Conducting Intervention Research With Immigrant Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence: Barriers and Facilitators of Recruitment and Retention

Research is needed to support culturally informed interventions for diverse groups of survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV), such as immigrant women. Researchers, however, often face numerous barriers in recruiting and retaining immigrant survivors of IPV in intervention research. This qualitative study explored strategies to enhance recruitment and retention of immigrant survivors of IPV in intervention research from the perspective of immigrant survivors of IPV and providers serving immigrant women. Forty-six in-depth interviews were conducted with diverse groups of immigrant women (Africans, Asians, and Latinas) and 17 key informant interviews were conducted with providers serving immigrant women. The interviews focused on perceived facilitators and barriers to recruitment and retention including strategies to form partnerships with domestic violence organizations. Data were analyzed using systematic inductive thematic analysis. Participants identified barriers to recruitment such as fear of being judged, lack of familiarity with the recruiter, normalcy of abuse in some cultures, undocumented status, and fear related to legal implications of reporting IPV. Barriers to study retention included lack of motivation, time burden related to study participation, and emotional strain with recounting abuse experience. Participants also shared strategies to facilitate recruitment and retention such as engaging with the community, forming partnerships with domestic violence organizations, using recruiters with similar background and experiences as potential participants, using snowball sampling strategies, recruiting in locations frequently visited by immigrant survivors, providing adequate incentives, ensuring confidentiality, educating survivors about IPV, and conducting periodic check-ins throughout the study period. Findings can be useful for researchers conducting intervention studies with immigrant survivors of IPV.

Motivations for Police Support of Domestic Violence Response Team Implementation With Advocates

In New Jersey, collaboration between police departments and advocates from domestic violence organizations is mandated by state policy, which requires law enforcement agencies to participate in domestic violence response teams (DVRTs). The purpose of this study is to examine factors that motivate police officers to implement DVRT. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with DVRT coordinators and domestic violence liaison police officers. Findings suggest that police motivation for implementing the intervention is often influenced by perceived benefits to police response and investigation, perceived benefits to victims, the need to comply with mandates, and recognition of domestic violence as a serious crime.

Disaster Research “Methics”: Ethical and Methodological Considerations of Researching Disaster-Affected Populations

How we do research directly affects what we know about the subject matter under study. While the study of disaster events continues to grow, rigorous inquiry on disaster research methodology is limited because it is confounded by the disruption a disaster presents. Yet it is precisely at that point that special methodological problems emerge. The methodological—and inherently ethical—challenges disaster researchers face became apparent to me during my own fieldwork on domestic violence organizations and their recovery trajectory following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005. In this article, I explore methodological and ethical issues that lay beneath “studying” people in the wake of disaster events and argue that ethical concerns should have the same, if not greater, primacy as methods; a dual consideration I refer to as “methics.” My findings support this argument and add to the growing chorus advocating for a paradigm shift in disaster research methods.

Who Represents the Needs of Domestic Violence Survivors in State Welfare Policy?

A large percentage of women receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) — known colloquially as welfare—have experienced domestic violence in their lives, with studies reporting that upwards of 50% of welfare recipients have been abused at some point. Receiving TANF benefits can provide the financial stability that is necessary for a woman to leave an abusive relationship, though some TANF provisions, such as child support reporting requirements, may also put victims of domestic violence at risk. Under TANF, states may adopt the Family Violence Option and waive many program requirements, including time limits, work requirements, and child support reporting requirements, for victims of domestic violence. Given the importance of TANF for those trying to leave, or who have left, abusive situations, this article asks: Who represents the interests of these women in the states? To answer this question, I employ a mixed methods approach, combining a quantitative analysis of the diversity of interest groups in the states with a case study of Connecticut and New Jersey. I find that feminist and domestic violence organizations do not consistently have a significant effect on the adoption of policy accommodations for survivors, but these groups are speaking out.