Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
IPV constitutes a serious health concern for LGBTQ populations within Australia, yet inclusive service provision remains sparsely and unevenly accessible to victim-survivors. While poor availability and accessibility of inclusive services is widely recognized as an issue facing LGBTQ victim-survivors, few researchers have examined the structural or systemic basis of this problem. The current piece seeks to explore the structural conditions obstructing inclusive service provision to LGBTQ victim-survivors, from the perspective of service providers.
Method
N = 19 interviews were conducted with N = 21 key personnel with affiliations to a variety of: (i) general population service organizations, (ii) community-led service organizations and (ii) advisory or convening groups. Interviews explored the structural conditions of the IPV service sector, focusing on barriers and enablers to implementing inclusive service provision for LGBTQ populations.
Results
Three broad factors that obstructed or curtailed inclusive service implementation were identified. These were namely: (i) resistance from both internal and external sources around inclusive practice, (ii) accommodating keeping demands in resource constrained contexts, and (ii) political will and LGBTQ visibility within official policy. Responses to these challenges on the organizational level were sometimes sufficient to meaningfully – though only partially – ameliorate these factors, but seldom addressed the structural conditions that necessitate such responses.
Conclusion
Inclusive service provision is a crucial element of victim-survivor recovery. The sporadic accessibility of such services within Australia can be attributed to several core features of sector and policy landscapes, which demand a significant degree of inter-organizational collaboration and collective advocacy to overcome.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference41 articles.
1. AbiNader, M. A., Graham, L. M., & Kafka, J. M. (2023). Examining intimate Partner violence-related fatalities: Past Lessons and future directions using U.S. National Data. Journal of Family Violence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-022-00487-2.
2. Antebi-Gruszka, N., & Scheer, J. R. (2021). Associations between Trauma-Informed Care Components and multiple health and psychosocial risks among LGBTQ survivors of intimate Partner violence. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 43(2), 139–156. https://doi.org/10.17744/mehc.43.2.04.
3. Australian Government Department of Social Services (2011). National Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women and Their Children 2010–2022. Canberra, Australia: Council of Australian Governments. Retrieved from: https://www.dss.gov.au/women/programs-services/reducing-violence/the-national-plan-to-reduce-violence-against-women-and-their-children-2010-2022. statement [cited 30th April 2022].
4. Badenes-Ribera, L., Sánchez-Meca, J., & Longobardi, C. (2019). The relationship between internalized homophobia and intimate partner violence in same-sex relationships: A meta-analysis. Trauma Violence & Abuse, 20(3), 331–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838017708781.
5. Barros, I. C. D., Sani, A., & Santos, L. (2019). Gender and same-sex intimate partner violence: A systematic literature review. Trends in Psychology, 27, 127–139. https://doi.org/10.9788/TP2019.1-10.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献