long lasting and traumatic for most victims regardless of their specific background.
After carefully reading the 45 stories multiple times, the data collected was organized in four themes: reasons to stay, reasons to flee, consequence of the feeling and rebuilding process; with the intention of finding an answer to the question:
What do victims of domestic violence need and look for in the support and facilities provided by shelters?
Findings
The finding presented here help understand what the victims of DV go through, the reasons for their reluctance to seek help and the consequences after they have managed to leave the
relationship; in this context, by analyzing the stories told by the victims themselves it is possible to construct an idea of what the victims need, value, and expect from the services that provide them support, such as the shelters. The stories were not selected based on the nationality of the victim or the context of the abuse and regardless of the differences in the particular stories, it was possible to find patterns, which will be explained below.
Reasons to stay or return
Going through the stories, it was possible to see how the survivors struggled with the decision of leaving their abuser. In various accounts it was mentioned that the abuse had happed several times before action was taken and, in some cases, after lack of or failed support, the victims would return to their aggressor. Stories of numerous breakups and reconciliations showed how the victims did not only consider it difficult to stop the abuse by leaving, but also found it very hard to stay away from the aggressor and not going back. Most of the reasons given for this behavior were either external – children, promises of change, stigma, lack of help or lack of control – or personal – lack of self-esteem, self-blame, love or fear-. In this section, the reasons to stay and return are described together, given that as evidence showed, they were very similar. Love and promises of change were explained to be some of the reasons for wanting to stay or to give the aggressor another chance. Some of the examples given were: love for the person the aggressor was when they first met (HH6, HH7) love for the sober attacker (VRC3, VRC7), love and compassion for the individual that acted due to their psychological conditions (VRC4), love for the abuser that needs some fixing (VRC5, VRC6, VU10) or love simply because of the nature of the relationship – daughter, cousin, first love or husband (VU10, HH7, VU7). Hence, in order to make the relationship with their ‘loved one’ work, victims mentioned forgiving their
perpetrator several times expecting for them to keep up their promise and change (HH1, HH8, VRC1).
The safety or welfare of children, of the victim or the perpetrator, came to be one of the most mentioned reasons for victims wanting to stay or go back with the abuser. Stories about hiding bruises and pain not to scare the children (HH6), or staying in the relationship in order not to leave the children (VRC11) are some of the examples found in the narrations. A victim motioned in her story how, after getting back together with the perpetrator (she had left him before), she was too afraid to move, especially thinking she “can’t uproot the kids again” (HH3). Even though many narrations talked about the victim’s children, some other stories talked about the
perpetrator’s children too, and how the victims felt it was their responsibility to stay with them and try to accept or ignore the abuse (VRC7). In this context, the victim’s willingness to stay or return to the relationship was related to their attachment or responsibility to their children.
