Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore professionals’ perceptions of the barriers to help-seeking for victim-survivors of domestic abuse aged 60 years and over. Help-seeking as defined by Anderson and Saunders (2003) is not a single act or decision, but a complex and continuous process, victims engage in when seeking support.

A total of 50 qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with statutory practitioners and managers from 21 out of 22 local authorities in Wales. The research team worked collaboratively to produce a coding scheme which was subjected to a systematic coding exercise using the software package NVivo.

Professionals believed that older people’s “interconnectedness” with family, social embeddedness in the community and “meanings of the home” influenced help-seeking. The research suggests that for older victim-survivors of domestic abuse, age discrimination by practitioners, compounds older people’s experiences of help-seeking, restricting the range, quality and type of support provided. The paper demonstrates that a significant shift is required in practice to ensure that older people are in a position to make informed choices and their wishes are central in the decision-making process.

Further qualitative research is needed to explore what older people themselves believe are the factors that impact on statutory service engagement.

This study is the first in the UK to conduct Pan-Wales research on professionals’ views on help-seeking behaviours of older people. One of the key findings from the study is that professionals from the statutory sector feel that connections to the home and social networks strongly influence help-seeking for older victim-survivors of domestic abuse.

This paper aims to examine the use of coproduction to create a film “Do You See Me?”, to amplify the voices of a “hard to reach” group: older lesbian, gay, bisexual (LGB) victim-survivors of domestic abuse (DA).

Qualitative methods were used as part of the co-production, which included two practitioner focus groups and 14 narrative interviews with lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning persons or the community (LGBTQ+) victim-survivors.

Despite differences in gender, sexualities, roles and “lived experiences” across stakeholders, there was a shared aim to ensure victim-survivors had a sense of ownership in this endeavour. Consequently, a positive reciprocity existed that helped to foster effective communication, allow for capacity building and subsequent knowledge exchange. The collaboration produced a nuanced meta-narrative making visible the “lived experiences” of LGB victim-survivors’ perceptions of perpetrator behaviours.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is original in two ways, firstly, providing insights into the “lived experiences” of an invisible group; older LGBTQ+ victim-survivors, and secondly, in involving them in the co-production of a film. The paper aims to reveal how interdependencies that developed between stakeholders helped to disrupt understandings, develop new ways of knowing and build levels of trust. Group interactions helped to dismantle hierarchies, so those with experiential knowledge: the survivors, had greater control throughout the research process. The paper is significant in providing a critical reflection on the ethical, methodological and resource challenges involved in co-production. It also makes recommendations for researchers and funders about the value of using co-production as a method to engage with hard-to-reach groups.

Most abuse affecting older adults in the UK, as across Europe, takes place within caring relationships, where one person is disabled and needs care/support. This paper critically appraises two of the key theoretical explanations. First, feminist theories of “intimate partner abuse” tell us that it is mostly men who perpetrate abuse against women. Second, “carer strain”: the stress caused by caring responsibilities, often with inadequate help from services. Neither fully reflects the complex dynamics of “dangerous care” leading to a lack of voice and choice in safeguarding responses. This paper aims to articulate the need for an overarching theoretical framework, informed by a deeper understanding of the intersectional risk factors that create and compound the diverse experiences of harm by disabled people and family carers over the life course.

The critical synthesis of the theoretical approaches informing UK policy and practice presented here arises from a structured literature review and discussions held with three relevant third sector agencies during the development of a research proposal.

No single theory fully explains dangerous care and there are significant gaps in policy, resources and practice across service sectors, highlighting the need for joint training, intersectional working and research across service sectors.

Drawing both on existing literature and on discussions across contrasting policy and practice sectors, this paper raises awareness of some less well-acknowledged complexities of abuse and responses to abuse in later life.