This study aims to explore the partner link worker (PLW) role in supporting women who have been subjected to or at risk of domestic abuse. Prior research in a probation setting tends to focus solely on the person on probation, failing to examine the experiences of people subjected to crime and support services on offer. The PLW role provides an essential service that has been undervalued and overlooked. The study begins to provide some evidence to counter the broader political rhetoric that people subjected to crime are central to probation practice within the criminal justice system. It draws on the findings from thirteen semi-structured interviews conducted across five Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs). The findings suggest that PLWs demonstrate a professional commitment to protecting and safeguarding vulnerable women and addressing domestic abuse. However, PLWs face many challenges and obvious gaps in provisions to provide a fully inclusive and accessible service to meet the individual needs of women and their children. The recently reunified probation service offers an optimum opportunity to review, resource and regenerate the PLW service to protect and safeguard people who have been subjected to or at risk of domestic abuse.
BhavsarVKirkpatrickKCalciaM, et al. (2021) Lockdown, domestic abuse perpetration, and mental health care: Gaps in training, research, and policy. The Lancet Psychiatry8(3): 172–174.
2.
BilbyCHatcherR (2004) Early Stages in the Development of the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP): Implementing the Duluth Domestic Violence Pathfinder. London, UK: Home Office.
3.
BottomsAERobertsJV (2010) Hearing the Victim: Adversarial Justice, Crime Victims and the State. Cullompton: Willan.
4.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research In Psychology3(2): 77–101.
5.
BullockK (2014) Integrated approaches to domestic violence? An exploration of the role of the victim and women’s safety work in cognitive-behavioural programmes. Probation Journal61(1): 27–43.
CharmanS (2020) Making sense of policing identities: The ‘deserving’ and the ‘undeserving’ in policing accounts of victimisation. Policing and Society30(1): 81–97.
8.
CrawfordAEnterkinJ (2001) Victim contact work in the probation service: paradigm shift or pandora’s box?British Journal of Criminology41(4): 707–725.
9.
CrawfordN (2017) The journey of probation domestic abuse interventions. Irish Probation Journal14: 164–175.
10.
CunninghamP (2003) At the Margins: Victim Contact Work in the New Zealand Probation Service. Unpublished MSW thesis. Dunedin: University of Otago.
11.
CunninghamPGibbsA (2005) At the margins: victim contact work in the New Zealand probation service. British Journal of Community Justice3(2): 51–62.
12.
EadieTKnightC (2002) Domestic violence programmes: reflections on the shift from independent to statutory provision. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice41(2): 167–181.
13.
FarrellGPeaseK (2007) The sting in the tail of the British crime survey: multiple victimizations. In HoughMMaxfieldM (Eds.) Surveying Crime in the 21st Century. Cullompton: Willan, 33–54.
14.
FriedlanderMLEscuderoVWelmers-van de PollMJ, et al. (2018). Meta-analysis of the alliance–outcome relation in couple and family therapy. Psychotherapy, 55(4): 356–371.
15.
GraciaE (2004) Unreported cases of domestic violence against women: Towards an epidemiology of social silence, tolerance, and inhibition. Epidemiology & Community Health21(58): 533–534.
16.
HealyD (2019) Exploring Victims’ Interactions with the Criminal Justice System: A Literature Review. Dublin: Department of Justice and Equality.
17.
HillTDSchroederRDBradleyC, et al. (2009) The long-term health consequences of relationship violence in adulthood: an examination of low-income women from Boston, Chicago, and san antonio. American Journal of Public Health99(9): 1645–1650.
18.
HoganKFHegartyJRWardT, et al. (2012) Counsellors’ experiences of working with male victims of female-perpetrated domestic abuse. Counselling And Psychotherapy Research12(1): 44–52.
19.
Home Office (2018) Domestic Violence and Abuse: New Definition. London: Home Office.
20.
HowardLMTrevillionKAgnew-DaviesR (2010) Domestic violence and mental health. International Review of Psychiatry22(5): 525–534.
21.
HMIP (HM Inspectorate of Probation) (2018) Domestic Abuse: The Work Undertaken by Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs): A Thematic Inspection by HM Inspectorate of Probation. Manchester: HMIP.
22.
IversonKMShenkCFruzzettiAE (2009) Dialectical behavior therapy for women victims of domestic abuse: A pilot study. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice40(3): 242–248.
23.
KemshallHMackenzieGWilkinsonB (2011) Risk of Harm: Guidance and Training Resources CD ROM. Leicester: De Montfort University.
Madoc-JonesIRoscoeK (2010). Women’s safety service within the integrated domestic abuse programme: Perceptions of service users. Child & Family Social Work15(2): 155–164.
26.
MawbyRWalklateS (1994) Critical Victimology: International Perspectives. London: Sage.
27.
MawbyR (2016) Victim support in England and Wales: the End of an era?International Review of Victimology22(3): 203–221.
28.
McCawBGoldingJMFarleyM, et al. (2007) Domestic violence and abuse, health status, and social functioning. Women & Health45(2): 1–23.
29.
McNeillF (2012) Four forms of ‘offender’ rehabilitation: Towards an interdisciplinary perspective. Legal and Criminological Psychology17(1): 18–36.
30.
MullenderABurtonS (2001) Good practice with perpetrators of domestic violence. Probation Journal48(4): 260–268.
NewtonE (2003) A study of the policies and procedures implemented by the probation service with respect to victims of serious crime. British Journal of Community Justice2(1): 25–36.
RobinsonGMcNeillF (2008) Exploring the dynamics of compliance with community penalties. Theoretical Criminology12(4): 431–449.
37.
SandelowskiM (1995) Sample size in qualitative research. Research In Nursing & Health18(2): 179–183.
38.
ShaplandJWillmoreJDuffP (1985) Victims in the Criminal Justice System. Gower: Aldershot.
39.
SpalekB (2003) ‘Victim work in the probation service: perpetuating notions of an ‘ideal victim. In: ChuiW.HNellisM (Eds.) Moving Probation Forward. Harlow: Pearson Education, 214–226.
WalbySTowersJ (2017) Measuring violence to end violence: Mainstreaming gender. Journal of Gender-Based Violence1: 11–31.
42.
WalkerKBrownSHicksK (2016) An exploratory examination of practitioners’ and offenders’ perceptions of the effectiveness of an individual workbook approach for treating intimate partner violence offenders. Psychology. Crime & Law22(10): 977–999.
43.
WilliamsB (1996) The probation service and victims of crime: paradigm shift or cop-out?Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law18(4): 461–474.
44.
WilliamsBGoodmanH (2007) Working for and with victims of crime. In GelsthorpeLMorganR (Eds.) Handbook of Probation. Cullompton: Willan Publishing, 518–543.
WongJMellorD (2014) Intimate partner violence and women’s health and wellbeing: impacts, risk factors and responses. Contemporary Nurse46(2): 170–179.
47.
WoolfordRWardhaughJ (2019) HELP: A practitioners’ perspective on programmes for domestic abuse perpetrators. A Qualitative Study. British Journal of Community Justice15(2): 82–105.
48.
World Health Organization (2012) Understanding and addressing violence against women: Intimate partner violence. World Health Organization. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/77432 (Accessed 23 January 2021).
49.
ZednerL (1994) Reparation and retribution: are they reconcilable?The Modern Law Review57: 228–250.
50.
ZednerL (2002) ‘Victims’. In MaguireMMorganRReinerR (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology. 3rd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 419–456.
