finding a safer life: ameliorating the effects of intimate partner violence
TRANSCRIPT
Finding a Safer Life: Ameliorating the Effects of
Intimate Partner Violence
Principal Investigators
Michael Rothery, PhD., Professor Emeritus, Faculty of Social Work, University of
Calgary
Leslie M. Tutty, PhD, Professor Emerita, Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary
Robbie Babins-Wagner, PhD, Executive Director, Calgary Counselling Centre; Adjunct
Professor, Faculty of Social Work, University of Calgary
Major Contributors
Karen Walroth, MSW, Research Consultant
Gillian Weaver-Dunlop, MSW, Clinical Director, Calgary Women’s Emergency Shelter
Funded by:
The Alberta Centre for Child, Family and Community Research
Calgary, Alberta
January, 2016
ii
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Alberta Centre for Child, Family and Community
Research (ACCFCR)
The research team consisted of Dr. Michael Rothery, University of Calgary, Dr. Robbie
Babins-Wagner (CEO, Calgary Counselling Centre), and Dr. Leslie M. Tutty, University of
Calgary.
Thanks are extended to Dr. Deborah Levesque, Pro-Change Behavior Systems, Inc.
Rhode Island, for her help with initial planning, launching the project and conducting focus
groups.
Lynne Goertzen took the lead in conducting focus group interviews in Calgary.
Karen Walroth, M.S.W. was the Project Lead in contacting and training agencies to
engage women to complete the scales.
The initial Project Advisory Team consisted of Michelle Murray and Brigitte Baradoy
(Discovery House), Laura Woollard (HomeFront), Karen Pease (ED of the Wheatland Shelter in
Strathmore) and Bonnie Knox (HomeFront).
iii
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... ii
Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... iii
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................v
Structure and Agency ......................................................................................................... vi
Recommendations .............................................................................................................. vii
Introduction...............................................................................................................................1
Chapter One: Understanding Intimate Partner Violence .......................................................2
What We Know About Intimate Partner Violence Against Women ...................................2
Process Models in Dealing with Intimate Partner Violence ................................................3
Recognizing and Disclosing the Problem .............................................................................3
Women’s Strategies to Keep Themselves Safe .....................................................................4
Decision-Making: To leave or to stay? .................................................................................6
Turning Points: When Women Decide to Leave Abusive Partners .......................................6
Theories of Coping with Abusive Partners ..........................................................................7
Survivor Models ..................................................................................................................8
Process Models of Survivor’s Reactions to IPV ...................................................................9
Ecological Models of Intimate Partner Violence ................................................................ 13
Qualitative Findings on the Ecology of Decision-Making .................................................. 14
Structure: Ecological Theory and Social Justice ............................................................... 15
The ecological niche, and “goodness of fit” ....................................................................... 15
Chapter Two: Qualitative Findings ........................................................................................ 19
Social Structure, Culture, and Diversity ............................................................................ 19
Sexual orientation – a note for future research .................................................................. 22
Social structure: supports and resources ........................................................................... 22
Emotional supports and resources ...................................................................................... 24
Informational supports and resources ................................................................................. 26
The consciousness-raising function of informational supports............................................ 26
The system navigation function of informational supports ................................................. 27
The motivational function of informational supports .......................................................... 27
Informational supports and cultural diversity ..................................................................... 28
iv
Concrete, instrumental supports and resources ................................................................... 28
Affiliational supports and resources ................................................................................... 29
Findings Regarding Agency ................................................................................................ 31
Cognitive and affective aspects of the emergence of agency .............................................. 32
Chapter Three: Preliminary Quantitative Findings .............................................................. 34
Design, Method and Research Resources ........................................................................... 34
Defining Constructs and Creating Items ............................................................................ 34
Administering the Measures ............................................................................................... 35
Psychometric Analysis of the Scales ................................................................................... 35
Readiness to Stay Safe Scale ............................................................................................. 35
Decisional Balance Scale ................................................................................................... 36
Chapter Four: Discussion and Recommendations ................................................................. 37
Stages of change: Problems with Obtaining a Sample ....................................................... 37
Utilizing a Critical Ecological Perspective ......................................................................... 38
Necessary Resources ........................................................................................................... 38
Emotional resources .......................................................................................................... 38
Informational resources ..................................................................................................... 39
Concrete/Instrumental resources ........................................................................................ 40
Affiliational supports ......................................................................................................... 40
Agency ................................................................................................................................. 40
Epilogue ............................................................................................................................... 41
References................................................................................................................................ 42
Appendix One: Engaging Women/Stages of Change Measure Development Focus Group
Protocol .................................................................................................................................... 47
Appendix Two: Women’s Intentions to Keep Self Safe Measure Distribution and
Corrected-Item-Total Correlations ........................................................................................ 52
Appendix Three: Decisional Balance Items ........................................................................... 56
v
Finding a Safer Life: Ameliorating the Effects of Intimate Partner
Violence
Executive Summary
The proposal for this study stipulated a project designed to improve family services to
women who have experienced Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). The goal was to develop scales
for assessing readiness for change as that term is used by proponents of Prochaska’s
Transtheoretical Model (Prochaska & Norcross, 2003).
The proposed project was to develop three clinically useful instruments for assessing
readiness for change: (1) a basic readiness for change scale comprising items asking about
women’s readiness to do what they can to create a safer life; (2) a resistance scale comprising
items asking about the obstacles to creating a safer life; (3) a decisional balance scale asking
about likely positive versus negative effects of such changes.
Stages of interest from the basic readiness for change scale include precontemplation,
contemplation, preparation, action, and maintenance (Prochaska & Norcross, 2003; see chapter 1
of the full report for more detail). Decisional balance is a scale describing ambivalence
regarding change. It recognizes that increased safety may come with significant costs, a claim
supported by the qualitative analysis in Chapter 2 of the full report.
The steps in the measurement development process outlined in the project proposal were:
(1) defining constructs, (2) generating items, (3) administering the measures, (4) refining
measures, (5) subtype analysis, and (6) validation.
Several modifications were required as the project proceeded. In the original project
proposal it was determined that an updated literature review would be a necessary part of step 2.
As revisions to the project’s goals and procedures were undertaken the need for an expanded
literature review was given a high priority, and this is presented in chapter 1 of the full report.
Early in the study, the team also decided to exclude the resistance scale for two reasons:
(1) key informants advised that the concept of resistance as it is used in the professional literature
is seen by many to be pejorative, and (2) key informants also suggested that the distinction
between the proposed resistance and decisional balance scales was not sufficiently clear
conceptually.
Finally, important changes to the research were required as a consequence of difficulties
obtaining a large enough sample to complete steps 4 through 6. Agreed-upon revisions to goals
and procedures were, briefly: (1) whereas the desired sample size for administration of the
measures was 250, after many attempted approaches we had just 31 completed measures in hand,
and it was decided that the quantitative analysis of such a small sample should be restricted in
scope and exploratory in spirit, (2) recognizing that the focus group transcripts accumulated in
step two were a rich, largely untapped resource, it was decided that an extensive qualitative
analysis of those data would be potentially valuable.
Thus, the final project has two focuses: a qualitative piece in which focus groups’
transcripts (n=56 respondents) were thematically analyzed and a quantitative piece in which a
vi
small sample (n=31) of responses to draft stages of change measurement items were analyzed as
preliminary, descriptive findings.
Respecting the qualitative focus, a consensus exists in scholarship respecting engaging
women that our knowledge of women’s help-seeking remains atheoretical, and it is further
suggested that theory development might well fruitfully consider ecological systems theory as a
promising general framework. These propositions guided the extensive of qualitative work
presented in Chapter 2 of the full report.
The commonest use of qualitative research methods is for exploratory purposes. Such
was not the case in this study, where our purposes were confirmatory:
Adding depth and detail to statistical findings is one aspect of confirmation and
elucidation. Within major traditions of theory-oriented qualitative inquiry… qualitative
methods are also the methods of choice in extending and deepening the theoretical
propositions and understandings that have emerged from previous field studies. (Patton,
1990, p. 132)
The coding for our qualitative analysis was carried out using NVivo, a flexible and
powerful qualitative analysis computer program. In total 1661 coding decisions were made.
Structure and Agency
Basic to the ecological systems perspective is the observation that people make decisions
(agency) within the supports and constraints of their social contexts (structure). Prominent
among the structural issues our respondents spoke of were the impacts of culture, and the special
challenges that women from minority cultures face. A culture that discourages help-seeking in
the broader community can make the search for a safer life even more difficult than it normally
is, via social control strategies such as stigma, shaming and isolation.
Given cultural variations on themes, there are still commonalities that the ecosystems
perspective brings into sharp focus. There are similarities in the types of demand or stress that
both motivate and impede help-seeking:
Emotional needs and resources, which refer to available relationships in which a woman
can discuss her experience safely, expecting to be understood.
Informational needs and resources refer to the knowledge and skills a woman needs if
she is to find a safer life for herself and her children. This can be an especially acute
problem for women from some cultural minorities, whose social isolation may include
language problems, and who consequently may not know about or understand resources
that are in place to help them.
What makes informational resources vitally important is that they serve three functions:
consciousness-raising, system navigation, and motivation.
Concrete and instrumental needs and resources refer to relevant goods and services that
are required to live a reasonable secure life: along with feeling unsafe, a common fear
that discourages problem-solving is finding oneself and children impoverished , even
homeless.
Affiliational needs and resources refer to the need for meaningful social roles within
which one feels competent and welcome. As our respondents related, women who have
vii
suffered spousal abuse have often been encouraged to see themselves as globally
incompetent.
Following Taylor (1985) we describe the exercise of agency as a process illustrated by
this example:
A woman reflects upon her troubled marital circumstances.
She evaluates the circumstances on which she is reflecting.
This exercise in values clarification implicates her sense and definition of self, of who
she is and what she deserves.
When the evaluation is strong and negative it results in clarity of conviction and purpose.
She plans and takes action.
Incidents of this general process are prominent in our respondents’ transcripts.
Commonly, a woman begins in a state of denial. The emergence of agency from this original
state begins when a turning point or critical incident motivates reflection – fresh reality testing
respecting her relationship and an evaluation respecting the acceptability of her situation. Often
enough, this leads to a commitment to change. The critical incident that inaugurates this process
can be any number of things; consistent with the literature, our respondents most often identify
an escalation of the violence they are subjected to, and/or concern for children’s safety or well-
being.
Recommendations
A more extensive discussion of recommendations is in Chapter 4 of the full report; the
following are examples:
A holistic, ecosystems assessment leads to an appreciation for the real complexity that IPV
presents. One of the resulting recommendations is for systematic attention to a range of
supports, and to the development of service packages.
Our data analysis indicated that part of any suitably complex plan or program should often
include careful attention and response to affective issues. The current emphasis favoring
Cognitive Behavioural work is not wrong, but it is not complete.
Informational resources are strongly endorsed as essential – many excellent educational
resources have been developed, and they are effective. Given this, every community should
have an adequately funded program for the development and dissemination of information.
Especially with informational and affiliational resources (though by no means exclusively)
the special challenges facing cultural minority groups demand care and creativity on the part
of service providers.
Advocating for development of adequate concrete and instrumental resources is an ongoing
need and responsibility.
Systematic attention to affiliational resources and supports is recommended; this means
attention to clients’ access to meaningful social roles.
1
Introduction
The proposal for this study stipulated a two year project designed to improve family
services to women abused by their spouses. The goal was to develop scales for assessing
readiness for change as that term is used by proponents of Prochaska’s Transtheoretical Model
(Prochaska and Norcross, 2003).
The proposed project was to develop three clinically useful instruments for assessing
readiness for change: (1) a basic readiness for change scale comprising items asking about
women’s readiness to do what they can to create a safer life; (2) a resistance scale comprising
items asking about the obstacles to creating a safer life; (3) a decisional balance scale asking
about likely positive versus negative effects of such changes.
Stages of interest from the basic readiness for change scale include precontemplation,
contemplation, preparation, action, and maintenance (Prochaska & Norcross, 2003; see chapter 1
of this report for more detail). Decisional balance is a scale describing ambivalence regarding
change. It recognizes that increased safety may come with significant costs, a claim supported by
the qualitative analysis in Chapter 2 of this report.
The steps in the measurement development process outlined in the project proposal were:
(1) defining constructs, (2) generating items, (3) administering the measures, (4) refining
measures, (5) subtype analysis, and (6) validation.
Several modifications were required as the project proceeded. In the original project
proposal it was stipulated that an updated literature review would be a necessary part of step 2.
As revisions to the project’s goals and procedures were undertaken the need for an expanded
literature review was given and even higher priority, and this is presented in chapter 1.
Early in the study, the team also decided to exclude the resistance scale for two reasons:
(1) key informants advised that the concept of resistance as it is used in the professional literature
is seen by many to be pejorative, and (2) key informants also suggested that the distinction
between the proposed resistance and decisional balance scales was not sufficiently clear
conceptually.
Finally, important changes to the research were required as a consequence of difficulties
obtaining a large enough sample to complete steps 4 through 6. Agreed-upon revisions to goals
and procedures were, briefly: (1) whereas the desired sample size for administration of the
measures was 250, after many attempted approaches we had just 31 completed measures on
hand, and it was decided that the quantitative analysis of such a small sample should be restricted
in scope and exploratory in spirit, (2) recognizing that the focus group transcripts accumulated in
step two were a rich, largely untapped resource, it was decided that an extensive qualitative
analysis of those data would be very valuable.
A consensus exists in scholarship respecting engaging women that our knowledge of
women’s help-seeking remains atheoretical, and it is further suggested that theory development
might well fruitfully consider ecological systems theory as a promising general framework.
These propositions guided an extensive piece of qualitative work, presented in Chapter 2.
2
Chapter One: Understanding Intimate Partner Violence
This chapter presents the research relevant to engaging women whose partners have
abused them, first exploring the nature and severity of woman abuse, abused women’s help-
seeking behaviours and theories that explain the causes of the violence and. women’s decision-
making processes. Theories related to women coping are presented, as is the rationale and
methodology for the current research.
What We Know About Intimate Partner Violence Against Women
Violence against women is a serious problem that results in injury, emotional harm and,
at worst, death. Canada’s 2009 General Social Survey (GSS) on Victimization (Statistics Canada,
2011) estimated that 6% of Canadian women had been victimized by an intimate partner in the
previous five years. In the 2004 GSS (the last time these details were reported), of women who
self-reported partners abusing them, 27% had been beaten, 25% choked, 44% were injured, and
13% had sought medical help. Perhaps most instructive is that 34% of these women feared for their
lives in reaction to their partner’s violence (AuCoin, 2005).
Unlike how the general public often conceives of violence against women by intimate
partners, the abuse is not marital conflict or anger but the intentional and instrumental use of
power to control the woman’s actions (Kimmel, 2002). Stark (2007) coined the term “coercive
control,” which aptly captures the unique element of intentional actions to control one’s partner.
The abuse that women suffer from their intimate male partners takes many forms that
typically extend throughout the relationship. While focusing on physical injuries is important,
many women endure years of intense psychological abuse that devastates their lives and the lives
of their children (Ansara & Hindin, 2011). Sexual assaults are also common (Bergen & Bukovec
2006; Cattaneo, De Loveh, & Zweig, 2008). Most women are abused in multiple ways, each of
which has a cumulative effect on their feeling trapped and ineffective in either addressing the
abuse or fleeing their abusive partners. Further, women can be at increased risk of abuse after a
couple separation (Brownridge, 2006; Fleury, Sullivan, & Bybee, 2000).
However, we would like to highlight several cautionary notes in working with and
conducting research with abused women. Though considerable research has documented the
traumas and negative consequences for women who live with abusive partners, we are at risk of
the perceiving these individuals as “helpless” victims, not seeing their strengths and coping
abilities to both endure abuse and, ultimately, decide to leave (Tutty, 2006). This well-intended
perspective comes from focusing on the serious nature of intimate partner violence in efforts to
raise the importance of the issues and engage community and institutional support to develop
specialized programs. As critical as these initiatives are, we must not lose sight that women
whose partners behave abusively are diverse and have multiple reactions and strategies to
address their partners’ behaviours. Acknowledging the resilience of women and finding ways to
support their strengths is a critical aspect of intervention (Tutty, 2006).
Another inherent risk is inadvertently blaming the victim for the actions of the
perpetrator. Goodman, Dutton, Vankos and Weinfurt (2005) suggest that focusing attention on
the ways that victims protect themselves should not be used to blame women for their
victimization, nor to blame them if they respond in ways that could further endanger themselves.
Violent behaviour must be seen as the sole responsibility of the individual that who commits
3
such behaviour. As Burman (2003) states, “queries like, ‘why does she put up with that? and
‘why does she stay’ continue to haunt the battered woman and demonstrate a pervasive reversal
of condemnation – from the perpetrator to the victim” (p. 83).
Focusing on the victim’s role in staying safe is intended to draw attention to the ways that
some women do end assaultive relationships despite the risk to themselves (Burman, 2003), and
to “glean some insights into their survival skills and the strengths that are utilized to make the
decision to leave, act upon, and sustain that goal” (Burman, p. 84).
It is also important to caution that women who choose to stay in abusive relationships
should not be seen as “failures” or as having “relapsed” (Tutty, 2006). Experiences of abuse in
relationships vary widely, and for some women, the disadvantages of leaving a relationship
outweigh the advantages. Nixon (2002) suggests that blaming women for remaining in abusive
relationships ignores the socio-economic realities that women face, since many women are no
safer and are worse off financially when they leave violent partners. Some women choose not to
leave abusive relationships because they have been threatened with increased violence. In fact, as
mentioned previously, leaving abusive relationships can be a time of increased risk of re-abuse
or even homicide for women, since many batterers escalate their violence after separation
(Fleury, Sullivan & Bybee, 2000).
Mehrotra (1999) reminds us that individual experiences of abuse vary and often fall
outside the parameters established by typical definitions of abuse. She suggests that it is essential
to take into account the diverse experiences of women who are experiencing abuse in their
intimate relationships:
The emphasis on the excessive amount of abuse that characterizes the chronic battered
syndrome makes leaving an abusive relationship the only rational solution... we challenge the
blanket assumption that leaving abusive relationships is the only rational solution for all
women (p. 626).
Immigrant women who have left support networks in their countries of origin may be
considerably disadvantaged should they leave their abusive partner (Mehrotra, 1999).
Structural barriers such as poverty, lack of mobility, lack of social support, and shortcomings
in community interventions may also be overwhelming for women from the dominant culture
who are in abusive situations (Gondolf & Fisher, 1988).
In summary, women typically have the best sense of their own safety and needs for
intervention. Assuming that the professionals know better, and attempting to force women into
leaving partners, and accepting treatment or “support” simply parallels the power and control
issues used against her by her partner.
Process Models in Dealing with Intimate Partner Violence
Recognizing and Disclosing the Problem
A number of researchers have explored the process by which women abused by intimate
partners come to view their partners’ behaviour towards them as abusive. Women often perceive
initial violent acts by a partner as aberrant events in otherwise loving, good relationships (Mills,
1985). In fact, abusive episodes are often, “only a portion of the complex interactions with their
partners that also involve significant acts of caring and mutual support” (Lempert, 1996, p. 270).
4
Defining the behaviour of one’s spouse as abusive is not an easy process for women,
since the cultural norms about families are that they are expected to be safe, nurturing havens for
all members. Lempert (1996) suggests that women typically bear responsibility for maintaining
this cultural tradition, so may feel a personal sense of failure for the marriage not being happy.
Some women may resist labeling their partner’s behaviours as abuse, since this could imply that
they are not strong women, and does not convey the ways that they have resisted the violence
(Campbell, Rose, Kub & Nedd, 1998; Wade, 1997).
Initially women often choose not to tell others about the abuse (Lempert; 1996; Mills,
1985). In this way, women attempt to make their realities consonant with cultural norms.
Lampert suggests that keeping the violence “invisible” is a way to claim their senses of self,
hiding their own victimization and keeping up the appearances of a happy relationship. Since
violence normally occurs in the privacy of the home, it is often quite possible to keep it hidden
from others. The perpetrators of abuse also attempt to keep the violence private, using strategies
to prevent women from disclosing to others such as isolating them and assaulting them in
controlled ways such as hitting parts of a woman’s body where bruises will not be visible to
others (Lempert, 1996).
Over time, if the abuse escalates, it may no longer be possible for women to continue
defining the relationships as harmonious, or to keep the violence invisible (Lempert, 1996).
Women often struggle with the lack of consonance between their own experiences of being
abused, their partner’s refusal to acknowledge the violence, and their own expectations of
marriage and family life. They may engage in this struggle alone, still choosing not to disclose to
others.
At this point, women may employ other strategies to keep the relationship together,
attempting to understand the reasons for their partners’ violence, and to prevent it from recurring.
They may attempt to keep themselves as safe as possible by acting passively, and may manage
the violence through rationalization, minimizing the significance of the violence, and blaming
themselves.
Women’s Strategies to Keep Themselves Safe
Abused women engage in considerable help-seeking behaviour in trying to achieve non-
violent lives (Gondolf & Fisher, 1988; Campbell et al., 1998; Gondolf, 2002; Goodkind, Sullivan
& Bybee, 2004; Goodman, et al., 2005). Gondolf and Fisher (1988) note that the research
evidence counteracts the myth that abused women are passive and unassertive, and points to
them instead being, “survivors, in that they assertively and persistently attempt to do something
about their abuse. They contact a variety of help sources where one would expect to find
assistance” (p. 93).
Goodkind et al. (2004) reported that the women in their research who were experiencing
the most serious levels of abuse were most often engaged in self-protective and help-seeking
activities. Women who were categorized in a “High Activity” cluster endorsed a large number of
strategies, including placating, actively resisting the assailant, seeking help from both formal and
informal sources, as well as emergency escape planning. These women were experiencing the
most violence, and had assailants whose behaviours were most indicative of potential lethality.
Unfortunately, despite the women’s best efforts at protecting themselves, they remained in
5
considerable danger from their abusers – highlighting the need to hold abusers accountable for
their actions.
Other research has supported the conclusion that women become increasingly active in
their attempts to stop violence as it becomes more frequent or severe (Gondolf & Fisher, 1988;
Dutton, Goodman & Bennett, 1999). Women are more likely to seek help as the violence
worsens, and they are also more likely to seek a wider variety of forms of help.
Gondolf (1998) researched women whose partners were attending batterer treatment, and
concluded that these women were also active help-seekers, often attempting to get help from the
criminal justice system. More than half had obtained alcohol treatment or some other form of
counselling at some point in the past, and 58% had previously used the criminal justice system to
deal with domestic violence. In contrast, only one third of the women had used domestic
violence specific counselling services, and less than 10% had ever stayed in a women’s shelter.
From their research with over 400 African American women, Goodman et al. (2005)
concluded that the more resources that women had, the less likely they were to report re-abuse.
In particular, women who were employed, and women living on their own or with family, were
less likely to report re-abuse. Women’s emotional well-being also predicted re-abuse over time –
that is, women who were better off emotionally were less likely to report re-abuse. Goodman and
colleagues suggest that women’s emotional well-being may lead to increased self-determination
and autonomy, which, in turn, leads to increased safety.
Goodman et al. (2005) also reported that in the group of women with histories of severe
violence, whether women had strong social support networks or not had no relationship to
whether they were re-abused. For women experiencing high levels of violence, re-abuse was
equally likely at every level of social support. However, for women with histories of lower levels
of violence, a lack of social support strongly predicted re-abuse: women with the least amount of
social support had a 65% predicted probability of re-abuse during the next year, compared to a
20% for women reporting the highest social support. Four acts that contributed to re-abuse all
involved the woman directly confronting her partner – fighting back physically, sleeping
separately, refusing to do what he said, and using a weapon to resist his abuse.
While some research suggests that help-seeking behaviour is positively associated with
the victims’ mental health (Kemp, Green, Hovanitz & Rawlings, 1995; Mitchell & Hodson,
1983), other studies suggest that the issue is complex and other mediating variables should be
considered. For example, for some immigrant women, active resistance may, in fact, be
associated with decreased mental health (Yoshihama, 2002). Active resistance and help-seeking
may also place women at increased risk of injury or death (Goodman et al., 2005; Wilson &
Daly, 1993; Fleury, Sullivan & Bybee, 2000).
Cultural values may strongly influence the range of coping strategies that women believe
are available to them. Leaving an abusive partner may not be seen as a viable option for some
women because of serious sanctions from their extended family and community, and they may
be ostracized in the community (Yoshihama, 2002). There may be a strong pressure to acquiesce,
to place the collective welfare of the family over one’s individual needs and rights (Dasgupta &
Warrier, 1996). Further, since many immigrant women are unfamiliar with the dominant culture,
6
and their primary support networks may be in their countries of origin, the prospect of leaving
can be extremely daunting.
Goodman et al. (2005) concluded that actively resisting abuse may place women at
increased risk for serious harm. Women, therefore, often deliberately choose to act “passively” to
protect themselves and their children. Lempert (1996) purports that victims make strategic
decisions in surviving abusive situations. As such, choosing to be passive is a deliberate choice
that some women make to protect themselves. Goodman et al. (2005) concluded that women
who actively resisted their partner’s abuse were significantly more likely to be re-abused.
Goodkind and colleagues (2004) noted that although one must be careful not to fault women for
using these strategies, counsellors could help the women consider the risks involved in actively
resisting abuse.
Decision-Making: To leave or to stay?
Research on women’s stay/leave decisions began to appear in the 1970’s as an initial
attempt to identify the reasons why abused women remained trapped in abusive relationships.
Many of these studies tried to account for both structural constraints on a woman’s decision to
leave or stay as well as psychological factors (Anderson & Saunders, 2003). Primarily based on
research in shelters from the 1980’s (Aguirre, 1985; Cannon & Sparks, 1989; Giles-Sims, 1983), a
common belief about abused women is that they make an average of seven or eight attempts to
leave their abusive partners before successfully doing so (Tutty, 2006). However this could be an
out-dated statistic. Frasier, Slatt, Kowlowitz and Glowa (2001) found no evidence of this in the
literature. In a study of 64 Alberta shelter residents, Tutty and Rothery (2002) noted that 90
percent were living independently six months to a year following a shelter stay. Nonetheless,
understanding that some women are at increased risk if they separate from their partner is an
important dynamic to consider in looking at leaving behaviours (Brownridge, 2006; Brownridge
et al., 2008).
Turning Points: When Women Decide to Leave Abusive Partners
Women often reach a turning point in the relationships when they begin to view their
partners’ actions in a different light (Patzel, 2001). This turning point may arise from a
worsening of the abuse, others learning of the abuse or an event involving harm to children
(Giles-Sims, 1983; Mills, 1985; Campbell et al., 1998). Sometimes several significant turning
points in an abusive relationship may influence a woman’s decision-making.
However, sometimes turning points are small, incremental changes that, over time, result
in a new perspective of the relationship in which leaving becomes an option (Campbell et al.,
1998). Campbell et al. suggest that abused women go back and forth in their thinking, feeling,
and actions as they respond to abusive incidents in the relationship:
The process included a number of elements: (a) responding to turning points by thinking
about, labelling, and conceptualizing what was happening to them; (b) negotiating internally with
self and externally with the abuser; and (c) trying various strategies and combinations of
strategies to improve the relationship and decrease the abuse. (p. 751)
At turning points, women may have particular insights about their partners and/or their
relationships. For example, they may realize that they are not to blame for the abuse; that the
7
problem is the responsibility of the perpetrator; and / or decide that they need to leave the
perpetrator permanently (Patzel, 2001). In fact, the process of defining one’s partner as abusive
is often a catalyst for women in deciding to leave or make some significant change in the
relationship (Campbell et al., 1998).
A number of researchers have identified turning points in the process of leaving.
Grauwiler (2008) interviewed ten women from a community-based domestic violence program.
Each mentioned that an event occurred that precipitated initial help-seeking and that they saw as
a “turning point.” These pivotal moments created shifts in the women’s perceptions of their
partner’s violence such that they needed to seek help.
According to Baly (2010), women need such triggers to conquer their own doubts about
leaving and to explain their decision to external observers who did not support the decision to
leave. Baly stated, “leaving the relationship seems to have become an option once participants
started to have an understanding of the situation and how their needs were not being met, but it
did not become a reality until a suitable trigger was identified” (p. 2310).
In summary, a solid body of research has identified the following five primary factors or
turning points that contribute to an abused woman’s decision to leave: (1) a deterioration in the
relationship and/ or an increased level of violence (Campbell, et al., 1998; Chang et al., 2010;
Patzel, 2001); (2) fear for the safety of children, others or self (Campbell, et al., 1998; Chang et
al., 2010; (Kurz, 1996; Patzel, 2001); (3) increased personal strength and agency in the
victimized woman (Patzel, 2001); (4) A cognitive shift in which the woman starts to view the
relationship as abusive (Burke et al., 2001; Chang et al., 2010; Patzel, 2001) and partner’s
infidelity (Campbell et al., 1998; Chang et al., 2010; Enander & Holmberg, 2008; Patzel, 2001).
Theories of Coping with Abusive Partners
While some theories have been posited to aid in the understanding of abused women’s
stay/ leave decisions and each of these theories has found some degree of support within the
literature, our understanding of stay/leave decisions within violent relationships remains limited.
Bell and Naugle (2005) suggest that this may be due in part to fact that “the current theoretical
models proposed to explain stay/leave suggestions are exceedingly broad in scope, rely heavily
on self-report data, focus primarily on unalterable historical factors and victim characteristics,
lack adequate research and clinical utility and fail to capture the full complexity of stay/leave
decisions” (Bell & Naugle, p. 26). Although researchers have extensively examined the nature
and extent of help-seeking, a theory of help-seeking that provides a framework for such findings
has yet to be developed (Liang, Goodman, Tummala-Narra, & Weintraub, 2005).
Sylaska and Edwards (2014) reviewed literature on the rates, experiences and correlates
of disclosure and help-seeking to informal support networks finding three overarching groups of
theories. First, feminist-inspired models (also called survivor theory) view victims as actively
seeking help (Gondolf & Fisher, 1988). Feminist/survivor theories place a crucial emphasis on
gender and have a strong focus on combating victim blaming.
Second are process models such as the transtheoretical model of change (Prochaska &
DiClimente, 2003) that examine victims seeking to reduce violence or leave the relationship by
disclosing or help-seeking (Sylaska & Edwards, 2014). Process/transtheoretical frameworks are
8
unique in their focus on victims’ disclosure processes and how this process is fluid and changes
over time” (p. 11).
Thirdly, Sylaska and Edwards identify an ecological model or the symbolic interactionist
role theory that incorporates the roles of individual, relational, and environmental factors. They
described these as unique because they include multiple factors with respect to victims’
disclosure experiences.
However, Sylaska and Edwards found some overlap in these frameworks, in that all three
examine the roles of different levels of internal and external factors related to the disclosure
process; both the feminist/survivor and process/ transtheoretical frameworks focus on victims as
survivors or active agents within the disclosure and help-seeking efforts; and both the ecological
and process/transtheoretical frameworks credit the complexity of disclosure for victims.
Sylaska and Edward’s framing of theories is used in the next sections that present these
conceptualizations in more detail.
Survivor Models
In seeking to understand the process by which abused women seek to end the violence in
their lives, several models have been proposed including Gondolf and Fisher’s Survivor
hypothesis and the Theory of Social Entrapment (Ptacek, 1999). In these models, the decision to
leave a violent relationship is seen as a complex process that is affected by a number of personal
and situational factors, and involves progression through a number of stages (Hendy, Eggen,
Gustitus, McLeod, & Ng, 2003). Each model provides a theoretical framework for understanding
the experiences of victims who do wish to leave their abusive partners, and for whom structural
barriers are not debilitating.
In contrast to the theory of learned helplessness, Gondolf and Fisher’s (1988) survivor
hypothesis suggests that women continually resist their victimization through help-seeking
efforts that are largely unsuccessful because of institutional failures. Using data from interviews
with 6000 shelter residents in Texas, Gondolf and Fisher concluded that increased abuse in
combination with batterers’ increased anti-social behaviour (i.e., substance abuse, violence
outside the home, and arrests) were related to increased help-seeking behaviour. Gondolf and
Fisher argue that if women have sufficient resources and social support, they will leave their
abusive partners and live independent lives.
While the abused women as survivors theory represented a marked advancement over the
model of learned helplessness, the variables hypothesized to influence abused women’s help-
seeking are limited to the individual and interpersonal levels. There is no opportunity to examine
how a woman’s socio-cultural context shapes her help-seeking behaviour.
Ptacek’s theory of social entrapment (1999, as cited in Moe, 2007) provides a contextual
framework for understanding the ways in which abused women survive and resist violence.
According to Ptacek the combinations of coercive control tactics by abusers, and social and
institutional failures to adequately address battering, are largely responsible for the social
entrapment of abused women. When deserted by community support networks including friends
and family, women may feel as if there is little they can do to stop their victimization.
9
Moe’s (2007) qualitative research with nineteen women in a domestic violence shelter
supported Ptacek’s (1999) theory of social entrapment, revealing that most of the participants
were cumulatively affected by their partners’ abusive tactics and the failed or inadequate
responses by social and institutional supports.
Process Models of Survivor’s Reactions to IPV
According to Carlson’s Stress and Coping model (1997), obstacles to women leaving
abusive relationships consist of both internal and external constraints. External constraints may
include a lack of support from a woman’s extended family, low educational level, lack of
employment prospects, lack of supportive institutional responses, lack of affordable housing, and
childcare issues. Carlson suggests that interventions designed to address these external barriers
are often required – including changes in social policy and broad societal interventions.
Intimate partner violence is viewed as a stressor that can sometimes overwhelm a
woman’s resources. According to Carlson, counselling can be utilized to strengthen a victim’s
internal resources, helping to address internal constraints such as low self-esteem, shame, self-
blame, poor coping skills, passivity, depression and learned helplessness.
Central to Carlson’s Stress and Coping model is the concept of cognitive appraisal, a
process by which an individual assesses an event in terms of its impact on the individual’s well-
being. In domestic violence situations, primary cognitive appraisal occurs when an individual
evaluates the degree of stress involved with an abusive incident, in other words, carries out a risk
assessment. Secondary appraisal occurs when the individual decides that action does need to be
carried out to respond or cope with a stressor. Carlson suggests that domestic violence does
normally lead to stressful appraisals, since abuse often involves harm, losses, and/ or threats to
victims. Women must then use secondary appraisal and cope with their circumstances.
Coping efforts can take two forms: problem-focused coping or emotion-focused coping.
Individuals use problem-focused coping when they perceive it is possible to make changes to the
situation, whereas they tend to use emotion-focused coping when they perceive that it is not
possible to change the source of the distress. According to Carlson, an individual may have
positive coping resources, such as problem-solving skills, social support, or high self-esteem.
However, there may be personal constraints to coping that can be addressed in counselling, such
as traditional sex-role belief systems, or psychological deficits.
Carlson suggests that women progress through stages in their perceptions of their
situation. During the first stage, a woman believes the batterer’s perception of the problem, that it
is her fault that she is being abused. She may engage in problem-focused coping aimed at being a
better wife or mother, and may choose to value the positive parts of the relationship more than
the negative aspects.
If the abuse continues in the relationship despite the woman’s efforts to make changes to
her role as mother and wife, the woman may begin to see the batterer as responsible for the
abusive behaviour. However, at this stage the positive aspects of the relationship may still
outweigh the negative, and so the woman may use problem-focused coping to try to change his
behaviour, and emotion-focused coping to help deal with her own feelings.
10
If her partner continues or escalates his abusive behaviour, the woman may reach the
third stage, in which she realizes there is nothing she can do to change his behaviour. According
to Carlson, at this stage, she may feel overwhelmed, depressed, trapped, and afraid. She may
leave the relationship temporarily, use drugs or alcohol to cope, call the police, or go to a
woman’s shelter out of a feeling of desperation.
Finally, if her partner still has not changed his behaviour, a woman may arrive at the final
stage, termed “despair”. At this stage, the woman realizes that her husband will not change, there
is little positive left in the relationship, and her only alternative to end her suffering is to
permanently end the relationship.
According to Carlson’s model, intervention should be linked to the client’s understanding
of the abuse, and also include the development of a safety plan, domestic violence education,
enhancement of coping abilities, improvement of problem-solving abilities, and increased social
support.
Another model that seeks to understand the process of change made by abused women is
the Transtheoretical Model of Change. This model was first developed by Prochaska and
Norcross (2003) as a general theory of the stages through which people progress in making
personal changes in their lives. The model delineates five stages through which people progress
in overcoming problematic behaviours, including precontemplation, contemplation, preparation,
action, and maintenance (Prochaska & Norcross, 2003). It is believed that with each stage, a set
of tasks is required for movement to the next stage. The model has been extensively and
successfully applied to individual medical issues such as smoking cessation, dieting and
compliance with medical instructions. What is not clear is the extent to which the model can be
applied to more complex social issues such as intimate partner violence.
Brown (1997), who applied the model to the decision-making of women abused by
intimate partners, suggests that making significant life change is a complex, dynamic process
that does not occur in a linear fashion. Change often occurs gradually, and it is normal for people
to experience setbacks in their process of change. The difficulties inherent in leaving an abusive
relationship are seen to be embedded in a context in which the perpetrator is threatening the
victim with harm should she leave, there may be limited financial and / or social resources, and
the victim may still love the perpetrator. In applying the model to victims of abuse, staying with
the abusive partner is commonly defined as the problematic behaviour, and leaving the abusive
partner, therefore, the desired outcome (Brown, 1997; Burman, 2003; Frasier, et al., 2001; ;
Burke et al., 2009, Denison, Gielen, McDonnell, & O’Campo, 2004).
According to the Transtheoretical model of change, individuals in the precontemplation
stage are unaware of their problem (Prochaska & Norcross, 2003). It is not that they do not see
the solution; they do not see the problem. As discussed earlier, cultural expectations that define
marriages and families as safe, nurturing institutions tend to mitigate against women initially
defining abusive episodes as problematic. It is especially difficult for women to define their
relationships as abusive if there are many positive aspects of the relationship.
Burman (2003) suggests that a woman is in precontemplation if she is minimizing or
denying the “source, extent, and consequences of the problem, refraining from viewing her
partner in a realistic light” (p. 84). In this stage, she tries to protect herself and to keep herself
11
safe by meeting his demands. She may hope that he will change, yet at the same time, “there is
an apprehensiveness in her daily routine” (p. 85), signifying her discomfort with her partner’s
behaviour. If a woman is in the precontemplation phase, Burman suggests that a primary
treatment goal is to provide her with information about the seriousness of abuse, and increase her
understanding of the personal risks involved in continuing the relationship.
According to Prochaska and Norcross (2003), in the contemplation stage, people are
aware that a problem exists that they wish to overcome, however they have not made any
commitment to take any action. Contemplators are evaluating the options. Some people may
choose to remain in the contemplation stage for many years. As the person takes small steps
toward change they begin to make firm their commitment to change and can move into the next
stage. Brown (1997) suggests that abused women in this stage are considering ending the
violence in their lives, and so they build their support network and assess how they can be
financially independent. Factors that may keep them in this stage include a love for the batterer,
or overwhelming external constraints. Burman (2003) suggests that this stage is characterized by
ambivalence on the part of the abused woman. She experiences constant fluctuations between
aspects of the relationship that are loving and abusive. She experiences increased cognitive
dissonance with the two contrasting parts of the relationship, and her awareness of the abuse
comes more to the forefront of her consciousness.
When working with abused women in contemplation, Burman (2003) suggests that the
goal is to reduce their ambivalence and cognitive dissonance, and to help them to evaluate the
batterer’s behaviour in a realistic light. If they wish to consider leaving the abusive partner, they
could conduct a “cost-benefit” analysis of staying versus leaving the batterer, involving a careful
weighing of the pros and cons of leaving, an assessment of the external factors and their own
safety.
The preparation stage involves both intentions to change and actual behaviour change.
Although people are not ready to fully integrate change into their lives they have begun to take
small steps that prepare them to make larger more complete changes. In order to move on to the
next stage people need to set goals and priorities, and they need to dedicate themselves to a
specific action plan (Prochaska & Norcross, 2003).
In the action stage, individuals modify their behaviour, experiences and environment in
order to overcome their problems (Prochaska & Norcross, 2003). Action involves the most overt
behaviour changes and requires a considerable commitment of time and energy. Modifications of
problems made in the action stage tend to be most visible and receive the greatest amount of
praise/recognition.
Frasier et al. (2001) suggested that actions such as seeking legal assistance, or gathering
together important documents necessary for independent living, are examples of the preparation
stage of change. Other actions taken by women that are characteristic of the preparation stage are
saving money, collecting contact information for resources and supports, and exploring options
for housing, legal aid, day care. The goal of the preparation stage is to make plans for the best
course of action, and to prepare to carry it out (Burman, 2003). Continued abuse by a woman’s
partner serves to reinforce her commitment to leave, and to reduce ambivalent feelings.
12
The action stage is considered the most dangerous for the victim and her family members
(Frasier et al., 2001), as women are at the highest risk of serious injury or death at the time of
leaving an abusive partner. Some of the steps taken by women that might characterize the action
phase include attending a support group for abused women, requesting the abusive partner seek
treatment, or seeking work outside the home. Other strategies include going to a shelter, seeking
assistance from friends and family, and/or obtaining a restraining order (Burman, 2003).
In the final stage of maintenance, individuals have successfully engaged in continuous
action without returning to a situation where they are victimized (Brown, 1997). They work to
prevent relapse and consolidate the gains attained during the action stage (Prochaska & Norcross,
2003). Maintenance is not a static stage as it has traditionally been viewed, but rather, is an
active process in which the person is continually attempting to better situation.
From this theoretical perspective, in working with abused women the goal of the
maintenance stage is to prevent a woman from returning to an abusive partner after having left.
Some of the reasons that women return to abusive situations include fear, emotional attachments
to the partner, a desire to keep the family together, and fear of the partner (Burman, 2003). Other
factors that may increase a woman’s vulnerability to returning to an abusive partner include post-
traumatic stress syndrome and pervasive grief reactions over losses (Burman, 2003). As
mentioned previously, women with greater access to resources and supports find it easier to
leave abusive relationships (Burman, 2003; Gondolf & Fisher, 1988).
Particular processes of change appear to be important in various stages of the change
process outlined above (Brown, 1997; Burke et al., 2004). Some of the change processes that are
important in the stages of contemplation and preparation involve cognition, such as: seeking
information about abuse (consciousness raising); re-appraising one’s own values with respect to
the abuse (self-re-evaluation); expressing feelings related to the abuse (dramatic relief);
considering how the abuse is affecting one’s life (environmental re-evaluation); and increasing
one’s consciousness of living a problem-free life (social liberation).
Other change processes are used more by those in the preparation and action phases of
change, and involve behaviours such as: seeking help from supportive others (helping
relationships); rehearsing new behaviours (counterconditioning); being rewarded for positive
changes (reinforcement management); believing in and committing oneself to change (self-
liberation); and, controlling for things that trigger the problem behaviour (stimulus control)
(Burke et al., 2004). Burke and colleagues note that the cognitive processes of consciousness
raising and social liberation also appear in the later stages of change.
Brown (1997) suggests that by assessing abused women with a stage-based framework,
we can understand both the internal and external constraints that affect their decision to end
violence in their lives. She suggests that counsellors assess where the woman is in the stage
process, and tailor interventions to meet the needs associated with this stage. For example,
“precontemplation would… be the stage of women who are suffering from battered women’s
syndrome, a variant of post-traumatic stress syndrome. Women suffering from this situationally
induced syndrome are not psychologically prepared to be making changes at that time” (p. 11).
In precontemplation, Brown states that women may need help to understand that what they are
experiencing is abuse, which requires consciousness-raising. They also may require dramatic
relief to realize that the abuse is wrong, and self-re-evaluation to understand that the abuse is not
13
their fault. Techniques that Brown (1997) suggests are helpful during later stages include
“assertiveness training (counterconditioning), group support (helping relationships); self-
rewards, doing something nice for oneself every day (reinforcement management), and grieving
losses (dramatic relief)” (p. 21).
Burke et al. (2004) reported that the constructs of decisional balance and self-efficacy are
related to women’s decisions to end the violence in their lives. Decisional balance refers to
“weighing the pros and cons regarding the behaviour change” (p. 125) and self-efficacy to “an
individual’s confidence in ability to make the behaviour change” (p. 125). Women in their
research sample spoke of remaining in abusive relationships for a long period of time, during
which time the disadvantages of leaving outweighed the advantages. They found that for abused
women, decisional balance was closely related to processes of change. For example, women
decided to take action when they began to see how their children were being adversely affected
by the violence, in other words, when the pros of leaving outweighed the cons.
A critique of the currently developed stages of change models for abused women is that
the prescribed successful outcome is leaving the relationship. While this can be a necessary
strategy, the model limits what women can choose in a manner that could be perceived as
patronizing. To date, a stage of change model with a broader range of outcomes has not yet been
conceptualized.
Ecological Models of Intimate Partner Violence
Carlson (1984) was one of the first to see domestic violence from an ecological theory
perspective. This early model acknowledged that, while individual decisions must be considered
in addressing intimate partner violence, that both victims and perpetrators are affected by family
beliefs and role-models, social-structural (economic issues and societal reactions and support
such as police intervention) and social cultural constraints such as cultural and gender norms and
beliefs.
The importance of looking beyond individual characteristics to structural resources,
social inequities and belief systems has been identified in other research. Rothery, Tutty and
Weaver (1999) interviewed thirty-five women whose partners had abused them. They concluded
that, “using an ecosystems perspective to organize our participants’ data establishes that there is
a beneficial goodness of fit between the theory and the women’s experiences… and encourages
attention to variables that our respondents (and those in other studies) consider important” (p.
16).
Grauwiler (2008) reported that once participants made the decision to seek help,
inadequate information about resources and services, as well as indifference across systems acted
“as key obstacles to accessing emotional, informational and instrumental support.” Many of the
participants “described feeling left to fend for themselves – as ultimately isolated by their
problem and their unique needs – and detailed numerous but futile efforts to seek formal and
informal social support” (add page). Her research is consistent with Moe’s (2007) results
reporting that many women felt abandoned by their informal support networks.
In summary, an ecological perspective allows us to look at the complex issues facing
abused women, from individual choices to considering the demands made upon them by their
own beliefs, family, community resources and the lack thereof, and societal pressures.
14
Qualitative Findings on the Ecology of Decision-Making
As reported above, in the literature we find the argument that women’s help seeking and
decision making are important and complex issues for which we lack an adequate theory. For a
theory with enough breadth and depth to do justice to the complexity of the general issue, some
scholars suggest that an ecological perspective be adopted.
The commonest use of qualitative research methods is for exploratory purposes. Such is
not the case in this study, where our purposes are confirmatory:
Adding depth and detail to statistical findings is one aspect of confirmation and
elucidation. Within major traditions of theory-oriented qualitative inquiry… qualitative
methods are also the methods of choice in extending and deepening the theoretical
propositions and understandings that have emerged from previous field studies. (Patton,
1990, page 132)
Early in the qualitative analysis for this project it became clear that an ecological
understanding works well for describing the issues that women experiencing intimate partner
violence commonly face.
In the human services (e.g. social work) the basic ideas in which the ecological
framework is embedded are more than a century old (Rothery, 2005; Rothery, in press); terms
such as psychosocial or person in environment have been effective and popular. In psychology,
Bronfenbrenner (2005) labels his person-in-environment perspective on human development
bioecological, while his colleagues Lazarus and Folkman write about stress and coping (close
synonyms with demand and agency). The anthropologist Gregory Bateson wrote Steps to an
Ecology of Mind (1972) almost 50 years ago and it is still cited by scholars working in family
and mental health related areas.
Sociologists (and some philosophers) have reflected upon the same basic elements
affecting people’s creative adaptations to the demands their lives present, using the terms
structure and agency – the school of thought called Critical Realism, discusses structure and
agency as crucial for understanding how people (spousally abused women are a perfect example)
strive to flourish, even under very challenging circumstances.
Our purpose is not to discuss ecological theory in toto; at this point we simply wish to
introduce the particular concepts from that perspective that we found most useful in our analysis.
Smith (2010) asserts that social structures (a) are durable patterns of relationships; (b)
that make sense culturally, expressing the culture’s values and morals; (c) that make use of and
influence available goods and services; and (d) that are actively sanctioned by society through
permissive and proscriptive rules. Women whose social structures enable them to access what
they need will flourish; women who live in social structures that, on balance, limit their access to
what they need to flourish are, to some degree, oppressed. The power of social structures is that
they are the contexts within which our lives are lived and experienced. Peoples’ self-definitions
and myriad choices regarding how to comport themselves are shaped and influenced by social
structures, but not wholly determined by them.
15
Structure: Ecological Theory and Social Justice
We refer to Critical ecological theory to highlight the importance of including social
justice values in ecological assessments. A criticism of ecological theory is that it can be a theory
of adaptation, and we reject any suggestion that the goal in work with women affected by IPV
can ever be to encourage adaptation to oppressive, often dangerous circumstances. Service
providers normally work with people who have been somehow oppressed and an assessment of
what is needed should include clarification of values respecting the social structures in which
they find themselves. A concern for social justice should therefore inform social services
generally, and reference to Critical Ecological Theory is meant to remind us of that.
The ecological niche, and “goodness of fit”
The social and physical spaces that women occupy are ecological niches
(Bronfenbrenner, 2005 (a); Rothery, in press). We are all given (and create) such spaces for
ourselves, and they vary respecting goodness of fit. Two aspects of a given ecological niche
influence how well women “fit” with their environments. The first of these aspects is demands,
which means the things in their lives that require attention for some reason: threats to safety,
children to care for, jobs, unsympathetic extended family members and so on. The second aspect
is resources, which means the help, and supports (including personal strengths) they rely on as
they cope with life’s demands.
Figure 1 Goodness of Fit
Demands Resources
Person (or Other System)
The demands that all people face are simply events or situations requiring a response. We
have to adapt to these events or situations, which can be relatively trivial (a young child
occasionally rebels against bath time), or vitally important (a partner threatens to abduct a child).
For the most part, demands are positive; by responding adaptively we learn and grow, and our
sense of mastery and interest in life are sustained. Under some circumstances, however, the
demands in our lives have negative impacts.
16
Resources, a second important aspect for assessing the adequacy of one’s goodness of fit
in a given ecological niche, are what we use in order to cope with the demands we face. Like
everyone, the women in our study require resources that can be grouped in four categories
(Cameron, 1990; Cameron & Rothery, 1985; Rothery, in press):
1. Emotional supports are relationships that provide opportunities for women to discuss
how they feel about the demands in their lives, especially when they are feeling
somehow vulnerable. Further, they can have those discussions expecting an empathic
response (the confidante is understanding and is a safe person to talk to).
2. Information supports are sources of the knowledge women need to deal effectively
with various demands.
3. Concrete, instrumental supports are help in the form of goods and services. Access to
safe shelters is an example identified by many of the women we talked to.
4. Affiliational supports are present when a woman has access to roles in which she feels
competent and valued (there is a reliable sense of belonging).
In situations where women have to mobilize their resources to respond to the demands
they face, they perform a balancing act, more or less like that diagrammed in figure 1. When the
weight of the demands and strengths of the resources available to them balance one another,
women draw on their strengths and competencies to access resources and use them effectively.
If, in their perception, their demands are manageable and their resources are sufficient, their
experience will be positive. They will take care of the issues and appreciate a gratifying
outcome. If, unlike in Figure 1, they perceive that the weight of the demands they face is greater
than relatively inadequate available resources, the consequence will be distress. The perceived
weight of demands is a function of number and type. Both these issues are highly relevant to the
women we interviewed – women for whom the simple number of demands they need to adapt to
is often overwhelming, but also for whom the particular types of demands faced very frequently
give them extra weight.
17
Demands Continuum
Figure 2 Continuum of Types of
Demands
Survival, Stability, Safety, Basic Comforts.
Growth, Development, Actualization.
Figure 2 suggests a continuum between demands perceived to implicate issues of survival,
safety, stability and basic comforts at one end; demands implicating less ominous needs are at
the other end. This differentiation is critically important for very practical reasons – it has much
to do with the appropriate selection and timing of interventive services, as will be illustrated
below.
A final, related issue (see Figure 3 below) describes another continuum suggesting a
differentiated service response. Briefly, when the ecological goodness of fit in a woman’s life is
generally high, her coping responses will be creative and adaptive. When the ecological
goodness of fit is very poor, the person’s response will tend to be disempowered or disorganized.
Between these extremes are responses that tend to be more or less rigid, a natural tendency being
to hang on tightly (not adaptively) to a status quo in an effort to retain control. Obviously, the
most effective response from service providers will be different with clients on the right pole of
the continuum compared with those toward the middle or on the left.
18
Creative, Adaptive Responses
Disempowered, Disorganized Responses
Rigid Responses
Good Fit: Resources Exceed or Outweigh Demands
Demands
Resources
Person
Poor Fit: Demands Outweigh Resources
Demands
Person
Resources
Figure 3
A Continuum of Responses to Demands
19
Chapter Two: Qualitative Findings
The qualitative work reported in this chapter is an exploration of the verbatim transcripts
of focus group interviews with seven groups of respondents (the focus group protocol is in
Appendix I). In all, the groups comprised 56 women. Of these, 36 were staff members from
various services and 20 were clients. This statistic means little, however, since a number of
people had a history of being a service recipient before becoming a service provider. Because of
this, and because some groups were made up of a combination of clients and providers meeting
together, no meaningful distinction between the two types of participant is attempted. In any
event, we are confident that any differences we could identify between these two groups would
be trivial; given their shared experience it is not surprising that their perceptions and attitudes are
highly congruent.
The transcripts were coded using NVivo, a powerful qualitative analysis program. In
total, 1661 coding decisions were made.
Social Structure, Culture, and Diversity
Four hundred and ninety-six coding decisions were considered germane to issues of
structure as it is conceptualized earlier: (a) durable patterns of relationships; (b) that make sense
culturally, expressing the culture’s values and morals; (c) making use of and influencing
available goods and services; and (d) which are actively sanctioned by society through
permissive and proscriptive rules (Smith, 2010).
In this conceptualization, culture is an important part of what social structure means.
Certainly, culture is widely recognized as an important variable influencing policy and practice
with women abused by intimate partners. Culture is a very broad concept, with a wide range of
referents. Despite its somewhat global nature, our respondents use the idea of culture to talk
about matters that are quite specific aspects of their experience.
Our respondents recognized how important our cultures are for their positive impact –
they nurture and sustain us in myriad ways. However, much of the discussion also concerns the
oppressive potential of cultural narratives and rules.
It is noteworthy that our respondents did not limit their concerns to minority cultural
groups, but were also very aware of the effects (negative and positive) of mainstream cultural
narratives on girls and women. For example, they voiced clear concerns about our culture
promoting romanticized expectations regarding marriage -- coupled with problematic
(patriarchal) gender role prescriptions these can underlie dangerous confusions respecting what
constitutes love and loving behaviours:1
Sometimes [we need] a more realistic expectation going into a relationship. You know,
he’s not Prince Charming. He’s not going to come in a silver coach with four white
horses to take you away and you are not going to get married and live happily ever after.
There are a lot of particularly younger women, who honestly think that once they’re
married they have achieved all of their goals and everything will be just great after that.
Barbie’s gonna date Ken and they’re gonna run away in a plastic camper.
1 We have adopted the convention of italicizing material taken directly from interview transcripts.
20
If somebody stalks you it means that they really love you.
When my daughter was first born I bought those classic fairy tales and I wouldn’t even
read them to them. I think they’re awful. There’s some awful images about little girls.
We socialize females to be victims. We teach little girls that a good woman puts her
children, her husband, her church and her community first and she rates somewhere near
the gerbil.
A related theme relevant to structure is the perception that, in both mainstream and
minority cultures, there are gender role prohibitions concerning the experience and expression of
“negative” affects, most notably anger. As part of socializing girls to be victims, our culture
prescribes niceness and non-assertiveness:
We socialize little girls to be victims and to be nice! Not [to] be too assertive. Don’t get
angry, because angry is bad and little girls should not be angry: That’s really bad.
Among cultural norms affecting responses to IPV another strong theme is loss. For
example, the common case in our society has the woman and children (rather than the violent
partner) leaving the familial home, often at considerable cost:
For a lot, it boils down to what am I prepared to lose? What can I live without? Can I
live without the nice house? Can I start shopping at a different store that is not as
expensive? And what is this going to mean for my kids?
The experience of loss of social and financial position is common to many cultural
groups, and it can be especially complex among women from some cultural minorities:
[Leaving is] culturally not acceptable, right? You are shaming your entire family if you
were to separate or divorce. Not only shame, but in some cultures you put the family in a
financial bind. In some cultures dowries are paid, however that is done, by stock, cash,
gifts, jewelry. If the marriage is ending there could be a request for repayment of those
things. The family is simply not able to do that.
Further strong themes are stigma and a simple fear of loneliness, of having to cope with
life’s demands unsupported. Such fears are seen as a powerful dynamic in the women’s lives,
amplified for many by the cultural norms governing their social lives, and our respondents
describe stigma that is remarkably widespread:
It’s the stigma with the family, the stigma with the society. It’s a stigma with the social
workers; they want to categorize you. I wish they wouldn’t do that.
We were talking about the stigma, whether it be churches or cultural communities.
Whatever social functions they have, it would not make her feel very comfortable walking
in and could possibly be even more physically harmful to her, not just emotionally, taking
the side of the partner and not her.
For some women who have left their partner, there is an experienced stigmatization
associated with being a single mother:
Like the taxi driver… They always ask – so where are you living? Are you a single
mother? And then they don’t say bye to you. I even got kicked out of a store. My daughter
21
and I were looking and he assumed okay – you are a single mother. Yeah, like you got a
disease or something. I asked if they had a newspaper and he says get out of my store.
Or like taking my kids to soccer. I took my son to soccer and nobody would talk to me,
because I was always a single mom.
They couldn’t tell an employer, “I’ve left my abusive partner, I’m living in a shelter,”
which also impacted their ability to get a job. [There is] reluctance on the part of
landlords or employers to step in and say “Here is an apartment for you.”
Stigma must have an especially strong negative effect on help seeking when it is
culturally sanctioned:
Sometimes when a woman makes a decision, she has to give up the church because [of]
the stigma or the disapproval. Church members won’t talk to her because she’s doing the
wrong thing.
Some cultures just don’t accept women walking leaving for a shelter or calling police or
anything like that. It’s just not considered a crime. (Interviewer: So that’s a huge step for
someone from another culture to make a call to get information?) Yeah, it’s like she’s not
only standing up to the abuser, she’s standing up to the whole community and the culture.
Damage to one’s sense of self is another theme, and it is easy to understand the demands
related to a felt loss of identity being “very daunting,” especially given these women’s
circumstances:
I’ll use my own life experience. I go from being a single individual, married when I was
young, from being so-and-so’s wife to so-and-so’s mom, you know? Over time your
identity gets wrapped up a whole bunch of other people, right? For some individuals in
these situations, it’s easy to lose yourself in their shadow and to get out from underneath
that can be very daunting.
The difficulty finding an adaptive response to such demands is a risk that is foreseen by
ecosystems theory (see figure 3 in the previous chapter). Still, the women mentioned examples of
more adaptive responding such as the following discussion of the difficult task of setting and
maintaining boundaries:
Especially when abuse situations coming from across cultures… When I left my ex, I had
to totally care less what people are going on about. I needed to do what was best for me
and my daughters. People said a lot of things. A lot of people didn’t approve – but that
wasn’t important for me. When you’re ready to make that decision then it doesn’t bother
you. You’re still part of the community but then you know that it’s not in your best
interests. You cannot take care of everybody. You cannot please the whole community.
You need to take care of your kids who are depending on you.
It is also consistent with ecosystems theory to stress the importance of knowing about
available supports for enabling a balanced perspective and response – knowledge that serves as
an antidote for loneliness – which can be difficult to impart effectively to someone whose
balance is precarious due to very high levels of demand:
22
When I was about to leave, they told me about the shelter so I called them. That was my
first step. My ex went on vacation and I told them, “Okay, I’m gonna stay a month in the
shelter and they are going to kick me out on the streets.” So I thought, “Okay so my
daughter and I are going to be on the street; I’m gonna leave anyways.” I wish I knew
about this place, about the social groups. About how much they knew about abusive
relationships because I wasn’t getting any help from anybody and people are
misunderstanding me. Just tell women out there they don’t have to stay a month at the
shelters. They help them find jobs, they help them with different things. I didn’t know that.
Women from different countries will not know that. I thought I was going to be kicked out
on the streets and it’s cold. So I wish you would tell women from other cultures the
reason why you think that women are… equal. They are not going to believe – they’re not
going to feel like an equal in a relationship like that. I just wish we could see a picture of,
okay, in this situation this is not normal. I mean they told us that but I want to see it. I’d
like to see more of it.
I know you help people but when women come here from a different culture, let them
know they are equal. I don’t blame them for staying at their husband’s home. Let them
know what help they have. They don’t know.
Even if they say [IPV] is not okay, they have no idea about the resources here in Canada
or that there actually can be avenues for them to make changes.
The demands facing immigrants coming to terms with a new culture, including a new
language, are considerable. Add to them the additional challenge of coping with IPV, and the
need to adapt sufficiently well, to find a good enough ecological niche for oneself and one’s
children, represents a sobering degree of difficulty. It is no surprise that our respondents
sometimes struggle to find the words to articulate exactly what these circumstances require if
people are to be helped. What they do make clear, however, is that having adequate supports in
place is only part of the solution; helpers also need to be prepared to work hard to connect, so
that they can communicate the availability of help to the person who needs it, even though she
may be slow to appreciate and believe what they are saying.
Sexual orientation – a note for future research
Sexual orientation as a source of stigma was addressed by only one respondent. Had we
included a reference to sexual orientation in our interview schedule there would have
undoubtedly been more discussion of it in relation to stigma. In any event, we considered this
variable to be noteworthy, if only as a recommendation for future research:
And there is another thing, the abuse for women who are in same-sex relationships. It’s
even more magnified in terms of shame because it’s a relatively very small community. I
need to go public about abuse and then about I’m in a same-sex relationship.
Social structure: supports and resources
In the previous chapter, we suggested that it is useful to consider that the supports one
uses to adapt to life’s demands are of four types, emotional, informational, concrete
(instrumental) and affiliational. We will discuss each of these types in turn; before that, however,
we examine participants’ responses germane to support and resources more generally. First, our
respondents note that not all potential resources are supportive all the time:
23
Like the community, your family, your neighbours, your friends, at the same time they
could be supportive or they could be the exact opposite.
[Abuse] could actually be disclosed to friends and family and [they react as if] it really
didn’t happen, “You’re making this up.” I know one whose mother just said “Well, dear,
that’s just the way relationships are. I’m sorry, just suck it up.” So it’s discounting and
not being validated. So why should I even try to make an attempt to make changes – I’m
not getting any support.
A second important generalization, consistent with ecosystems theory, is that our
respondents identified a tremendous range of supports and resources as important. The
professional culture supporting service providers often assumes that best practices entail
identifying specific problems, with equally specific interventions prescribed to ameliorate them.
This assumption has some validity – dangerous maltreatment might powerfully suggest
separation as a response, for example – but in most cases this is not the whole story.
However much we may appreciate a medical model understanding in which diagnoses
commend well-targeted treatments, this perspective is not sufficient in the minds of our
respondents, whose thinking is more holistic (and ecological). While our respondents did
underline the importance of “accessing resources in the community as far as counselling and
going for counselling with their partners and the children,” the need for a broader helping
network is implied at the same time:
Who knows where she’s staying, who she keeps in contact with, who she doesn’t keep in
contact with? Does her employer know? Do certain things happen at work? Is there
safety for their kids who are at school or at daycare?
You certainly want to be with people that support your decision, right? No matter what it
is because, even if you decide to stay, what you don’t need is somebody saying, “Are you
crazy? Why are you staying, blah, blah, blah? If something does go wrong do you have
someone you can turn to and depend on.
It’s more whether that certain activity helps them maintain a good self-image or
empowers them, whether that’s continuing their education or certain physical activities,
things they like to do. Community or spiritual groups that encourage them to have a more
positive life and make healthy choices.
A third generalization is that nowhere in our interview transcripts is there an interest in
comparatively evaluating informal versus professional supports, and there is limited discussion
differentiating the roles and responsibilities of different types of helpers. Each is described as
responding to similar needs at various times.
A fourth generalization is that the availability of resources does not mean they will be
recognized and used by everyone who could benefit from them. Availability does not necessarily
correlate with utilization.
24
Emotional supports and resources
Scholars interested in delineating the conditions under which we all flourish recognize
emotional richness as a basic need. Nussbaum, for example, identifies 10 basic “capabilities” as
necessary for human flourishing, a rich emotional life among them:
Being able to have attachments to things and people outside ourselves; to love those who
love and care for us, to grieve at their absence; in general, to love, to grieve, to experience
longing, gratitude, and justified anger. Not having one’s emotional development blighted by fear
and anxiety… (Nussbaum, 2011, pp. 33-34)
Compare Nussbaum’s ideal with the following observation from one of our respondents:
Quite a few have lived in a situation where they were punished showing any emotion at
all. They weren’t allowed to be mad, to be angry, they weren’t allowed to be hurt, they
weren’t allowed to be sad, they weren’t allowed to be happy. Basically they were to be
totally neutral so that his emotions would be the focus of events. So if you’ve been afraid
to be happy because every time you been happy for the last 20 years he’s done something
to make you very unhappy, you would probably be very cautious about being optimistic
or hopeful or cheerful because there’s always a punishment.
As an important aspect of social structure, we have identified four basic types of social
supports and resources, emotional supports being first among them. These are relationships
providing for safe and empathic reflections on one’s emotional life. A consensus among our
respondents is that repression of all feelings, rather than their nurture, is the norm for women in
relationships marked by IPV:
If some of the women are into drugs or alcohol to insulate from their feelings, if you open
the door to the positive feelings, you are also opening the door to the negative feelings.
It’s nicer to be in a sort of a fog. You can’t have one without the other. If you open the
door to the positive, there’s also going to be all the grief and the fear
Sometimes I can’t think of a reason why they would look at some of these issues because
it’s just going to give them another chance to feel bad about themselves. The number [i.e.
“more numb”] you can be, the less it hurts and the longer you’re going to stay alive. So
self-examination is not something women do.
There’s some real grieving process. It’s not easy for these women to say, “I don’t have
the happy relationship. This guy’s been treating me like a jerk and I’ve been putting up
with it for years.” That is a hard realization. It’s like the death of the dream. I can’t
overstate that. We’re asking them to acknowledge and with that acknowledgement, the
initial reaction is grief or anger.
Along with grief and anger, the following were considered by our respondents to be
feelings that are often suppressed: guilt, shame, powerlessness, fear, being overwhelmed,
depression, confusion and self-blame. Given an emotionally supportive relationship, a woman
might feel freer to acknowledge these feelings, and more “positive” affects might also emerge:
pride, hopefulness, confidence, empowerment, love (e.g. for children and for herself) and
heightened self-esteem.
25
Our respondents have strong feelings (and a high degree of agreement) about the
importance of emotional work in creating a safer life. Early in the helping process many, if not
all feelings if they engender fear, can be obstacles to change; later, these same emotions can
supply motivation for (and rewards for) progress made. It is even suggested that when problem-
solving is pursued without attention to emotional needs, any gains are temporary:
The focus is probably more on the practical stuff, if they’re starting to get ready. Then
when they go back to precontemplation, it’s because of the emotional stuff.
As one might expect, a reluctance to recognize the powerful emotional consequences of
having been abused carries a cost:
She could be drinking heavily. She might be very depressed. She might be having lots of
panic attacks. She may be a rescuer – taking care of everybody else’s problems and
relationships. It’s avoidance in a way. And she could be a workaholic.
We also see women who get out of one abusive relationship and have a period of safety
or stability with their kids, and then enter into another abusive relationship. That speaks
to the work that needs to be done around their self-esteem.
Tempting as it may be to label feelings either “positive” or “negative,” most if not all
have value under the right circumstances:
Shame? Embarrassment? Maybe she goes really tired and embarrassed about showing
up for work constantly with injuries and having to make excuses, so she decides to make
a change in her life.
Anger at just everything – that the situation has gotten that bad, that he has done this for
far too long. And when anger comes into – fear is a strong motivator but I think anger is
another motivator.
I sometimes hear from a client, “I used to be independent, I used to be this smart, sassy,
funny, go-getter woman – and I don’t know what happened to her. She’s gone. I want that
back again; I’m lost.” They feel that disconnect and that’s not okay with them. They can
be very sad and also very angry at themselves for that, “What the hell did I do?, I
bargained myself away.”
Anger is an affect that can be especially confusing, in part due to sexist cultural
proscriptions:
One of the things that really struck me when I’m with women’s groups is that they’re so
angry -- some of the women are – and worried about the fact that they were angry. When
someone mistreats you, the right thing to do is to get really angry. But society says it’s
not okay for a woman to be angry because that’s not feminine, so there’s constraints
against that strong emotion. So you might not want to get in touch with that because then
you’re not feminine or you’re doing something wrong.
Another dynamic that explains confusion about anger is that the women have seen its
destructive potential:
I don’t want to be like him. What’s the difference? He was always angry, always coming
home and putting me down. If I get angry doesn’t that make me just like him?
26
Especially for someone with a history of trauma, it makes sense to be fearful respecting
one’s emotions, which are powerful and can be disruptive (fear of loss of control was frequently
identified by the women we interviewed as a reason for repressing feelings rather than
expressing them). Perhaps for this reason, it was often respecting this support need that our
respondents referenced professional counselling as a necessary resource. Well-attuned friends
and/or sympathetic family members, of course, can and do offer relationships in which it is safe
to discuss feelings; it may be, however, that when the complexities of trauma are part of the
picture, professionals who are trained and experienced respecting those complexities have a
special role to play.
Informational supports and resources
The second category of supports and resources comprising the social structure within
which women’s decisions are made is informational. People working in the IPV field have
recognized the importance of information and education for decades. Therefore, to some extent
the discussion that follows simply endorses practices that are widespread and well-developed.
The consciousness-raising function of informational supports
Education imparting knowledge and skills serves different functions affecting the
goodness of fit between women and their environments. One such function, which received
much comment from our respondents, is consciousness-raising or improved awareness:
I remember him [a counsellor] going through a booklet one day saying, “Well has he
done this, and yes, this, this, this?” And him checking it off and then looking at me saying
you know that this is abuse – right? So that was kind of my turning point.
A woman [who was] well-established in her career was driving and heard a radio
program about domestic abuse. They were talking about the signs of someone who is
abusive. And she goes, “Yeah, that’s him. Oh yeah, that’s him.” This was just
information on some local radio station.
The women offered many such examples of the significance of awareness, but the
importance of consciousness-raising also includes a more general preventive, public education
goal:
[Preventive education should target] society in general. Start educating people sooner, in
school. They’ve got a program for bullying. Well, bullying leads to abuse. They should
have an abuse course in school and start them young.
Maybe if the schools would intervene at an early age then they know that it’s wrong and
maybe some of us wouldn’t be here. Definitely they should put something in the school
system to teach people like us early.
They have bookmarks, they have all kinds of information that they can read at the church
so there was literature available in places where women typically go, that could be the
churches, the libraries, the grocery store, the bank. I was going to the Co-op yesterday,
and [there was] a little flyer along with all the other little flyers. It was wonderful. So
there is stuff out there in places where some women go day to day.
27
The system navigation function of informational supports
Along with consciousness-raising assisting with recognition of abuse, another function
served by informational supports and resources is help with navigating relevant systems:
I don’t know how many times I’ve heard women tell us that we have helped them so much
just by having that information to direct them where to go, what to do, where to look for
something. We will go to court with them. They will thank us for that and say, “I don’t
know what I would’ve done if you weren’t there to help me walk through this.” A lot of
support is very necessary for them to go from point A to point B and out of the system.
Of course, information germane to safety planning is an important early step and, in this
case, what is helpful is ready information about myriad small details:
Safety planning is the first step. Also getting information and education about domestic
violence. Those are the key first steps.
I wish we had a book that would tell us different ways to hide your money (laughter).
So planning stuff. If you can have a book and just tell people how to stash money, how to
stash certain things, who to call…
I didn’t know really what’s wrong in a marriage. I didn’t know… If you could just write
down the guidelines.
A lot of times we will tell them is it’s very important to have some extra cash, car keys if
you have a vehicle, documentation (birth certificates, passports, IDs) in a safe place.
Have a plan where you’re going to go; who you are going to talk to. Who is your support
system? Or if they have cell phones, program 911 on their cell phone. Make sure that it’s
either accessible or have a second cell phone that he doesn’t know about, because a lot
of times they’ll take their phones away to prevent calls.
I’m not taking it anymore, because now I have some knowledge about how it works. I
know who to call and I know what to do. I know where to look for help.
The motivational function of informational supports
Information in the form of other people’s stories can be motivating in two ways. First,
news of other people’s successes can be an antidote to feelings of hopelessness. Secondly
recognizing positive aspects of others’ narratives can predispose people to be similarly generous
toward themselves.
Inspiration comes from something positive. You can hear someone else’s story through
the media. You can read a book and the person is very real in the book and tells me what
it was like and how difficult it was but this is the result. That can inspire you.
You may have a family member who inspires you. To me the inspiration comes from
hearing someone’s story or seeing something [in the media]. So you change. There is a
shift in thinking and a shift toward a hope that you can do it and motivation to do it.
28
Informational supports and cultural diversity
We commented earlier on the need to reach out to IPV victims who are members of
immigrant groups or other cultural minorities, and there is no need to repeat that information
here. We would simply note that our respondents emphasize the importance of informational
supports to minority groups whose members may lack basic English skills, may not appreciate
that partner assaults are a crime in Canada, and may be largely ignorant of what resources are
available to them if and when they set out to create a safer life for themselves and their children.
Concrete, instrumental supports and resources
In our introduction to this chapter we highlighted qualitatively different types of demands
defining people’s ecological niches (see figures 2 and 3). It is important to remember that
demands implicating one’s ability to obtain goods and services necessary for basic comforts,
even survival, have a disproportionate effect on the ability to problem solve, to adapt effectively
and creatively.
When demands outweigh resources, we argued, it is natural to succumb, becoming
passive or disorganized (or depressed). For the women in our focus groups, this is an important
part of the explanation for why women experiencing IPV and who want to separate from their
abusive spouse decide instead to return to the unhappy relationship:
Even though you are out of the relationship there’s still that half that you desperately
need to know. It’s a huge part… like the money, the food, the clothing, the shelter… If
you don’t have that – like that other half of it – then it’s really easy to go back.
A lot of times they stay in the situation because they don’t think that they can make it on
their own. If he’s not there, what do I do? Where do I go? Where do I get money? Where
do I get food? Especially if they’re non-working mothers. How much can I do by myself
without having to have him here and taking the abuse just because he’s the provider?
Raising your kids and making sure they get their homework done and they have a bath
and are fed. Doing all that as well as trying to figure out, do I have enough money for
gas this month or trying to figure out if he’s not paying child care what can I do?
Underlying these questions and anxieties is a frequent fear of homelessness:
Because I could speak English, I got a job. It wasn’t a very good paying job, but I got a
job and I’ll manage. I can get a job, but it was a big world out there. It was snowing and
winter and it was just scary. I want to get over that, but it’s even worse in Calgary
because of the weather. I said, “Okay, I’m going to leave him in the wintertime and I’m
going to be stuck out walking in the streets with my daughter.”
Our respondents suggest that one important answer to this problem is to increase the
supply of both first and second stage shelter accommodation; these are services that meet a
critical need, and for which the demand outstrips the supply:
We know the demand is there [and] the supply is not high enough; the demand is way
higher. So if there was more availability, more people would actually do that [i.e. use the
service]. We do get calls when we are full – they called this shelter, they called that –
nobody can take us. I can’t afford to go to a hotel.
29
Even we have called from shelter to shelter – and it’s not easy to actually get in because
there is only so many beds. So if there was more spaces, more victims would be saved.
A longer-term, post-shelter need is for jobs and affordable housing, of course. Even then,
the demands can be daunting:
You lived in a lovely home with all of the comforts of life and what are you looking at?
Maybe Calgary Housing, maybe a rental if you’re fortunate, and starting all over from
scratch, and your kids do too. You got the clothes on your back and possibly a few
household items.
That’s the number one thing I hear from women in abusive relationships. The one reason
why they can’t picture themselves outside of the relationship is those financial barriers of
starting all over and how are they going to care for their children and where are they
going to live? All that…
Life is very hard compared to what it used to be. Hard in a different way, but a very
fatiguing way. This emotional stuff was fatiguing in its own way but this practical stuff is
really tiring too.
Affiliational supports and resources
The ecological systems perspective stresses that since all our needs are met (more or less
well) in relationship, the importance of access to meaningful social roles cannot be overstated. It
is through our affiliation with others, through recognition as people with value and competence
that we create narratives within which we belong, and attribute meaning (value) to our lives.
As they are described to us by our respondents, it is characteristic of abusive relationships
that women living with IPV are persuaded to see themselves as worthless rather than valuable
and incapable rather than competent. As with other research, the women participating in our
study reported isolation from rather than access to meaningful social roles, and this is a critically
important matter.
We cited Martha Nussbaum (2011) respecting emotional supports and resources. Here is
what she has to say about affiliation:
Affiliation. (A) being able to live with and toward others, to recognize and show concern
for other human beings, to engage in various forms of social interaction;… (Protecting
this capability means protecting institutions that constitute and nourish such forms of
affiliation, and also protecting the freedom of assembly and political speech.) (B) Having
the social bases of self-respect and nonhumiliation; being able to be treated as a dignified
being whose worth is equal to that of others. This entails provisions of nondiscrimination
on the basis of race, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, caste, religion, [and] national
origin. (p. 34).
Writing from his Critical Realist perspective, Smith (2010) emphasizes the importance of
meaning for human flourishing:
Among these many human capacities I am recounting is also the ability to create, grasp,
and communicate meanings. By this I intend to denote the ability mentally and
emotionally to draw connections between different entities in ways that generate import
30
and significance for people. Meaning is a primal or first-order fact of human existence
that is difficult to define precisely. Yet the making of meaning is real, important, and
ineliminable in human life. The world and its parts do not simply exist for people
functionally or at face value. They have significance. (p. 49)
Like anyone, women affected by IPV require roles in which they feel valued. At the same
time, they are unlikely to access or to benefit from such roles for as long as they remain
convinced they are incompetent and worthless:
Generally [women need] to see that they can be independent; that they don’t have to rely
on somebody else to be their own person. I am a person; I am quite capable of taking
care of myself and my kids. I don’t need him to belittle me, when I’m quite capable.
High self-esteem. It’s really important because this is what a lot of abusers try to
undermine. If you control somebody they can get that person to do anything. Somebody
who is really dependent, thinks that she’s not educated enough, not good enough, it’s a
lot easier to control that kind of person than somebody who has high self-esteem.
I had one say, “I can’t do that! I didn’t know I could do that.” They become more self-
aware, and then they may [see they] have more value than they thought.
It’s a well-documented fact about the dynamics of many abusive relationships that the
perpetrator works hard to undermine his partner’s sense of competence and self worth, blocking
her access to meaningful social roles within which she can feel valued:
When I thought I deserved better I started to act on it like getting a job, studying… and
then it starts over again. I’ve got a better life now. I’m going to do this, I’m gonna get a
job, study, I’m gonna be a better mom, a better wife. And then he knocks me down. I
couldn’t keep the job. I mean, he kept me from keeping the job, he kept bringing me into
the room [where] I couldn’t study, took the car keys away – lots of things. Then my self-
esteem wobbles up and down, and I’m not stable.
My survival mode was high but my self-esteem wasn’t that high. And then he kind of
boosted it up a little bit and then he knocks you down again. He takes away my books, he
doesn’t allow me to read. That happened many times.
In identifying survival as an issue, the woman providing the previous quote highlights
how high the stakes can be when access to meaningful social roles is blocked. For some, the
consequences of this are a kind of death:
I feel much more secure in myself, like I’m an actual person again and I have my own
opinion and I can depend on myself. Like personally I didn’t realize that I didn’t have…
it was like I had no soul, I had no emotional connection to anything. It was like you might
as well have had a lobotomy.
In the beginning my whole foundation was shaken. I didn’t always have the food I wanted
but I had food. I didn’t get to choose the clothes I wanted, but I had a roof over my head.
So leaving with no friends, with nothing, and it’s freezing outside. The only thing I had
was a hope that my self-esteem wasn’t going to die… That was the only hope.
31
[Taking necessary steps] actually gave me back myself. I can laugh now. My mom said to
me “I got my daughter back! You have a sense of humour again.” I feel like I’m living
again. I didn’t feel like I was living. My children and I can crank up the music now…
If women abused by intimate partners can be deprived of meaningful social roles and
experience such deprivation as a kind of death, then part of the dynamics of choosing change
will be a grieving process. The relationship within which efforts to create meaningful social roles
are undermined has often been the same relationship in which hopes for meaning and self-worth
had been invested. Thus, a decision to end even a toxic relationship entails the loss of very
important hopes and expectations:
[What is being confronted is] the loss of the love you thought you would have for life. The
life you thought you would have, the dreams, the hope, the children, the grandchildren…
Children graduate, get married, children have children. All those are milestones in a
person’s life. That is a grieving process as well because now that isn’t going to happen.
Findings Regarding Agency
In the previous chapter, we identified the Critical Realists’ stipulation of two aspects of
our social lives that determine the extent to which individuals will flourish. These aspects are
structure and agency, a perspective that has high congruence with ecological systems theory.
The latter claims a basic interest in processes of decision-making (agency) and the social context
within which decisions are made and enacted (structure).
The discussion to this point has focused primarily on the structural realities that support
and constrain decision-making by women with abusive partners. We concluded with findings
having to do with affiliational supports and resources, and noted the logical relationship between
some of that discussion and the question of agency, to which we now turn. Agency implies an
experienced capacity to act, which we are not likely to see in someone who is convinced she is
incompetent and worthless.
Much of the literature regarding agency is found in the work of philosophers; it is
abstract, and its practical implications are not easily discerned. An exception is Charles Taylor,
who seeks to understand agency in ways that are philosophically sound at the same time as the
relevance of that understanding to the real world – such as the world of women affected by IPV –
is readily apparent.
In a chapter titled “What is human agency?” Charles Taylor (1985, pp. 15 to 44; see also
Taylor, 1989, pp. 14 to 42) Taylor outlines a process constituting the exercise of agency. As an
example, here is how the process might look with a woman with an abusive intimate partner:
The woman reflects usefully upon her circumstances.
She ascribes value to – evaluates – the circumstances upon which she is reflecting.
This exercise in values clarification implicates her sense and definition of self, who
she is and what she deserves.
When the evaluation is sufficiently strong and negative it results in clarity of
conviction and purpose.
She plans and takes action.
32
In Taylor’s work, the strong evaluation concept has a particular meaning:
What I called… strong evaluation… concerns questions about what kind of life is worth
living, e.g., what would be a rich, meaningful life, as against an empty one, or what
would constitute an honourable life, and the like. Of course, the kind of issue which
arises… varies from person to person and, more markedly, from culture to culture.
(Taylor, 1989, p. 42)
One of the more frequent themes in our analysis concerns the emergence of agency in the
responses of women to IPV. This finding is congruent with the consensus from other relevant
research that agency is the outcome of frequently-observed cognitive and emotional processes.
Especially noteworthy in this regard is the stages of change as understood by Prochaska and his
colleagues; the emergence of agency occurs in stages, specifically (using Prochaska’s
terminology), moving from precontemplation through contemplation and preparation to action.
With an impressive frequency and conviction, our respondents recognize an initial
response set in women victims of IPV characterized by denial – by a relative absence of
reflection respecting the reality of their abusive relationships. Not infrequently this is followed
by a cognitive/emotional shift from precontemplation to contemplation, a stage in which there is
meaningful reflection on the reality of IPV and its implications are confronted. In turn,
commitment to change and an exploration of behavioural options signals a move from
contemplation to preparation and action.
This critical move from precontemplation to contemplation and preparation (and
therefore the emergence of agency) is the focus of considerable discussion in our transcripts:
A lot of this comes back to a moment in time that something happens. Something triggers
and that begins the change whether it be an incident, a story, a shared experience, a
relationship with a different person, a new friendship, witnessing something…
There’s numerous reasons why women would want to make change or take steps in
creating a safer life for themselves. For example, in one situation there was a long
history of abuse in the relationship. What it boiled down to for the client was when her
partner attacked her in front of the children. That was a pivotal moment for her.
Cognitive and affective aspects of the emergence of agency
Cognitively, our respondents describe a process of reality testing and values clarification,
and an assessment of how congruent their reality is with their sense of identity, a core reflective
process:
Their definition of what a relationship is or should be, or a healthy marriage, and then
once you cross that line it’s not acceptable behavior anymore. This is not what they want
for themselves or their kids. Physical danger, if it comes to that point, is another reason
[as is] loss of themselves and who they are.
The first step is to identify that there is a problem. To say, “I don’t like what’s happening,
this doesn’t feel right,” and to give herself permission to say, “This is not okay. I am not
going to be treated this way.”
33
We have indicated that the emergence of agency is an emotional as well as a cognitive
process:
[In contemplation] the dominant emotions are confusion and then fear. Fear of making a
change, fear of what will I do if I leave, fear of what people will think. Lots of fears about
lots of different things.
Emotions of confusion and fear can support critical self-esteem issues:
I don’t know how to do this you know – I don’t know how to leave. I don’t know how. I
don’t even know what a safe and respectable relationship would look like.
Fear, of course, can be motivating as well as distressing; the same is true of frustration,
shame, guilt, suicidal impulses, grief and anger, which were frequently mentioned. For agency to
emerge, our respondents were also clear about the necessity of hope, at least minimal optimism
being necessary if change is to be attempted.
If reflection comprising reality testing and values clarification is a necessary element in a
shift from precontemplation to contemplation and preparation (e.g. for the emergence of agency)
it is useful to consider what commonly triggers such an event. For some, what we have referred
to above as informational supports are critical, delivered at the right time and with a necessary
level of intensity:
An emotional experience could be an intervention or confrontation by friends or family.
They sit them down and say, “You are in an abusive relationship. You need to get out.”
In the emergency ward, someone says, “I think you’re in a relationship where there’s
abuse and I’m worried for you.” That allows them to stop holding it off for fear and
going, “Wow, if they’re worried for me then I can be worried too.”
For me it was when they put The Burning Bed on TV and I watched it. All of a sudden it
was like, “This isn’t my fault. This isn’t something I’m solely doing. I didn’t create this.”
That was a huge “aha” moment for me that really changed things.
Finally, in the literature on women’s decision-making an escalation of violence to new
levels of pain and danger is a frequent trigger, and this is emphasized by our respondents as well:
The thing that triggered it was he wanted a cigarette and he was getting angry. He
attacked me. It’s stupid. He beat me all the way to the door. I knew that if I didn’t get that
door open I was going to die. He was hitting me so hard on the head I was seeing nothing
but black.
34
Chapter Three: Preliminary Quantitative Findings
As noted earlier, the original plan for this study involved extensive quantitative work (scale
development), but had to be modified because an adequate sample was not available. The
modification entailed simplifying the quantitative analysis considerably, while a much more
extensive qualitative analysis of the focus group transcripts would be undertaken (see Chapter 2).
Initially, a sequential scale development process (Comrey, 1988; Levesque, Velicer, Castle
& Greene, 2008; Levesque et al., 2000; Redding, Maddock & Rossi, 2006) was to be employed,
which blends the wisdom of professionals and women clients, using statistical criteria to yield
measures that meaningfully capture the emotional and practical complexities of the stage process
in psychometrically reliable, valid forms.
In the formative phase of this research, scale items (i.e. questions) were developed from
the focus group interviews with three groups: women using shelter services, women relying on
non-shelter community services, and service providers familiar with the service needs of this
population.
Design, Method and Research Resources
No measures such as those we proposed to develop for use with women who have
experienced violence in their relationships are currently available. Nonetheless, the Stages of
Change model is well established and has provided a theoretical basis for the development of
measures relevant to various other health-related behaviours (see publications list at
http://www.uri.edu/research/cprc), including male domestic violence offenders (Begun, Shelley,
Strodthoff & Short, 2001; Levesque, et al., 2000; Levesque, et al., 2008). The method that has
proven successful in such prior research is described as a “sequential multi-step, iterative
measurement development process” (Redding, et al., 2006, p. 84; see also Levesque et al., 2008).
The steps required in this process involve extensive consultation with groups of clients as
well as experts knowledgeable about their service needs. As such, it is congruent with
contemporary thinking about how research with abused women should be conducted (Williams,
2004) and fits well with the mandate of the Calgary Faculty of Social Work/Calgary Counselling
Centre Partnership, which stresses the integration of research and practice.
Defining Constructs and Creating Items
The foundational step in scale development is to define the construct(s) the scale(s) will
measure. Definitions should provide clarity but should also be sufficiently abstract that subsequent
exploration can result in a useful elaboration of the complexity and shades of meaning associated
with the construct.
The project team included researchers familiar with scale development and professionals
with rich knowledge of the circumstances abused women confront. Their expertise was first
utilized in developing the focus group protocol (Appendix 1)
Once the transcripts were analysed, the core research team constructed items that reflected
the readiness for change and decisional balance constructs. The items were circulated to the
Research Advisory team for critique and comments and the proposed items adjusted accordingly.
The Readiness for Change Scale was 100 items in length while the Decisional Balance Scale was
34 items.
35
The items were worded for optimal ease of understanding and response (the Flesch-Kincaid
reading level of the final scales was Grade 6.1). Along with debating the initial selection of items,
decisions were made regarding the wording of instructions and selection of response formats.
Previously developed similar scales (e.g. Pro-Change Behavior Systems, 2001) were consulted in
this regard. On the Readiness to Stay Safe Scale, 33 of the 100 items were negatively worded with
respect to keeping safe and were reverse scored; 12 of the 34 items on the Decisional Balance
Scale were negatively worded.
Administering the Measures
The sample size required to develop the measures was difficult to predict with confidence,
because the process is developmental and iterative. To generate final scales of approximately 20
items, we hoped to administer initial item sets approximately 50 items in length. On the basis of
these estimates, our best guess was that a sample of 250 women would be sufficient for the final
field test.
The field tests were administered in agency and shelter settings in the city of Calgary, by an
experienced Research Coordinator in collaboration with the agency professional staff (group
leaders, counsellors). This was considered to be more effective (albeit more time consuming) than
a mailed and self-administered data collection process. Potential respondents were approached by
staff in these agencies and offered the opportunity to complete the measures. A small honorarium
was offered to the women for the time involved.
Nonetheless, we experienced considerable difficulty engaging women to complete the
rather lengthy measures. Despite numerous visits and contact to appropriate agencies over a period
of several years, only 31 completed sets of measures were collected. The agencies from which the
respondents came were a mix of shelters [Discovery House: 10 (32.3%); Sonshine Centre: 6
(19.4%)] and community agencies to address intimate partner violence and other mental health
concerns [Calgary Counselling: 11 (35.5%); Distress Centre: 3 (9.7%)] or sexual abuse [Calgary
Communities Against Sexual Abuse: 1 (3.2%)].
Psychometric Analysis of the Scales
Given the extent of the work done we considered that a simplified, descriptive (and
strictly preliminary) analysis would be of interest. The data on the responses to the Readiness to
Stay Safe and the Decisional Balance items appear in Appendix Two and Three respectively.
The two scales were scored and a Corrected Item-Total Score correlation was calculated and
included in the tables to identify what items were most strongly related to the total scores. This
correlation provides information about how reliable a measure is. “In a reliable scale, all items
should correlate with the total.
So, we’re looking for items that don’t correlate with the overall score from the scale.
(Field, 2009, p. 278) Field suggests that items with a correlation of .3 or less should be dropped
from the scale. These items are italicized in Appendices Two and Three. To further clarify the
most reliable items, those with correlations higher than .75 have been bolded.
Readiness to Stay Safe Scale
As can be seen in Appendix Two, the majority of the Corrected-Item-Total correlations were
relatively strong. Only 23 correlated under 0.3 and should be discarded (interestingly 10 of these
36
were reverse-scored items). Eighteen items correlated very strongly with the total score (over
.70). Of these, only one was negatively worded vis à vis readiness to stay safe and reverse
scored. The Cronbach’s alpha of the Readiness to Stay Safe Scale is .97, which is strong, but also
not unexpected as the scale includes 100 items and longer scales have better reliability (DeVellis,
1991, p. 88).
Decisional Balance Scale
In the Decisional Balance Scale item analysis, presented in Appendix Three, 16 of the 34
items (almost half) did not sufficiently correlate with the total score to warrant keeping them (5
were reverse scored). Also notable, in comparison to the Readiness to Stay Safe Scale, none of
the items correlated strongly with the total score (correlations over .70), although it must be
noted that this “cutoff” is arbitrary. The Cronbach’s alpha of the Decisional Balance Scale is .75,
which is certainly acceptable.
Despite the respectable Cronbach’s alpha score, the lack of strong correlations with the
total score (especially in comparison to the Readiness to Stay Safe Scale) raises some questions
about whether the scale was tapping the construct of decisional balance. The items are more
complexly worded and the fit of the Likert responses from “very unimportant” to “very
important” is not always strong conceptually.
37
Chapter Four: Discussion and Recommendations
Stages of change: Problems with Obtaining a Sample
This research is not unique in encountering problems obtaining an adequate sample of
women who have been assaulted by a spouse. In a previous Calgary Counselling study, 366
women partners of men receiving service for having been abusive were selected for recruitment
to a study. Of these, only 31 agreed to be interviewed, and 22 successful interviews were
eventually conducted. Researchers in other locations (e.g. Gondolf, 2002, in the United States)
recognize that this is a particularly difficult population to attract to needed services and research
evaluations of those interventions.
The optimistic strategy in the present study was to employ a highly experienced and
prominent professional, well known in this city’s domestic violence services community, and a
modest token of gratitude was offered to participants. As noted, the initial goal was to obtain 250
responses to our initial draft scales; after many months, 31 responses had been obtained. It is
ironic that 56 participants were relatively easily recruited to our focus groups, whereas more than
a year of concentrated effort resulted in little more than half that number of responses to our draft
scales.
Another difficulty was finding women in the stage of precontemplation or contemplation.
The women in the current study were already connected with community agencies and shelters
and so were most likely to already be in the stage of action, although regression to contemplation
or precontemplation is, of course, possible. This dynamic is different from that found in studies
developing measures targeting stages of change in men who abuse partners, wherein they may be
mandated to attend treatment by courts and a number are in precontemplation.
Respecting the Item-Total Correlation test that was run (strictly in an exploratory spirit)
on the stage-of-change responses that were obtained, one would not extrapolate much under the
circumstances. Still, the results indicate the draft scales have potential: there is marked variance
between items on the strength of the correlation, so that some items could likely be discarded if
further testing was undertaken.
If further research was to be conducted, the work done on the scale items could still be
useful. Our analysis reveals a number of items that could be deleted and a good number of others
that are worth exploring further however, the strategy for obtaining a sample of sufficient size
may be difficult to find. One possibly workable idea might be to offer participants substantial
honoraria rather than less valuable tokens of thanks.
An option might be to recruit women who do seek help, the difficulty being that it would
still take a long time to gather the requisite 250 responses from this population. Further, the
sample would represent the small number of women who actually do seek out services, which is
not the majority of women with abusive spouses. Further, this strategy does not address the
problem of recruiting participants who are in the early stages of change. These being people in
receipt of services, they are already further along than women in the precontemplation and
contemplation stages. Participants could be asked retrospectively what they would have said had
they been interviewed earlier in the change process; this is obviously an imperfect solution, but it
might be a “best possible” compromise.
38
All this being said, a valid general comment is that our respondents were strongly
interested in the interventions and events where women move beyond
precontemplation/contemplation and recognize the importance of resisting the relationship
dynamics employed by their abusive spouse. A very strong theme for our participants was how
women can move from denial (precontemplation) to investing themselves in reflection about
their circumstances, and whether those circumstances are or are not acceptable – processes
involving reality testing and values clarification.
Utilizing a Critical Ecological Perspective
One impetus for this study was the suggestion in the recent literature that theoretical work
respecting services to women who have been abusively treated is overdue, and that ecological
theory might be a promising place to start. Ecological theory commends a dual focus on the
person and her environment. Conjoined to Critical Realism, the resultant Critical Ecological
perspective directs attention to structure (social environment) and agency (problem solving by
people or organizations) (see Archer, 2012).
Our confirmatory qualitative analysis (Patton, 1990, 2014) of women’s focus groups
illustrates how the social structures in which abused women and their children are embedded and
exercise their choices can be usefully described and understood using a critical ecological theory
framework.
It is reasonable to suggest that a medical/mental health model of helping permeates
services commonly offered to women who have been abused by their spouses. One reason this
framework has served some purposes very well is that it is reductionistic. While we would be
well advised to retain a good deal of very useful understandings and approaches rooted in
reductionistic models – Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, for example – our data suggest that the
more holistic Critical Ecological Framework is an important expansion. For example, a strong
theme from the focus groups that we analyzed is that “wraparound” services or service packages
are preferred over a limiting commitment to working solely with tightly defined problems using
specialized, prescribed interventions and relying too much on manualized programs.
Necessary Resources
The framework comprising four types of essential resource (emotional; information;
concrete, instrumental; and affiliational) was utilized. It is noted that coding for these resources
was relatively effortless, indicating a goodness of fit.
For most women, a range of supports and resources (a service package) is ideal. Effective
intervention can include careful help with identifying and trusting relevant supports. Ideally,
available supports will include both informal and formal sources (friends, family, colleagues etc.
in addition to professional help). Women whose decision to seek help results in ostracism on the
part of family and friends might feel especially resourceless.
Emotional resources
Our participants placed a high value on affective work, including the suggestion that
attending to cognitions and behaviours without taking care to address affective issues can be
counterproductive. The examples offered by our participants included a woman who relinquished
39
much progress in the face of feelings aroused but not carefully dealt with, these being fear and
hopelessness.
There was a strong consensus among our participants regarding the importance of
effective emotional supports. When intervention protocols emphasize cognitive work, the need
for careful emotional work might not be as systematically addressed. The cost of this, according
to our respondents, can be a fear of feeling and a loss of confidence in one’s ability to creatively
adapt.
For all groups, but considering that cultural minorities and recent immigrants may
experience some issues more acutely, systems need to help women with the emotional fallout
that comes from seeking help: stigma, loneliness, fear, shame, etc.
Professional and in-service training often stress Cognitive-Behavioural understandings
and interventions. The reasons for this choice are sound; the empirical evidence supports it.
Recent outcome research also supports more affect and relationship oriented approaches,
however, and inclusion of this information in standard training for work with this population
should enhance services (Elliott, Greenberg, Watson, Timulak, & Freire, 2013).
Informational resources
Informational supports (developing knowledge and skills) have a paramount importance
which has not been lost on people working in the IPV field – significant resources have been
appropriately developed for preventive and intervention programs. Given the importance and
perceived effectiveness of such interventions, it is reasonable to suggest that every community
should have an adequately funded program for the development and dissemination of
information about what IPV is, its effect on families, and available community supports for
people who are coping with it.
Perhaps one of the reasons the importance of informational supports is so strongly
endorsed is that they serve three essential functions: consciousness-raising, system-navigation,
and motivation.
There is, in our focus group responses and in the literature, strong recognition of an initial
stage in coming to terms with IPV characterized by strong denial. The process of progressing
from precontemplation (using Prochaska’s language) to subsequent stages leading to active
problem-solving can scarcely be overstated. This is part of the explanation as to why
informational supports are so important – they challenge denial, offering a perspective that
encourages reality testing and problem-solving.
Especially (albeit not exclusively) with information resources, language and other
cultural differences demand care and creativity on the part of service providers. The challenge of
reaching out to women from minority cultural groups can be considerable; making information
available does not guarantee that it will be accessed, accessing information does not mean it will
be understood or believed. Developing trust with people who may have been traumatized is
seldom easy, and it will obviously be more difficult where a cultural divide needs to be bridged
(see Sevcik, Rothery, Nason-Clark & Pynn, 2015, pp.85-112 for examples of practical responses
to the difficulties of cross-cultural work).
40
Concrete/Instrumental resources
There is a unanimous recognition in our focus groups, as well as in the literature, about
the vital importance of concrete/ instrumental supports and resources. It is important to
remember that demands implicating one’s ability to obtain goods and services necessary for
basic comforts, even survival, have a disproportionate effect on the ability to problem solve, to
adapt effectively and creatively. A strong theme in our transcripts is that women leaving an
abusive spouse may see themselves and their children slipping into poverty, even homelessness,
and decide to stay in an unsafe relationship out of that fear (see Tutty, Ogden, Giurgiu &
Weaver-Dunlop, 2013).
Two general responses are important: (1) as discussed above under informational
resources, effective communication concerning goods and services that are available is
frequently necessary, perhaps especially for women from cultural minorities and immigrant
groups, (2) when it is feasible, advocating for the development of adequate resources is a
professional responsibility – for example, additional 1st and 2nd stage shelters and affordable
housing would be helpful investments, according to a number of our respondents.
Affiliational supports
An assertion supported by both literature and the respondents for the present study is that
in very many abusive relationships the perpetrator will have set out to undermine his partner’s
sense of competence and self-worth, blocking her access to meaningful social roles within which
she can feel valued. The universal need for access to meaningful social roles, in which one feels
competent and recognized, is therefore especially pertinent for many victims of spousal assault.
Being blocked from access to such roles is obviously very damaging; our respondents spoke of it
as being akin to a kind of psychological or emotional death, and it can therefore represent
extreme forms of disempowerment (see figure 3 in chapter 2).
There are approaches to conducting a systematic assessment of roles which may well be
useful in this regard – ecomaps are a prominent example (see Rothery, in press, for a reasonably
detailed discussion of ecomaps in practice with a family).
Agency
The exercise of agency (making and acting upon autonomous decisions) presupposes a
process of reflection (notably absent for someone who is in precontemplation) and values
clarification. Our respondents, as is related in the literature, describe critical incidents or turning
points triggering a decisive moment in which abusive behavior is recognized for what it is, and
the recognition that it is wrong, are associated with the emergence of agency.
Awareness of agency, tied as it is to hope, is important through all stages of change,
though it is probably appropriate to give it special weight in the earlier stages: precontemplation,
contemplation and preparation. It is usually an error to expect effective problem solving to occur
without such awareness being minimally present, along with systematic support for reality
testing and values clarification. These, our data suggest, are essential precursors to the critical
incidents or turning points that are widely regarded as highly important, and they will not often
occur without a beginning, reliable emergence of the empowerment that agency supports.
41
Epilogue
One of our participants provides particularly apt last words, with a superior description of
the journey from oppression to the emergence of agency:
Well, maybe she’s tired of getting you know, getting physically hurt. Maybe she’s tired of
being battered emotionally. Maybe she’s tired of if she wants a little financial
independence, maybe he’s had control of the purse strings all the time and you know
she’s tired of that she went to the store and he is and how much? Twenty dollars for
what? And that kind of stuff. Um, children are exhibiting signs of really suffering from
being, witnessing those things and you know she herself may be tired. It’s just like you
can only be beaten so long and you know the spirit tends to rise up against that.
42
References
Aguirre, B. E. (1985). Why do they return? Abused women in shelters. Social Work, 350-354.
Anderson, D. K. S., D. G. (2003). Leaving an abusive partner: An empirical review of predictors, the
process of leaving, and psychological well-being. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 4(2), 163-191.
doi:10.1177/1524838002250769
Ansara, D. L., & Hindin, M. J. (2011). Psychosocial consequences of intimate partner violence for
women and men in Canada. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(8), 1628-1645. doi:
10.1177/0886260510370600
AuCoin, K. E. (2005). Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile 2005 (85-224-XIE2005000). Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics Retrieved from
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/85-224-x2005000-eng.pdf
Baly, A. (2010). Leaving abusive relationships: Constructions of self and situation by abused women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(12), 2297-2315. doi:10.1177/0886260509354885
Begun, A. L., Shelley, G., Strodthoff, T., & Short, L. (2001). Adopting a stages of change approach for
individuals who are violent with their intimate partner. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment &
Trauma, 5(4), 105-127.
Bell, K. M., & Naugle, A. E. (2005). Understanding stay/leave decisions in violent relationships: A
behavior analytic approach. Behavior and Social Issues, 14, 21-45.
Bergen, R. K., & Bukovec, P. (2006). Men and intimate partner rape: Characteristics of men who sexually abuse their partner. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 21(10), 1375-1384. doi:
10.1177/0886260506291652
Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). The bioecological theory of human development. In U. Bronfenbrenner (Ed.), Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development (pp. 3-
15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Brown, J. (1997). Working toward freedom from violence: The process of change in battered women.
Violence Against Women, 3(1), 5-26. doi: 10.1177/1077801297003001002
Brownridge, D. A. (2006). Violence against women post-separation. Aggression and Violent Behavior,
11(5), 514-530. doi: 10.1016/j.avb.2006.01.009
Brownridge, D. A., Chan, K. L., Hiebert-Murphy, D., Ristock, J., Tiwari, A., Leung, W. C., & Santos, S. C. (2008). The elevated risk for non-lethal post-separation violence in Canada: A comparison of
separated, divorced, and married women. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(1), 117-135. doi:
10.1177/0886260507307914
Burke, J. G., Mahoney, P., Gielen, A., McDonnell, K. A., & O’Campo, P. (2009). Defining appropriate
stages of change for intimate partner violence survivors. Violence and Victims, 24(1), 36-51.
doi:10.1891/0886-6708.24.1.36
Burke, J. G., Denison, J. A., Gielen, A. C., McDonnell, K. A., & O’Campo, P. (2004). Ending intimate partner violence: An application of the Transtheoretical model. American Journal of Health and
Behavior, 28(2), 122-133.
43
Burman, S. (2003). Battered women: Stages of change and other treatment models that instigate and
sustain leaving. Brief Treatment & Crisis Intervention, 3(1), 83-98. doi: 10.1093/brief-treatment/mhg004
Cameron, G. (1990). Child maltreatment: Challenges in expanding our concept of helping. In M. Rothery
& G. Cameron (Eds.), Child maltreatment: Expanding our concept of helping (pp. 277-285).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Cameron, G., & Rothery, M. (1985). An exploratory study of the nature and effectiveness of family
support measures in child welfare. Toronto, ON: Ontario Ministry of Community and Social
Services.
Campbell, J., Rose, L., Kub, J., & Nedd, D. (1998). Voices of strength and resistance: A contextual and
longitudinal analysis of women’s responses to battering. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 13(6),
743-762. doi: 10.1177/088626098013006005
Cannon, J. B., & Sparks, J. S. (1989). Shelters - an alternative to violence: A psychosocial case study.
Journal of Community Psychology, 17, 203-123.
Carlson, B. E. (1984). Causes and maintenance of domestic violence: An ecological analysis. Social
Service Review, 58(4), 569-587.
Carlson, B. E. (1997). A stress and coping approach to intervention with abused women. Family
Relations, 46(3), 291-298. doi: 10.2307/585127
Cattaneo, L. B., DeLoveh, H. L., & Zweig, J. M. (2008). Sexual assault within intimate partner violence: Impact on helpseeking in a national sample. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the
Community, 36(1-2), 137-153. doi: 10.1080/10852350802022415
Chang, J. C., Dado, D., Ashton, S., Hawker, L., Cluss, P. A., Buranosky, R. & Scholle, S. H. (2006). Understanding behavior change for women experiencing intimate partner violence:.Mapping the
ups and downs using the stages of change. Patient Education and Counseling, 62, 330-339.
Comrey, A. L. (1988). Factor analytic methods of scale development in personality and clinical
psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clincial Psychology, 56, 754-761.
Dasgupta, S. & Warrior, S. (1996). In the footsteps of “Arundhati”: Asian Indian women’s experience of
domestic violence in the United States. Violence Against Women, 2(3), 238-259. doi:
10.1177/1077801296002003002
DeVellis, R. F. (1991). Scale development: Theory and applications. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Dutton, M., Goodman, L, & Bennett, L. (1999). Court-involved battered women’s responses to violence:
The role of psychological, physical, and sexual abuse. Violence and Victims, 14(1), 89-104. doi:
no doi Dec 2014
Elliott, R., Greenberg, L. S., Watson, J., Timulak, L., & Freire, E. (2013). Research on humanistic-
experiential psychotherapies. In M. Lambert (Ed.), Bergin and Garfield's handbook of
psychotherapy and behavior change (6th ed., pp. 495-538). Etobicoke, ON: John Wiley & Sons.
Enander, V. H., & Holmberg, C. (2008). Why does she leave? The leaving processes of battered women.
Health Care for Women International, 29, 200-226. doi: 10.1080/07399330801913802
Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (Third edition). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
Fleury, R. E., Sullivan, C. M., & Bybee, D. I. (2000). When ending the relationship does not end the
violence: Women's experiences of violence by former partners. Violence Against Women, 6(12),
1363 -1383. doi: 10.1177/10778010022183695
44
Frasier, P., Slatt, L., Kowlowitz, V., & Glowa, P. (2001). Using the stages of change model to counsel
victims of intimate partner violence. Patient Education and Counselling, 43(2), 211-217. doi: 10.1016/S0738-3991(00)00152-X
Giles-Sims, J. (1983). Wife-battering: A systems theory approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Gondolf, E. W. (2002). Service barriers for battered women with male partners in batterer programs.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17(2), 217-227. doi: 10.1177/0886260502017002007
Gondolf, E. W. (1998). Service contact and delivery of a shelter outreach project. Journal of Family
Violence, 13(2), 131-145. doi: 10.1023/A:1022889506479
Gondolf, E. W. (1998). The victims of court-ordered batters: Their victimization, helpseeking, and perceptions. Violence Against Women, 4(6), 659-676. doi: 10.1177/1077801298004006003
Gondolf, E. W., & Fisher, E. R. (1988). Battered women as survivors: An alternative to treating learned
helplessness. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Goodkind, J. R., Sullivan, C., M., & Bybee, D. I. (2004). A contextual analysis of battered women’s
safety planning. Violence Against Women, 10(5), 514-533. doi: 10.1177/1077801204264368
Goodman, L., Dutton, M. A., Vankos, N., & Weinfurt, K. (2005). Women’s resources and use of
strategies as risk and protective factors for reabuse over time. Violence Against Women, 11(3), 311-336. doi:10.1177/1077801204273297
Grauwiler, P. (2008). Voices of women: Perspectives on decision-making and the management of partner
violence. Child and Youth Services Review, 30(3), 311-322. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.10.008
Hendy, H., Eggen, D., Gustitus, C., McLeod, K., & Ng, P. (2003). Decision to leave scale: perceived
reasons to stay in or leave violent relationships. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 27, 162-173. doi:10.1111/1471-6402.00096
Kemp, A., Green, B. L., Hovanitz, C., & Rawlings, E. I. (1995). Incidence and correlates of posttraumatic
stress disorder in battered women: Shelter and community samples. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 10(1), 43-55. doi:10.1177/088626095010001003
Kimmel, M. S. (2002). “Gender symmetry” in domestic violence: A substantive and methodological
research review. Violence Against Women, 8(11), 1332-1363. doi:10.1177/107780102237407
Kurz, D. (1996). Separation, divorce, and woman abuse. Violence Against Women, 2(1), 63-81. doi: 10.1177/1077801296002001004
Lempert, L. B. (1996). Women’s strategies for survival: Developing agency in abusive relationships.
Journal of Family Violence, 11, 269-289. doi: 10.1007/BF02336945
Levesque, D. A., Gelles, R. J., & Velicer, W. F. (2000). Development and validation of a stages of change measure for men in batterer treatment. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 24, 175-199.
Levesque, D. A., Velicer, W. F., Castle, P. H., & Greene, R. N. (2008). Resistance among domestic
violence offenders: Measurement development and initial validation. Violence Against Women, 14(2), 158-184. doi:10.1177/1077801207312397
Liang, B., Goodman, L., Tummala-Narra, P., & Weintraub, S. (2005). A theoretical framework for
understanding help-seeking processes among surviviors of intimate partner violence. American Journal of Community Psychology, 36, 71-84. doi: 10.1007/s10464-005-6233-6
45
Mehrotra, M. (1999). The social construction of wife abuse: Experiences of Asian Indian women in the
United States. Violence Against Women, 5(6), 619-640. doi: 10.1177/10778019922181400
Mills, T. (1985). The assault on the self: Stages in coping with battering husbands. Qualitative Sociology,
8(2), 103-123.
Mitchell, R. E., & Hodson, C. A. (1983). Coping with domestic violence: Social support and
psychological health among battered women. American Journal of Community Psychology, 11(1), 629-654. doi:10.1007/BF00896600
Moe, A. M. (2007). Silenced voices and structural survival: Battered women's help seeking. Violence
Against Women, 13(7), 676-699. doi:10.1177/1077801207302041
Nixon, K. L. (2002). Leave him or lose them?: The child protection response to woman abuse. In C. G. L.
Tutty (Ed.), Reclaiming self: Issues and resources for women abused by intimate partners (pp.
64-80). Halifax, NS: Fernwood Press and RESOLVE.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Patzel, B. (2001). Women’s use of resources in leaving abusive relationships: A naturalistic inquiry. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 22, 729-747. doi: 10.1080/01612840152712992
Pro-Change Behavior Systems, I. (2001). Domestic Violence Survey (URICA-DV). West Kingston, RI:
Pro-Change Behavior Systems, Inc.
Prochaska, J. O., & Levesque, D. A. (2002). Enhancing motivation of offenders at each stage of change
and phase of therapy. In E. McMurran (Ed.), Motivating offenders to change: A guide to
enhancing engagement in therapy. New York, NY: Wiley.
Prochaska, J. O., & Norcross, J. C. (2003). Systems of psychotherapy: A transtheoretical analysis. Pacific
Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Prochaska, J. O., Velicer, W. F., Rossi, J. S., Goldstein, M. G., Marcus, B. H., Rakowski, W., et al.
(1994). Stages of change and decisional balance for 12 problem behaviors. Health Psychology, 13, 39-46.
Prochaska, J. O., Velicer, W. F., Rossi, J. S., Redding, C. A., Greene, N. R., Rossi, S. R., et al. (2004).
Multiple risk expert systems interventions: Impact of simultaneous stage-matched expert system interventions for smoking, high-fat diet, and sun exposure in a population of parents. Health
Psychology, 23, 503-516.
Redding, C. A., Maddock, J. E., & Rossi, J. S. (2006). The sequential approach to measurement of health
behavior constructs: Issues in selecting and developing measures. Californian Journal of Health Promotion, 4(1), 83-101.
Rothery, M. (2007). Critical ecological systems theory. In N. F. Coady & P. Lehmann (Eds.), Theoretical
perspectives for direct social work practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
Rothery, M. (in press). Critical ecological systems theory. In N. F. Coady & P. Lehmann (Eds.),
Theoretical perspectives for direct social work practice (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
Rothery, M., Tutty, L. M., & Weaver, G. (1999). Tough choices: Women, abusive partners and the ecology of decision-making. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 18(1), 5-18.
46
Sevcik, I., Rothery, M., Nason-Clark, N., & Pynn, R. (2015). Overcoming conflicting loyalties: Intimate
partner violence, community resources, and faith. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta Press.
Smith, C. (2010). What is a person? Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Stark, E. (2007). Coercive control: How men entrap women in personal life. New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Statistics Canada (2011). Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile. (Catalogue no. 85-224-X). Ottawa, ON: Statistics Canada Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-224-x/85-224-
x2010000-eng.pdf
Sylaska, K. M., & Edwards, K. M. (2014). Disclosure of intimate partner violence to informal social support network members: A review of the literature. Trauma Violence & Abuse, 15(1), 3-21. doi:
10.1177/1524838013496335
Tutty, L. (2006). There but for fortune: How women experience abuse by intimate partners. In M. R. Hampton & N. Gerrard (Eds.), Intimate partner violence: (pp. 9-32). Toronto: Cormorant Books
and RESOLVE.
Tutty, L. M. & Rothery, M. A. (2002). How well do emergency shelters assist women and their children?
In L. Tutty, & C. Goard (Eds.), Reclaiming self: Issues and resources for women abused by intimate partners (pp. 25-42). Halifax, NS: Fernwood and RESOLVE.
Tutty, L. M., Ogden, C., Giurgiu, B., & Weaver-Dunlop, G. (2013). I built my house of hope: Abused
women and pathways into homelessness. Violence Against Women, 19(12), 1498-1517. doi:10.1177/1077801213517514
Wade, A. (1997). Small acts of living: Everyday resistance to violence and other forms of oppression.
Contemporary Family Therapy, 19, 23-39. doi: 10.1023/A:1026154215299
Williams, L. M. (2004). Researcher-advocate collaborations to end violence against women: Toward
liberating methodologies for action research. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(11), 1350-
1357.
Wilson, M. & Daly, M. (1993). Spousal homicide risk and estrangement. Violence & Victims, 8, 3-16. doi: no doi
Yoshihama, M. (2002). Battered women’s coping strategies and psychological distress: Differences by
immigration status. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30(13), 429-452. doi: 10.1023/A:1015393204820
47
Appendix One: Engaging Women/Stages of Change Measure Development Focus Group
Protocol
Introduction: This focus group discussion is to discover how we can better assist women
abused by intimate partners to create safer lives for themselves. We are not asking you to
disclose your own experiences (although you certainly can if you like), but to think about what
other women might do to be safer. Also, this is not just about leaving the relationship to be
safer, but other strategies to be safe even while living with an abusive partner.
Operational Definition
1. Are there things that women who have been abused by their partners can do to create a
safer life for themselves and their children? What can they do?
2. What are the first steps they can take?
3. What are some other steps?
4. Do you think women differ in their readiness to take these steps? How can you tell?
Stages of Change
1. Precontemplation: Imagine a woman who is just not ready yet to take active steps to create a
safer life for herself and her children. What kinds of things might she think/say/do?
2. Contemplation: Imagine a woman who is beginning to think about taking active steps to
create a safer life for herself and her children. What kinds of things might she think/say/do?
3. Preparation: Imagine a woman who is getting ready to take active steps to create a safer life
for herself and her children. What kinds of things might she think/say/do?
4. Action: Imagine a woman who is taking active steps to create a safer life for herself and her
children. What kinds of things might she think/say/do?
5. Relapse: Imagine a woman who has taken active steps to create a safer life for herself and
her children, but is afraid that she will not be able to maintain these changes. What kinds of
things might she think/say/do?
Part I: Decisional Balance
1. What are some reasons why a woman might want to take these steps to create a safer life?
What are the benefits/pros of taking these steps?
Use prompts to ensure that the following Janis and Mann categories are represented:
Category Prompt
Utilitarian gains for self How could taking these steps benefit the woman
personally?
Utilitarian gains for others Who else could benefit (e.g., children, other family
members, employers, society)?.How might they benefit?
Self-approval Could taking these steps help a woman feel better about
herself? In what way?
48
Social approval Would other people approve if a woman took steps to
create a safer life for herself and her children? Who? How
would they show their approval?
2. What are the reasons why a woman might not want to take steps to create a safer life for
herself and her children? What are the costs/cons?
Use prompts to ensure that the following Janis and Mann categories are represented:
Category Prompt
Utilitarian losses for self How could taking these steps negatively affect a woman
or make her life more difficult?
Utilitarian losses for others How could taking these steps negatively affect others
(e.g., children, other family members, employers,
society)?
Self-disapproval Could taking these steps make a woman feel bad about
herself? In what way?
Social disapproval Would other people disapprove of a woman taking these
steps? Who? How would they show their disapproval?
Part II: Self Efficacy
1. Women can run into difficult situations that can test their confidence that they can create a
safer life for themselves and their children. What are some of these difficult situations? What are
some of the challenges women face when they try to make changes?
Part III: Processes of Change and Processes of Resistance
Consciousness Raising
1. What can women who have been abused by their partners do to increase their awareness of
the benefits of taking active steps to create a safer life for themselves and their children?
2. How/where can women learn more about how they can create a safer life for themselves and
their children?
3. What kinds of information in the media can trigger thoughts about making changes among
women who are victims of partner violence?
RESISTANCE:
4. What are some reasons why women may not want to think or learn more about creating a
safer life?
5. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to think or learn more about
creating a safer life?
Dramatic Relief
49
1. Sometimes emotional experiences can motivate women to begin taking active steps to create
a safer life for themselves and their children. What kinds of experiences can scare women into
making changes?
2. What kinds of experiences can inspire women to make changes?
3. We talked about fear. What are some other negative emotions that can motivate women to
make changes?.
4. We talked about inspiration and hope. What are some other positive emotions that can
motivate women to make changes?
RESISTANCE:
5. What are some reasons why women may not want to get more in touch with their emotions
(inspiration, fear) related to making a safer life?
6. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to get more in touch with
their emotions related to making a safer life?
Self-Reevaluation
1. How might women who are victims of partner violence see themselves?
2. How might their view of themselves change as they begin to take active steps to create a
safer life for themselves and their children?
3. How might their view of themselves change once they’ve been able to keep themselves safe
for awhile?
RESISTANCE:
4. What are some reasons why women who are victims may not want to take a closer look at
their self-image and how it might change if they created a safer life?
5. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to take a closer look at their
self-image and how it might change if they created a safer life?
Relationship Reevaluation
1. How might women who have been abused by their partners see their relationships?
2. What might encourage women to take a closer look at their values, hopes and expectations
regarding their relationships?
3. What might encourage women to look at their relationships more realistically?
RESISTANCE:
4. What are some reasons why women who have been abused by their partners may not
want to take a closer look at their relationship and what they want for themselves?
5. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to take a closer look at their
relationship and what they want for themselves?
Environmental Reevaluation
50
1. How would the world be a better place if we ended domestic violence?
2. How do children, other family members, friends, and the community benefit when women
take active steps to create a safe life for themselves and their children?
3. How much do women think about the impact of DV on others? How does it motivate them to
make changes?
RESISTANCE:
4. What are some reasons why women who have been abused by their partners may not want to
think about the impact of DV on others?
5. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to think about the impact of
DV on others?
Self-Liberation
1. Do you think women who have been abused by their partners believe that creating a safer life
for themselves and their children is within their control?
2. What can women do to increase their sense of control over their ability to create a safer life?
3. What can women do to show others that they are firm in their commitment to create a safer
life for themselves and their children?
RESISTANCE:
4. What are some reasons why women who have been abused by their partners may not want to
make a commitment to create a safer life for themselves and their children?
5. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to make a commitment to
create a safer life for themselves and their children?
Social Liberation
1. In what way is our society making it easier for women to create a safer life for themselves
and their children?
2. These days, what are the messages in our society about domestic violence? Who is sending
out those messages?
RESISTANCE:
3. What are some reasons why women who have been abused by their partners may not want to
notice how society is making it easier for women to create a safer life for themselves and their
children?
4. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to notice?
Stimulus Control
1. What kinds of people, places, and things can women avoid to make it easier to create a safer
life for themselves and their children? (e.g., people who minimize abuse or undermine self-
esteem, situations that increase the likelihood of violence or that make it more difficult to
change; alcohol and other drugs)
51
2. What kinds of people, places and things can women spend more time with/in to make it
easier to make changes?
RESISTANCE:
3. What are some reasons why women whose partners have abused them may not want to avoid
people, places and things that can make it harder to create a safer life?
4. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to avoid those people, places
and things?
Contingency Management
1. How can women reward themselves for taking active steps to create a safer life for
themselves and their children?
2. How can others reward them?
3. How is taking these steps in itself rewarding?
RESISTANCE:
4. What are some reasons that women who have been abused by their partners may not reward
themselves for taking active steps to create a safer life?
5. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to reward themselves?
Counter Conditioning
1. When women who are trying to create a safer life for themselves and their children, it’s
important to find healthy alternatives to old ways of thinking and acting.
2. What are some old ways of thinking and acting?
3. What are some healthy alternatives?
RESISTANCE:
4. What are some reasons why women who may choose not want to use alternatives to old ways
of thinking and acting?
5. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to use these alternatives?
Helping Relationships
1. Who can women who have been abused by their partners turn to for support when they’re
trying to create a safer life for themselves and their children?
2. What kinds of support can these helpers provide?
RESISTANCE:
3. What are some reasons that women who have been abused by their partners may not turn to
others for support?
4. What kinds of things might they do and say if they’re not ready to turn to others for support?
52
Appendix Two: Women’s Intentions to Keep Self Safe Measure Distribution and Corrected-Item-Total Correlations
Items with a star (*) were reversed scored) Items in bold have the strongest correlations. Items in italics the weakest.
Item Strongly
Disagree
Disagree No
Opinion
Agree Strongly
Agree
Don’t
Know
Item
Total r
1. I seldom discuss the troubling parts of my relationship with others. * 2 (6.1%) 9 (27.3%) 2 (6.1%) 14 (42.4%) 6 (18.2%) 0 .46
2. In my opinion, abuse is being physically hurt, not just having hurtful
words used against me. *
15 (45.5%) 8 (24.2%) 1 (3%) 5 (15.2%) 4 (12.1%) 0 .21
3. I am now less likely to make excuses for my partner’s abusive
behaviour.
0 1 (3.2%) 1 (3.2%) 14 (45.2%) 15 (48.4%) 2 .81
4. I now see more clearly what is or isn’t acceptable in my relationship. 0 1 (3.1%) 1 (3.1%) 17 (53.1%) 13 (40.6%) 1 .23
5. My partner’s behaviour does not affect our children or anyone else close
to us.*
22 (68.8%) 6 (18.8%) 1 (3.1%) 2 (6.3%) 1 (3.1%) 1 .39
6. I am interested in information about what counts as abuse in my
relationship.
1 (3.2%) 3 (9.7%) 2 (6.5%) 14 (45.2%) 11 (35.5%) 2 -.07
7. I am learning that my partner’s abuse is not something he will just get
over.
0 2 (6.1%) 5 (15.2%) 11 (33.3%) 15 (45.5%) 0 .32
8. Other women experiencing abuse could be helped by what I’ve learned
about making life safer.
0 0 2 (6.5%) 12 (38.7%) 17 (54.8%) 2 .63
9. I want to find ways to make my life safer, but I’m not sure how. 3 (9.1%) 10 (30.3%) 6 (18.2%) 7 (21.2%) 7 (21/2%) 0 -.46
10. It’s best to ignore my distress about my relationship.* 14 (42.4%) 14 (42.2%) 2 (6.1%) 3 (9.1%) 0 0 .54
11. There is nobody to tell if I did want to talk to somebody about the
problems in my relationship.*
10 (31.5%) 12 (37.5%) 4 (12.5%) 2 (6.3%) 4 (12.5%) 1 .62
12. I am now less likely to let other people talk me out of taking steps to
make life safer.
2 (6.5%) 1 (3.2%) 3 (9.7%) 17 (54.8%) 8 (25.8%) 2 .56
13. I am better at seeing danger signs in my relationship 1 (3%) 0 4 (12.1%) 17 (51.5%) 11 (33.3%) 0 .20
14. More than before, I am making decisions that are best for me. 0 0 3 (9.4%) 17 (53.1%) 12 (37.5%) 1 .76
15. I now know what steps to take to stay safe when I feel unsafe in my
relationship.
0 4 (12.9%) 3 (9.7%) 17 (54.8%) 7 (22.6%) 2 .61
16. I find it easier not to ask for help when I need it.* 0 7 (21.2%) 4 (12.1%) 18 (54.4%) 4 (12.1%) 0 -.51
17. I’ve been successful at making my life safer, and expect to keep it like
that.
1 (3%) 4 (12.1%) 3 (9.1%) 16 (48.5%) 9 (27.3%) 0 .47
18. I have friends or family I can call if I’m afraid and need to talk. 2 (6.3%) 4 (12.5%) 1 (3.1%) 11 (34.4%) 14 (43.8%) 1 .56
19. I know of professionals I can call if I’m afraid and need to talk. 0 1 (3.1%) 2 (6.1%) 15 (46.9%) 14 (43.8%) 1 .71
20. I believe that my partner will change.* 14 (46.7%) 10 (33.3%) 4 (13.3%) 1 (3.3%) 1 (3.3%) 3 .30
21. I still have dreams and hopes for my relationship.* 15 (45.5%) 2 (6.1%) 7 (21.2%) 7 (21.2%) 2 (6.1%) 0 .39
22. There are things I could do to stop my partner from getting so upset
with me.*
10 (31.3%) 10 (31.3%) 5 (15.6%) 5 (15.6%) 2 (6.3%) 1 .09
53
23. I sometimes think that my relationship may be abusive. 1 (3.3%) 2 (6.7%) 1 (3.3%) 8 (26.7%) 18 (60%) 3 -.12
24. I don’t see the point of thinking about trying to change my situation.* 16 (48.5%) 11 (33.3%) 3 (9.1%) 2 (6.1%) 1 (3%) 0 .59
25. Much of the time, I really don’t know how I feel about my partner.* 5 (17.2%) 5 (17.2%) 6 (20.7%) 8 (27.6%) 5 (17.2%) 3 .007
26. At times I am afraid of my partner, but I know what to do to feel safer. 0 1 (3%) 7 (21.2%) 17 (51.5%) 8 (24.2%) 0 .48
27. Realizing that my partner has been abusing me has been an important
first step.
0 1 (3.1%) 2 (6.3%) 13 (40.6%) 16 (50%) 1 .54
28. I go from day to day, not thinking much about the future.* 7 (21.2%) 10 (30.3%) 5 (15.2%) 8 (24.2%) 3 (9.1%) 0 .46
29. While my relationship is often difficult, it is better than living on my
own.*
12 (37.5%) 8 (25%) 2 (6.3%) 4 (12.5%) 6 (18.8%) 1 .50
30. When my partner is angry or controlling, I remind myself that he is OK
most of the time.*
11 (33.3%) 12 (36.4%) 2 (6.1%) 5 (15.2%) 3 (9.1%) 0 .09
31. I prefer to not think about my relationship often.* 5 (15.2%) 5 (15.2%) 2 (6.1%) 16 (48.5%) 5 (15.2%) 0 .22
32. I don’t see myself as able to make it on my own.* 10 (30.3%) 12 (36.4%) 3 (9.1%) 3 (9.1%) 5 (15.2%) 0 .59
33. I have friends or family who support me when I act to make my life
safer.
3 (9.4%) 5 (15.6%) 2 (6.3%) 11 (34.4%) 11 (34.4%) 1 .29
34. I think about how I can stop putting up with my partner’s abuse. 2 (6.1%) 1 (3%) 5 (15.2%) 16 (48.5%) 9 (27.3%) 0 -.15
35. I am beginning to realize that the abuse in my relationship is not
acceptable.
1 (3.1%) 1 (3.1%) 1 (3.1%) 12 (37.5%) 17 (53.1%) 1 .66
36. If I have days when I doubt myself, I know ways to get my confidence
back.
2 (6.1%) 7 (21.2%) 6 (18.2%) 14 (42.4%) 4 (12.1%) 0 .61
37. When I see danger signs in my relationship, I am now more likely to think about what I can do about it.
1 (3.1%) 0 6 (18.8%) 19 (59.4%) 6 (18.8%) 1 .55
38. I am learning new ways of taking care of myself in my relationship. 1 (3.1%) 1 (3.1%) 8 (25%) 15 (46.9%) 7 (21.9%) 1 .21
39. I have friends or family who can help me make my life safer. 3 (9.1%) 5 (15.2%) 3 (9.1%) 15 (45.5%) 7 (21.2%) 0 .40
40. I know there are professionals who can help me make my life safer. 0 1 (3.1%) 0 16 (50%) 15 (46.9%) 1 .80
41. I have taken steps towards a safer life, and won’t go back to the
way it was before.
0 1 (3.2%) 5 (16.1%) 7 (22.6%) 18 (58.1%) 2 .86
42. I feel stronger, having made changes towards a safer life. 1 (3%) 4 (12.1%) 1 (3%) 13 (39.4%) 14 (42.4%) 0 .87
43. I do not agree when friends or family call my partner’s behaviour
“abuse”.*
15 (50%) 9 (30%) 4 (13.3%) 1 (3.3%) 1 (3.3%) 3 .55
44. I do not agree when professionals call my partner’s behaviour “abuse”.* 18 (58.1%) 8 (25.8%) 4 (12.9%) 0 3 (3.2%) 2 .58
45. Friends and family who think my relationship is unsafe don’t really
understand.*
14 (48.3%) 7 (24.1%) 3 (10.3%) 5 (17.2%) 0 4 .48
46. Professionals who think my relationship is unsafe don’t really
understand.*
15 (46.9%) 12 (37.5%) 3 (9.4%) 2 (6.3%) 0 1 .03
47. The problems in my relationship would improve if I was a better
partner.*
13 (39.4%) 13 (39.4%) 2 (6.1%) 4 (12.1%) 1 (3%) 0 .79
48. I could not manage being on my own.* 12 (36.4%) 13 (39.4%) 2 (6.1%) 4 (12.1%) 2 (6.1%) 0 .58
49. I am reluctant to talk about my relationship because others don’t 4 (12.1%) 9 (27.3%) 7 (21.3%) 9 (27.3%) 4 (12.1%) 0 .47
54
understand.*
50. It is normal for couples to have pain in their relationships.* 4 (12.1%) 7 (21.9%) 7 (21.9%) 14 (43.8%) 0 1 .66
51. Although my partner hurts me, he’s not as bad as others think.* 11 (35.5%) 9 (29%) 4 (12.9%) 6 (19.4%) 1 (3.2%) 2 .55
52. I’m used to my relationship and don’t want to think about changing.* 16 (50%) 9 (26.1%) 3 (9.4%) 3 (9.4%) 1 (3.1%) 1 .11
53. I am learning not to bury my feelings about my partner’s abuse. 3 (9.1%) 2 (6.1%) 4 (12.1%) 15 (45.5%) 9 (23.7%) 0 .41
54. I am the cause of whatever problems I am experiencing in my
relationship and it is up to me to change.*
11 (33.3%) 16 (48.5%) 1 (3%) 4 (12.1%) 1 (3%) 0 .68
55. My partner is not perfect, but he will change in time.* 12 (42.9%) 12 (42.9%) 4 (14.3%) 0 0 5 .16
56. My partner hurts me, but I believe he can change.* 14 (48.3%) 7 (24.1%) 5 (17.2%) 3 (10.3%) 0 4 .11
57. There is no reason to think I deserve a partner who treats me better.* 15 (46.9%) 12 (37.5%) 2 (6.3%) 2 (6.3%) 1 (3.1%) 1 .51
58. I don’t understand why others see the way my partner treats me as a
problem.*
14 (45.2%) 12 (38.7%) 3 (9.7%) 2 (6.5%) 0 2 .54
59. I am learning not to feel ashamed about my partner’s abusive
behaviour.
3 (9.4%) 3 (9.4%) 1 (3.1%) 17 (51.5%) 8 (25%) 1 .58
60. I am learning to care more about how I am treated. 0 0 2 (6.1%) 20 (60.6%) 11 (33.3%) 0 .23
61. I am beginning to accept that I have been abused. 0 0 5 (15.2%) 17 (51.5%) 11 (33.3%) 0 .47
62. I am now becoming more open with other people about the abuse I’ve
experienced.
2 (6.1%) 5 (15.2%) 2 (6.1%) 18 (54.4%) 6 (18.2%) 0 .54
63. More and more, I’m seeing that the changes I’ve made have really
made a difference.
0 4 (12.9%) 3 (9.7%) 14 (45.2%) 10 (32.3%) 2 .73
64. I now believe that I deserve a safer life for myself. 2 (6.1%) 0 2 (6.1%) 16 (48.5%) 13 (39.4%) 0 .64
65. I am trying new ways of taking care of myself in my relationship. 1 (3.2%) 2 (6.5%) 4 (12.9%) 18 (58.1%) 6 (19.4%) 2 .42
66. It is a good idea for me to talk to people about how difficult my relationship has been.
1 (3.2%) 3 (9.7%) 3 (9.7%) 13 (41.9%) 11 (35.5%) 2 .27
67. I have stopped letting my partner tell me whether I’m smart, loveable,
or able to take care of myself.
0 2 (7.1%) 6 (21.4%) 10 (35.7%) 10 (35.7%) 4 .53
68. I am less afraid about having to live on my own. 3 (9.1%) 3 (9.1%) 2 (6.1%) 15 (45.5%) 10 (30.3%) 0 .73
69. I am taking more steps to keep myself safe. 0 4 (12.5%) 2 (6.3%) 20 (62.5%) 6 (18.8%) 0 .51
70. I am starting to see that life without abuse is possible. 2 (6.1%) 0 3 (9.1%) 14 (42.4%) 14 (42.4%) 0 .74
71. I am interested in information about services that help women in
abusive relationships.
1 (3.1%) 2 (6.3%) 2 (6.3%) 17 (53.1%) 10 (31.3%) 1 -.07
72. I am learning that my partner’s past abusiveness was not my fault. 0 2 (6.1%) 1 (3%) 19 (57.6%) 11 (33.3%) 0 .67
73. I have let friends or family I trust know what I’ve been going through in
my relationship.
3 (9.1%) 3 (9.1%) 2 (6.1%) 14 (42.4%) 11 (33.3%) 0 .31
74. I am interested in what kinds of help can keep me safe. 0 3 (9.1%) 4 (12.1%) 18 (54.5%) 8 (24.2%) 0 .04
75. What might look like small steps to make my life safer are very
important to me.
0 1 (3%) 1 (3%) 16 (48.5%) 15 (45.5%) 0 .45
76. When friends or family worry about me being in an abusive
relationship, I am willing to hear them.
0 0 6 (18.8%) 18 (56.3%) 8 (25%) 1 .75
55
77. When professionals worry about me being in an abusive
relationship, I am willing to hear them.
0 0 2 (6.3%) 19 (59.4%) 11 (34.4%) 1 .79
78. I am learning to accept that my relationship can never be what I
dreamed it would be.
2 (6.1%) 1 (3%) 4 (12.1%) 9 (27.3%) 17 (51.5%) 0 .29
79. Other people have trouble understanding my relationship.* 3 (10.3%) 5 (17.2%) 3 (10.3%) 16 (55.2%) 2 (6.9%) 4 .20
80. I no longer doubt my ability to take steps to keep myself and my
children safer.
1 (3.1%) 3 (9.4%) 5 (15.6%) 11 (34.4%) 12 (37.5%) 1 .71
81. I am more hopeful about my future. 1 (3.1%) 2 (6.3%) 5 (15.6%) 12 (37.5%) 12 (37.5%) 1 .60
82. I can see that I have achieved important changes that make my life
safer.
1 (3%) 2 (6.1%) 2 (6.1%) 15 (45.5%) 13 (39/4%) 0 .68
83. Friends or family who know me well can see I’ve made positive
changes.
1 (3.1%) 1 (3.1%) 4 (12.5%) 16 (50%) 10 (31.3%) 1 .63
84. Professionals who know me well can see I’ve made positive changes. 1 (3.2%) 2 (6.5%) 4 (12.9%) 17 (54.8%) 7 (22.6%) 2 .48
85. The things I’ve done to make my life safer have put me on a path that
feels right.
0 2 (6.5%) 4 (12.9%) 14 (45.2%) 11 (35.5%) 2 .68
86. There are things about managing my life that I thought I couldn’t
do, but now know that I can do them.
1 (3.1%) 2 (6.3%) 6 (18.8%) 12 (37.5%) 11 (34.4%) 1 .77
87. I feel stronger because of the things I’ve done to make my life safer. 0 4 (12.1%) 3 (9.1%) 17 (51.5%) 9 (27.3%) 0 .70
88. I have little to say when others ask about my relationship.* 1 (3.3%) 9 (30%) 6 (20%) 12 (40%) 2 (40%) 3 .45
89. I know friends or family I can turn to for support to continue with the
positive changes I’ve made.
2 (6.1%) 2 (6.1%) 2 (6.1%) 18 (54.5%) 9 (27.3%) 0 .67
90. I know professionals I can turn to for support to continue with the
positive changes I’ve made.
1 (3.1%) 2 (6.3%) 0 17 (53.3%) 12 (37.5%) 1 .79
91. I am better at safety planning than in the past. 0 2 (6.1%) 4 (12.1%) 21 (63.3%) 6 (18.2%) 0 .64
92. I am now more assertive than I was in the past. 0 3 (9.7%) 5 (16.1%) 14 (45.2%) 9 (29%) 2 .59
93. The steps I have taken to make my life safer help me feel more
confident.
0 5 (15.2%) 7 (21.2%) 17 (51.5%) 4 (12.1%) 0 .76
94. I have been thinking about how to keep myself safe from abuse in my
relationship.
0 2 (6.1%) 4 (12.1%) 20 (60.6%) 7 (21.2%) 0 .22
95. I feel more secure because of the positive changes I have made. 0 2 (6.3%) 4 (12.5%) 18 (56.3%) 8 (25%) 1 .64
96. The way I think and feel about myself is changing but others might not
see it.
1 (3.2%) 7 (22.6%) 9 (29%) 11 (35.5%) 3 (9.7%) 2 .44
97. I can be more independent than I thought possible. 1 (3.1%) 0 5 (15.6%) 14 (43.8%) 12 (37.5%) 1 .75
98. I see how important it is that I’ve made changes that are good for me. 0 0 3 (9.1%) 15 (45.5%) 15 (45.5%) 0 .68
99. I now feel like I can stay safe. 1 (3.2%) 6 (19.4%) 3 (9.7%) 12 (38.7%) 9 (29%) 2 .64
100. I have hope about what my future can hold. 1 (3.1%) 1 (3.1%) 7 (21.9%) 12 (37.5%) 11 (34.4%) 1 .64
56
Appendix Three: Decisional Balance Items
Item Very
Unimportant
Not
Important
No Opinion Important Very
Important
Don’t
Know
Item
Total r
D1. If I do more to make my life safer, I will be walking away from
my dreams of a happy family.*
3 (9.7%) 8 (25.8%) 4 (12.9%) 14 (45.2%) 2 (6.5%) 2 .32
D2. If I do more to make my life safer, I will be able to live
independently
0 1 (3%) 1 (3%) 13 (39.4%) 18 (54.5%) 0 .27
D3. If I do more to make my life safer, I will be giving up hopes of
ever making my relationship better again.*
5 (15.6%) 11 (34.4%) 5 !5.5%) 10 (31.3%) 1 (3.1%) 1 .37
D4. Doing more to make my life safer will be very difficult, and I
may not have the help I need to succeed.*
4 (12.1%) 6 (18.2%) 5 (15.2%) 10 (30.3%) 8 (24.2%) 0 .57
D5. If I do more to make my life safer, I will feel more positive
about my life in general.
0 0 2 (6.1%) 13 (39.4%) 18 (54.5%) 0 .30
D6. If I do more to make my life safer I will feel I have failed as a
partner.*
10 (31.3%) 13 (40.6%) 4 (12.5%) 3 (9.4%) 2 (6.3%) 1 .23
D7. I am okay with my relationship ending if it makes my life safer. 3 (10.3%) 2 (6.9%) 3 (10.3%) 10 (35.4%) 11 (37.9%) 4 .28
D8. I worry that by trying to make my life safer, I may make things worse.*
3 (9.7%) 7 (22.6%) 5 (16.1%) 9 (29%) 7 (22.6%) 2 .44
D9. If I do more to make my life safer, I don't believe friends or
family will understand.*
6 (18.2%) 10 (30.3%) 4 (12.1%) 12 (36.4%) 1 (3%) 0 .13
D10. If I do more to make my life safer, friends or family will not
support me.*
4 (12.9%) 11 (35.5%) 5 (16.1%) 8 (25.8%) 3 (9.7%) 0 .09
D11. If I do more to make my life safer, I will have more respect for
myself.
0 1 (3%) 2 (6.1%) 13 (39.4%) 17 (51.5%) 0 .41
D12. If I do more to make my life safer, friends or family who matter
to me will approve.
1 (3%) 2 (6.1%) 4 (12.1%) 19 (57.6%) 7 (21.2%) 0 .15
D13. If I do more to make my life safer, I may not be able to support
myself.*
5 (15.6%) 4 (12.5%) 1 (2.1%) 11 (34.4%) 11 (34.4%) 1 .11
D14. If I do more to make my life safer, I will be able to move on
with my life.
0 1 (3%) 3 (9.1%) 14 (42.4%) 15 (45.5%) 0 .54
D15. If I do more to make my life safer, I will end up alone.* 6 (18.8%) 10 (31.3%) 5 (15.6%) 5 (15.6%) 6 (18.8%) 1 .46
D16. If I do more to make my life safer, I will feel I've let down
people who are important to me.*
5 (15.6%) 13 (40.6%) 7 (21.9%) 5 (15.6%) 2 (6.3%) 1 .38
D17. If I do more to make my life safer, there are services to help
me.
0 1 (3%) 6 (18.2%) 13 (39.4%) 13 (39.4%) 0 .09
D18. If I do more to make my life safer, I will be able to reconnect
with family and friends.
1 (3%) 1 (3%) 7 (21.2%) 9 (27.3%) 15 (45.5%) 0 .42
57
Item Very
Unimportant
Not
Important
No Opinion Important Very
Important
Don’t
Know
Item
Total r
D19. If I do more to make my life safer, my life will be better than it
is now.
0 1 (3.2%) 3 (9.7%) 12 (38.7%) 15 (48.4%) 2 .18
D20. Doing more to make my life safer will be very difficult, and I
might not have the strength to follow through.*
3 (9.1%) 9 (27.3%) 4 (12.1%) 9 (27.3%) 8 (24.2%) 0 .34
D21. If I do more to make my life safer, I will feel like a better
parent.
0 0 5 (16.1%) 10 (32.3%) 16 (51.6%) 2 .50
D22. If I do more to make my life safer, I know friends or family will
tell me I'm being selfish.*
14 (43.8%) 12 (37.5%) 4 (12.5%) 2 (6.3%) 0 1 .28
D23. If I do more to make my life safer, I will be setting a good
example for others (e.g. children, other women).
1 (3%) 1 (3%) 2 (6.1%) 12 (36.4%) 17 (51.5%) 0 .47
D24. If I do more to make my life safer, my relationship will become more dangerous.
3 (9.7%) 8 (25.8%) 5 (16.1%) 10 (32.3%) 5 (16.1%) 2 -.33
D25. If I do more to make my life safer, I will feel more successful. 0 2 (6.3%) 5 (15.6%) 12 (37.5%) 13 (37.5%) 1 .52
D26. If I do more to make my life safer, people close to me will also
be safer.
1 (3.4%) 0 3 (10.3%) 11 (37.9%) 14 (48.3%) 4 .29
D27. If I do more to make my life safer, I'm afraid I won't be able to
afford food or a place to live.
6 (18.2%) 4 (12.1%) 2 (6.1%) 9 (27.3%) 12 (36.4%) 0 -.11
D28. If I do more to make my life safer, I will have more self-
respect.
0 1 (3%) 2 (6.1%) 12 (36.4%) 18 (54.5%) 0 .41
D29. I have no choice but to do more to make my life safer, because I
can't go on living with things the way they are.
1 (3%) 0 4 (12.1%) 8 (24.2%) 20 (60.6%) 0 .19
D30. I will feel stronger if I do more to make my life safer. 0 0 3 (9.4%) 15 (46.9%) 14 (43.8%) 1 .38
D31. If I do more to make my life safer, then other changes will be
easier.
0 1 (3%) 7 (21.2%) 15 (45.5%) 10 (30.3%) 0 .54
D32. If I do more to make my life safer, people close to me will be
happier.
0 2 (6.7%) 2 (6.7%) 17 (56.7%) 9 (30%) 3 .08
D33. If I do more to make my life safer, my friends and family will
support me.
0 0 4 (12.9%) 15 (48.4%) 12 (38.7%) 2 .08
D34. If I do more to make my life safer, friends or family could be
hurt.
4 (16%) 3 (12%) 7 (28%) 7 (28%) 4 (16%) 8 .07