The Process of Leaving Abuse: Midlife and Older Male Experiences of Female-Perpetrated Intimate Partner Violence

Abstract

Leaving an abusive relationship is a difficult process for all survivors. For men, this can be particularly challenging due to the current knowledge and support for survivors being heavily influenced by a feminist discourse, despite a growing body of research that examines men’s experiences. This raises concerns about how men make sense of abuse, where they seek support for injuries and psychological distress, and what services are available to them to help them move on from abuse. Narrative interviews with 12 midlife and older men (aged 45–65 years) who had experienced intimate partner violence from a female were conducted with the aim to explore their journey of leaving abuse. The men’s stories revealed themes of how they made sense of what was happening to them (legitimacy as a survivor and self-help), their experiences of service readiness to respond to male victimization (discrimination from police, legal system set up to support women, and service readiness for males), and how men can leave abuse (post-separation abuse and support from friends and family). Implications of the findings demonstrate that many services are still not equipped to support male survivors. The men in our study found it difficult to comprehend their experience as abuse and this is negatively reinforced by ineffective services and stereotypical beliefs about abuse. However, informal support through friends and family is a powerful tool in supporting men to leave abusive relationships. More work is needed to increase awareness of male survivors and ensure that services, including legal systems, are inclusive.

Introduction

Despite increased academic interest in men’s victimization by a female partner, less research has been published in this area compared to that of female and child survivors. With over 50 years of work exploring intimate partner violence (IPV), there remains a lack of knowledge among professionals and the public about male victimization and few services exist to support men. Men are frequent survivors of abuse by their female partners (Drijber et al., 2013); yet, IPV research has typically focused on male-perpetrated violence toward women (Dobash & Dobash, 2004; Perryman & Appleton, 2016). Furthermore, IPV research and practice has tended to focus on younger victims and perpetrators; however, this leads to older generations being overlooked (Carthy et al., 2019). Despite an increased interest in IPV among older adults over the last two decades, this is mostly focused on female survivors and the impacts of female-perpetrated IPV among older cohorts are still in its infancy (Roberto et al., 2014). Previous research examining IPV has been invaluable in understanding this as a societal issue, having had significant global impact on policy and practice; yet, more work is needed to ensure that experiences of those across all survivor groups are understood to help guide policy and practice.

Domestic violence and abuse include physical, psychological, emotional, financial, and sexual abuse, as well as controlling, coercive, or threatening behaviors against a present or former intimate partner or adult family member, regardless of gender or sexuality (Home Office, 2018). Estimates from the crime survey for England and Wales (CSEW) ending March 2022 suggested that 1.7 million women and 699,000 men experienced domestic abuse in the last year (Office for National Statistics [ONS], 2022a). However, the CSEW focuses on domestic abuse more broadly and incident rates of IPV are difficult to determine using this tool. Home Office data on domestic abuse-related crimes recorded by 26 police forces in England and Wales differentiates partner abuse and family abuse. The estimated rates of partner abuse (including nonphysical, sexual, threats, force, and stalking) were 4.8% of women and 2.1% of men in the last year (ONS, 2022b). Still, all forms of domestic abuse, including IPV, are underreported, so exact occurrence rates are difficult to establish (ONS, 2022a).

Feminist discourse has dominated how violence within heterosexual relationships is understood and has influenced service planning, provision, and policy (Allen-Collinson, 2009; Carthy et al., 2019; Douglas & Hines, 2011). In the United Kingdom, the approach to policy for male survivors is situated within the Government’s Violence Against Women and Girls strategy (VAWG) (Crown Prosecution Service, 2019). Despite an additional policy aimed at supporting male survivors (Home Office, 2022) which highlights harmful stereotypes and misconceptions upon recognizing and disclosing abuse, this still sits alongside the VAWG strategy which is heavily underpinned by men’s violence toward women. Such messages are filtered into service development and have facilitated support networks mainly aimed at young female survivors and their children. Within the United Kingdom, few services exist for men and support is mostly available via helplines only (Perryman & Appleton, 2016). A recent review of male helpline data found that most calls (from 727 participants) were about female-perpetrated abuse, with physical, psychological, financial, and sexual abuse reported from 70% of the callers (B. Hines, Wallace, & Bates, 2022). The lack of inclusive services in terms of gender and age has been highlighted by previous researchers (e.g., Carthy et al., 2019) who further discuss the issues of this feminist paradigm on policy and practice. The authors highlight the consequence of this in terms of limited-service provision for both male and older survivors, in addition to limited interventions for female perpetrators of IPV (Carthy et al., 2019). The unintended consequences of this are that older male survivors are overlooked in services due to limitations of policy and practice around age and gender.

IPV is complex with many survivors feeling shame, guilt, and denial, making it difficult to recognize what is happening as abuse. For men, this can be increasingly difficult due to navigating a landscape of gendered discourse and support that has marginalized men (Wright, 2016). Female violence and abuse have been considered as not comparable to men’s violence toward women (Kelly & Johnson, 2008) with earlier research describing this as self-defense in response to male aggression (Dobash & Dobash, 2004). However, global research has recognized male victimization by female partners as a significant concern (Drijber et al., 2013; D. A. Hines & Douglas, 2010; McCarrick et al., 2016). Men experience physical and psychological violence that is comparable to the experiences of female survivors (Drijber et al., 2013; D. A. Hines & Douglas 2010; Perryman & Appleton, 2016). Furthermore, research exploring older males’ experiences of IPV has also found that violence perpetrated by females is comparable to that from younger cohorts as well as older men experiencing financial abuse from intimate partners (Bates & Carthy, 2020).

For men, many barriers exist from recognizing abuse to accessing support. This is further compounded by societal and patriarchal expectations that position men in roles of dominance which contrast with experiences of victimization and identifying self as a victim (Deziewa & Glowacz, 2021; Scott-Story et al., 2023). Masculinity, in terms of being perceived as physically stronger than their female partners, is a deterrent to men reporting physical abuse (Huntley et al., 2019). Additional barriers for older adults occur due to societal expectations around traditional gender values (Band-Winterstein, 2012). Such patriarchal beliefs can present barriers for older men to recognize abuse from their female partners. Discourses of masculinity and societal expectations of men influence how men seek help (B. Hines, Bates, & Wallace, 2022), coupled with a strong feminist discourse underpinning IPV and the lack of support available for male survivors, contributes to difficulties making sense of abuse and seeking help.

Fear of not being believed is common among all survivors and men are more likely to be faced with suspicion when disclosing abuse. Men fear being labeled as the perpetrator (Allen-Collinson, 2009; Huntley et al., 2019; Scott-Storey et al., 2023) and being blamed for their own victimization (Yamawaki et al., 2018). When disclosures are made, men are not always met with the support they need (Scott-Storey et al., 2023). Police responses have been found to be unhelpful and disclosures are not always taken seriously (Douglas & Hines, 2011; Drijber et al., 2013). Negative reactions to disclosures of abuse can contribute to survivors developing more serious symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (Dekel et al., 2019; Schackner et al., 2017). In an exploration of men’s experiences of the criminal justice system (CJS), McCarrick et al. (2016) found underlying themes of secondary trauma from inappropriate responses within the CJS in addition to trauma-related impacts from the abuse that was sustained in their relationship. However, informal support networks from family and friends have been beneficial in providing the most helpful support for men (Douglas & Hines, 2011; Huntley et al., 2019). Nevertheless, the lack of available resources can increase the burden of those informal support networks. Interviews from call handlers from a male helpline reported friends and family feeling helpless in supporting their loved ones despite a desire to help (B. Hines, Bates, & Wallace, 2022). The research also raised concerns about a postcode lottery in terms of relevant service provision for male survivors (B. Hines, Bates, & Wallace, 2022). Limited support can further enhance the embarrassment, denial, minimization, and self-blame that contributes to underreporting of IPV among men (Hogan et al., 2012; Storey & Strand, 2012). Insufficient services, inappropriate media coverage, and lack of positive police action explain why men turn to more informal mechanisms of support such as friends and family and online support. Furthermore, services are not always equipped to meet the needs of older adult survivors (Carthy et al., 2019), as well as media campaigns and awareness raising being targeted to a younger audience (Saferlives, 2016) which provides additional barriers to older cohorts. Male victimization is complex, this coupled with age-related factors requires further research to inform policy and influence future practice (Perryman & Appleton, 2016; Scott-Storey et al., 2023).

Leaving an abusive relationship is difficult for all survivors. For male survivors, legal and administrative aggression, such as using the law enforcement and legal systems in an abusive manner, occurs due to gendered stereotypes within the legal systems and among professionals. This form of aggression has been found to negatively impact the mental health of men and their children (Berger et al., 2016). Post-abuse tactics used by women often include using children as a weapon by withholding contact or as a method to escalate the abuse as well as false allegations (Bates, 2019). Ongoing abuse, post-separation can have an adverse impact on the individual and their recovery and has been reported for both female and male survivors; however, less is known about the impact of leaving an abusive relationship for men more generally (Bates, 2019; Dziewa & Glowacz, 2021). Further barriers among older adults include being less likely to leave (Saferlives, 2016) and feeling too old for change (Beaulaurier et al, 2005; Carthy & Taylor, 2018), which warrants further exploration of the process of leaving a partner and moving on from abuse for older male survivors.

Despite the increased attention of male victimization within academic literature, current knowledge and practice to support survivors of IPV is heavily focused on a feminist discourse of a male perpetrator and female survivor, this presents many barriers to men recognizing abuse and leaving an abusive relationship. Despite increased attention to male victimization, most of this research has drawn on younger cohorts; furthermore, research that has explored older adults’ experiences of IPV is largely focused on female survivors, leaving a dearth in knowledge about the experiences of older male victims. Together, with the lack of resources and services for men more generally, midlife and older male survivors are at greater risk of their needs not being met by formal support networks. Midlife and older men are rarely considered as a specific survivor group within the literature (Hackenberg et al., 2017); however, previous researchers have drawn meaningful data from such samples (e.g., McCarrick et al., 2016) despite the participant age range not being intentional. Within the literature exploring older adults and IPV, there is no clear age definition of older. For example, some researchers have focused on over 65s (e.g., Bonomi et al., 2007) and others have focused on over 45s (e.g., Beaulaurier et al., 2005; Carthy & Taylor, 2018; Pathak et al., 2019). Research exploring older women’s experiences have drawn meaningful conclusions about older survivors of abuse focusing on samples aged 45 and above; therefore, our definition of midlife and older men includes those who are 45 years and older. Therefore, a major strength of this study is focusing on hearing the voices of midlife and older males, which acknowledges this diverse and largely unheard IPV survivor group. An additional strength of this research, with respect to diversity, is that it contributes to the current literature in ensuring all survivors’ experiences can be met within policy, practice, and their social environment.

Method

Design

Hearing the voices of survivors was central to the research; therefore, a narrative approach was implemented; this approach focuses on lived experience and explores what we say about ourselves in terms of cognitions and behaviors (Crosseley, 2000). This was informed by a social constructionist approach, and that the stories we tell about ourselves are social constructions that help us make sense of our world (Murray, 2008). Salient features of the narrative can be understood as it makes sense to the individual and those descriptions remain at the heart of the analysis rather than focusing on latent interpretations of the data. To ensure that the narrative content was driven by the participants, the interview schedule had one key question: “tell me about your abusive relationship.” This methodological approach provides a client and trauma-focused perspective which will better inform care provisions as opposed to statistic-based provisions that are based on the most likely the survivors and not inclusive to all of those at risk of IPV.

Data

In all, 18 men agreed to take part but six were excluded due to being younger than 45 years of age (n = 3), contacted after data collection period ended (n = 1), or unable to complete an interview during data collection period (n = 2). The inclusion criteria were men aged 45 plus (age definition is based on examples from female survivor literature as discussed in the previous section) who had experienced IPV from a female. No period was stipulated for when the participants had to have left their abusive relationship. Narrative interviews were conducted with 12 men with an age range of 45 to 65 years (mean 52.5 years). One participant did not disclose his age. In total, 11 men identified as White/Caucasian. Six were in employment or education at the time of interview and 10 men had children.

All the participants had experienced verbal and emotional abuse, 10 experienced physical violence, and 5 experienced unwanted sexual activity. In all, 11 participants experienced restrictions on social activities, 10 experienced restrictions on finance, 9 experienced time away from home being monitored, and 10 experienced repeated phone calls from the abuser. The length of abusive relationships ranged from 3 to 24 years with an average of 11.4 years. Four participants also suffered physical and emotional abuse as a child.

Procedure

A range of services that offer support for IPV were contacted to advertise the study, including U.K. national male domestic violence support services. Other agencies that supported both male and female survivors and older adult support services within local authorities were contacted. The study was also advertised on social media.

Those interested in taking part made initial contact with the research team and were sent further information about the study. Participants were offered face-to-face or remote interview options, all opted for remote interview. Those who consented to participate agreed a date and time for their interview convenient for them. Before the interview commenced, participants were reminded of the study information and informed consent was obtained along with a demographic questionnaire. Participants were informed of withdrawal procedures, that they did not have to discuss anything they were not comfortable with, and that the interview could be ended at any point. Participants were invited to tell their story as it made sense to them, and the researcher provided a nonjudgmental environment in which this was able to take place. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed, and all identifying information was removed to ensure participant confidentiality was protected. At the conclusion of the interview, all participants were debriefed, signposted to relevant services, and thanked for taking part. The study was conducted in accordance with British Psychological Society code of ethics and ethical approval was obtained from author’s institution.

Data Analysis

Analysis was undertaken according to a narrative approach following Crossley’s (2000) analytic steps. Researchers began by reading and familiarizing with the content of each transcript. The next step involved looking out for important content in terms of tone (emotional impression), imagery (underlying values and major themes), and themes (main issues) within the narratives. The narrative tone within each story was identified followed by the narrative tone across the transcripts. The next stage was to identify the imagery and the themes, this phase provides a rough map of the transcript. The final step was to put together the tone, imagery, and themes into a coherent story followed by a write-up. Two researchers read and blind reviewed all the data and a third researcher (clinician) read and blind reviewed a random set of transcripts. During this process, the researchers moved between tone, imagery, and themes, ensuring that the analysis represented individual stories. The final set of themes was agreed, and the research team engaged in peer debriefing and reflexivity to ensure trustworthiness of the findings.

Findings

The stories of abuse told by midlife and older men involved physical, emotional, sexual, financial, and controlling abuse from female partners. The themes represent the process of leaving abuse and help-seeking rather than descriptions of the abuse. The narratives illustrated a lack of support and understanding toward their experiences. This started with questioning their legitimacy as a survivor and conducting research to make sense of what was happening to them and implementing self-help methods of managing their well-being during the abuse. Help-seeking efforts were met with services that were not equipped to support male survivors, including biased gendered views of abuse from the police and legal system and domestic violence services. Once the men were at a point where they could end the relationship, they suffered ongoing abuse from their ex-partner. Informal support networks provided by friends and family were important in helping them to end the relationship. The following themes and subthemes demonstrate this process.

Theme 1: Making Sense of Abuse

Subtheme 1a: Legitimacy as a Survivor

Socialized constructions of the male and female gender roles still influenced how the men understood and interpreted their experiences of victimization by a woman. One participant described not accessing support due to constructions of masculinity “Come on—what bloke is going to say that I’m scared of my tiny wife, and she beats me up if I come home late or if I don’t keep the house tidy?” (Participant 9). The importance of being understood was a fundamental part in making sense of the abuse that was happening to them. Some men described a process of evidence gathering, usually in the form of keeping a written log of abusive behaviors. This also provided concrete information that they could take forward when seeking support from external agencies. One participant described keeping a diary of practical things that were going wrong at home, this process led him to understanding that what he was experiencing was abuse: “I started keeping a diary. . .so I’d kept a record of what had gone wrong and, during the whole sort of process. . .reading it back. . .it had just turned into this diary of abuse” (Participant 8).

Other strategies included the use of digital technologies to record conversations so that they could be played back to understand what had been said. As participant 6 describes, his abuser used “word salads” as a way of confusing him:

so then I put an app on my phone. . .so every time I spoke to her it was recorded and then I could play it back, because. . .they do another thing called “word salad”. . .they actually start talking about something and they’ll throw you off it and. . .so then I just, started just to decipher who she was. . . (Participant 6)

Another participant described using information gathering as a way of understanding the flashbacks that he was experiencing due to being sexually assaulted by his wife, “I mean I started logging my flashbacks after a while, because they took so many different forms” (Participant 10).

The evidence gathering process enabled participants to objectively record what was happening to them so that they could reflect upon it and make sense of their experiences as a collection of events, thus providing some validity for their experience. Furthermore, gathering evidence was a way to legitimize to others what was happening to them within a context in which they expected not to be believed.

Subtheme 1b: Self-Help

The process of seeking help was something men undertook in isolation due to the lack of available resources or due to the negative experiences received when seeking support from services. Conducting research was a method of self-help. Researching what was happening to them helped them to make sense of their experience. One participant described how he had conducted research after the relationship had ended to help himself understand what had happened, he was able to appreciate what an unhealthy relationship looks like “I’ve done my research now and I understand the difference” (Participant 5).

Information gathering through online resources was common across the narratives. Despite having a positive experience with an independent domestic violence advocate (IDVA), participant 2 still conducted his own research to help make sense and understand the relationship with his abusive partner and talked about a book that helped him understand his partner’s behavior toward him: “through my IDVA, she linked me up with a lot of stuff, and of course I googled a lot of stuff, YouTubed a lot. . .I purchased a book called The Sociopath Next Door.” However, participant 4 described having less success with online resources due to the focus on female survivors “I looked at something like ‘My wife’s abusive’ or ‘My partner’s abusive’ or something like that, and I started to look at the threads on Mumsnet or something like that, but it was all about women all leaving.”

Legal rights were discussed by many of the participants as a barrier to support and justice due to the legal system acting in the interest of women. Such experiences resulted in participants seeking their own information on their legal rights. The participant below describes searching for legal information in relation to his children. He also describes frustrations about the limited work carried out in parliament for parental alienation: “I read a lot on family law. I read, I follow, like when the 2014 Family Act was going through parliament. . .so parliament in my mind is not doing enough. You know, parental alienation should be a crime” (Participant 6).

Other means of self-help related to support for their own well-being. Mental health support was identified as a useful tool in overcoming the impact of abuse; however, the men were not signposted to such agencies, this was accessed through their own support-seeking. Participant 10 describes looking around for relevant services and then having to endure a long waiting list, “I had to look around myself, and that’s when I found [name of service], and again, they had a queue for counselling, but it wasn’t as long, I think I waited 4 months.” Participant 4 attempted to make an appointment for both him and his wife to discuss their relationship but his wife resisted, and he attended alone. During this visit, his wife’s behavior was minimized: “So, I went to see a [name of service] counsellor. I made an appointment, and she refused to come, so I just went on my own, and she [counselor] said to me that her behaviour is very, very childish.” Whereas participant 3 talked about doing his own informal therapeutic journey: “I’ve never been for counselling or anything, I think I sort of do my own thing. The sort of stuff I do at university and sort of this stuff [talking about his experiences] is like counselling.”

Participant 2 described how religion helped and he describes how there are no clear places for men to access support and that to survive you need to build your own resources, “I became more religious, which is a good thing of course. . .you just have to keep building your resources, and you just have to. . .survive. But once you get on top of it you can make it.” Survival was also discussed by participant 8 who described creating his own refuge due to the lack of support that was available to him. He took solace in his garden shed; a space where he could feel safe:

I had a shed—it was only a little shed. I know every man wants a man shed, but I had a lock on the inside of it. . .so I could eat my dinner out there, had a heater out there, it was almost like a refuge. (Participant 8)

Without a concrete knowledge base to drive their help-seeking, men used their own means of support and guidance. Often this was in the form of online sources or other ways of making themselves feel physically and psychologically safe.

Theme 2: Service Readiness for Male Survivors

Subtheme 2a: Discrimination From Police

Many men sought help through traditional means, such as law enforcement, however felt let down and unsupported due to the system being biased in support of women and their legitimacy as a victim was, again, questioned due to not being believed. There was a general concern that services, such as the police, made gendered assumptions about partner abuse, as participant 5 describes in response to being asked about interactions with services: “So, my answer to your question would be awareness especially in terms of police forces. Not to make a gendered stereotype decision before you respond to the call and to respond to the evidence that’s in front of you.”

Other participants talked about specific experiences when they had gone to the police to seek help and were met with discriminatory attitudes: “And there was no assistance. So, you’ve got somebody there who. . .is telling you that you’re wrong and you’re the bad person, and she’s the good mother. . .Oh it was, it was an ordeal” (Participant 6). When reporting to the police, participant 3 was not believed and was accused of being the perpetrator:

[response from police officer] “Just admit what you’ve done—you’ve done enough—just admit it now” and I said just interview my kids. If you interview my children, they’ll tell you exactly what happened, they were there and they [police] wouldn’t interview my children, they wouldn’t listen to me. (Participant 3)

Not being believed by the police was common across the narratives. Following an episode of sexual violence perpetrated by his female partner, participant 10 described the process of reporting to the police. He explained mentally preparing himself and then being met with negative attitudes from two female police officers who questioned his status as a victim:

I went along—you know, psyched myself up. . .there were two female officers and they got me into a little room and one of them had a great big sheet of papers that she sort of shuffled around and then she pulled out a sheet of paper and said: “it says here that she used to squeeze your testicles. Well, you must have enjoyed it, or you’d have reported it sooner.” (Participant 10)

The same participant talked about how his experiences as a survivor were brought into question after he had suffered another violent attack from the perpetrator, “the police had brought her back to the house, even though she didn’t even live here. . .She’d told them a pack of lies, whatever, and, and turned up here and yeah” (Participant 10). Participant 8 also described feeling like his experiences were not taken seriously:

I got upset in the police station and I said to her [interviewing officer] “You know: what do you think of that?” and she said “Well, you know, that happens” and it was almost as if she was saying, “I know I shouldn’t, but I’ve heard a lot worse. Man up.” (Participant 8)

The men described assaults that were physically or sexually violent in nature and in each case their safety was not considered by the police officers because the severity of the abuse was minimized. Assumptions were made that the male survivor could not be a victim of female-perpetrated violence which further serves to alienate and inhibit access to appropriate levels of psychological, legal, and practical support at a time when they need it.

Subtheme 2b: Legal System set up to Support Women

Most of the men were fathers and had been involved with the family court. The process was viewed as damaging due to the flawed perception of men as perpetrators. Participant 4 describes his interactions with the family court: “I believe that the family courts just. . .victimise you further really. . .My children were perfectly safe with her. . .and I needed to be supervised in a contact centre make sure that I. . .wasn’t a risk to them.” Another expressed a wish to challenge the court system directly:

I’ll be in a position if it does go to court that I can actually stand up and say “This is an abusive relationship.” I haven’t had my day in court. I’ve been taken through a system that is fairly heavily weighted in the abuser’s favour. . .it’s all wrong. . .as far as I’m concerned, there’s been no justice at all. (Participant 8)

This lack of equality in the CJS leaves male survivors with the view that they will not be taken seriously:

they rang me back again and said, “Oh, no—our inspector says it’s too serious an assault to be dealt with in that way—do you want to press charges?” and I went “OK, well. . .If that’s the only way”. . .then they rang me back about 1 o’clock in the morning to say that the CPS weren’t going to charge her because “the jails were too full of looters and rioters”: that’s a direct quote. (Participant 10)

Another participant identified feeling violated on account of his truth being dismissed:

I had integrity and I thought that that would win the day and so when the judge pronounced so very negatively against me, I felt. violated. . .fundamentally, I felt that this one fundamental characteristic that I had valued and hoped would carry through, was my integrity and that was just stripped away. (Participant 11)

The damage inflicted by a legal system that assumes men are always guilty includes being blamed, minimized, and disregarded. Thus, the abusive relationship is being mirrored by a system whose role is to serve justice and protect, further isolating and silencing the survivor from expressing their truth.

Subtheme 2c: Access to Services

Not knowing where to look for support, fear of not being believed, and the available support being only for women were prevalent in the narratives. Knowledge of service provision to support men is sparse and the men acknowledge that they would not know where to go “I didn’t have anywhere to turn to. I mean, I wouldn’t even know where to turn to now” (Participant 8). The men also spoke of the inaccessibility of male-centered services. One participant talked about finding out about available support through his work at a solicitor’s office and describes this as still being limited: “The support for abused men. . .it came through the solicitor’s that I worked at—the support for men is very poor. Very scant and difficult to access. . .I mean I wouldn’t have a clue” (Participant 1).

Some men explained they did not want to seek support from services for fear of not being taken seriously, “I assumed that they’d just laugh me out the place, or worse that they’d be annoyed at me for wasting their time. . .I don’t think I would have had the first idea about where I could have gone” (Participant 7). This is echoed by participant 5, who also raises concerns about being treated fairly, “not only do I feel that there was no support I feel that it would have been the absolute reverse. . .I felt that, if anybody were to find out that I would be penalised.”

The lack of knowledge and awareness about female-perpetrated IPV among services is evident within the men’s accounts of support-seeking. Some men felt that there were services available which had knowledge about IPV but this was disproportionally focused on supporting female survivors. How abuse is advertised toward female survivors provided uncertainty for how and where to seek support:

I wouldn’t even know where to turn to now. . .I know if you’re a woman, then it’s advertised everywhere. . .it’s always advertised as a man attacking a woman, a man abusing a woman; and even when I’ve read the letter of the law for a lot of things like that, it’s always a man against a woman, it’s not open to that it can be both ways. (Participant 3)

This gendered perception of service availability for domestic violence was echoed by other participants, they raised concerns about the lack of alternative options for men, “I couldn’t see anything for men, and then I thought: well, there’s Women’s Aid, is there no Men’s Aid or something?. . . if there was more obvious help available at the time, I would have probably tried to seek it” (Participant 4).

The visibility of existing services was concerning for the participants. However, some men did describe experiences where they were able to find male-appropriate services: “So I found [service name] and I think I found another one which I can’t remember what it was now. . .but I remember thinking, the way it seemed to me. . .there seemed to be almost nothing” (Participant 12). Participant 10 talks about the service that he accessed losing its funding and ceasing to exist:

I wasn’t aware at all . . .the first support that I found was a group for male survivors run by an organisation called [place], in [county]. They’ve since lost their funding and they don’t exist anymore, but I only found them completely by accident. (Participant 10)

Most participants in this research did not feel supported by the very agencies that are there to protect them which has a detrimental impact on physical and psychological recovery and support in ending the abusive relationship. Services that did exist were difficult to find which perpetuated beliefs that support was not possible or appropriate.

Theme 3: Ending the Relationship

Subtheme 3a: Post-Separation Abuse

For most men in our sample, the process of ending the relationship was more difficult and included ongoing abuse from their female partners. Participant 3 discusses how the abuse continued through threatening behavior and false allegations and how this impacted his employment. “I left and after that she still stalked me. I got threats, violence, she made—that’s when the false allegations started. . .I lost my job and I got arrested and the abuse continued, even after the relationship.” Controlling and threatening behaviors were common across the narratives, particularly when leaving the abusive relationship. Participant 4 describes how his children were used against him and how this continued after the relationship ended: “it’s still ongoing—on Father’s Day I got sent messages: ‘You fucking sperm donor’. . .whatever it is, anytime she has communication. . .there’ll be some snide comment in there” (Participant 4).

Financial abuse was prevalent in post-separation abuse. Participant 8 describes how his abusive partner used the children as way of exploiting him in an emotional and financial manner. He describes how she still wanted him to pay the mortgage otherwise the children would be taken away. Here he describes a conversation with his ex-wife: “obviously, I can’t just stop paying the mortgage. If I find a flat or something then I won’t be able to afford the mortgage. . .she basically said well, if that’s the case then the girls go back to [name of different country].” He talks about the financial impact this has had on him and starting again in midlife, despite this, he draws on the protective impact that the children have on him: “51 now, and pretty much having to start from scratch, so, this is sort of very stressful, and luckily, I’ve still got the girls, because they keep me going” (Participant 8).

The men in our study described ongoing abuse in the form of control, aggression, financial demands, false allegations, and threats to take children away when leaving the relationship. This impact of continuous trauma had a long-term impact upon employment and relationships with children.

Subtheme 3b: Support From Friends and Family

The men in this study described informal networks of friends and family as a positive form of help in validating their experiences and leaving abuse. Participant 5 described discussing his experiences with a colleague who helped him: “there was another one of my co-workers that I worked with—and he and I had a conversation, and this is after I had decided that the relationship was over.” Participant 11 explained that a friend had approached him and asked how he was. He described the positive impact of someone reaching out to him especially as the friend was someone who was associated with his abusive partner rather than a friend of his own.

So, at one point when we were getting ready to leave, he [friend] took me aside and said “How are you?”. . .it turned out that he experienced exactly what I was experiencing. . .even though there was absolutely nothing in it for him to reach out to me they [friend and ex-wife] were the ones who went back 15 years. . .I really appreciated his reaching out to me like that. (Participant 11)

Having a support network is crucial in helping people leave abuse. For men, this can be critical given the lack of formal networks and services that are available. Participant 4 explained how his friend gave him a place to stay to help him move away from his abusive partner “so I stayed at his [friend] house for a couple of days and then I telephoned my parents, and they live some 70 miles away.” Participant 8 talked about the financial support that he received from his family to help him move on from the abusive relationship: “financial support of my family I managed to get a nice—well it was a 1-bedroom flat—but I set the bedroom up as the girls’ nursery basically—and you know, without sounding dramatic: I escaped.”

Many survivors question their identity as a victim and whether people will believe them and the first step of help-seeking is often disclosing to friends and family. The transition from victim to survivor and dealing with the fallout of ending the abusive relationship can be challenging, particularly when there are limited options for support. The men in our study described different ways in which they were able to recognize what was happening to them and take the steps to leave the abusive relationships.

Discussion

This study aimed to explore the narrative of midlife and older male survivors of female-perpetrated IPV to understand their experiences of leaving abuse and the level of support that is received for midlife and older males; identify risk factors and barriers to help-seeking; and promote inclusivity in services in terms of gender and age. The findings explained the men’s journey from conceptualizing and understanding what was happening to them as abuse, to seeking support from appropriate services, and the barriers they faced in doing so. Despite several changes within the CJS with regard to IPV, the participants believed that there are still discriminatory attitudes among police officers and legal frameworks about male survivors. Our findings also demonstrate the importance of informal support networks from friends and family for midlife and older men ending an abusive relationship due to the lack of more formal opportunities for support.

The amount of available information for survivors was limited for the midlife and older men in our sample. The participants conducted their own research to help themselves understand that they are legitimate survivors, which supports previous research (Hogan et al., 2012; Huntley et al., 2019, B. Hines, Bates, & Wallace, 2022). There are many factors that influence how men perceive IPV including social expectations around masculinity and gendered expectations, which are detrimental to men recognizing themselves as survivors (Hogan et al., 2012; Huntley et al., 2019, B. Hines, Bates, & Wallace, 2022). It could be postulated that masculinity and gendered expectations are more likely in midlife and older men because they have had more years to integrate such self-perceptions. Information on where and how to best seek support was limited reinforcing the perception of limited public support (Hogan et al., 2012) creating additional difficulties in recognizing their experiences as abuse. Women’s support services (e.g., Women’s Aid) often include refuge, counseling, information, advice, and guidance, as well as legal support. The men in this study were left to their own devices to find appropriate information and the support they needed also implementing self-help strategies due to the lack of formal support systems. Our research highlights the ongoing issue around providing services that are inclusive to all and that support for men should be paralleled to that offered to women.

A common theme among the men whom we spoke to is the experience of not being believed by organizations that they turned to for help. Often, this lack of belief was grounded in the thought that women were incapable of violent or abusive behavior to such an extent that men would suffer trauma because of those negative responses. Our findings show similar increases in psychological distress when confronted with disbelief and disclosures not taken seriously as with previous research (Drijber et al., 2013; McCarrick et al., 2016). Challenging such notions is partly a matter of changing the broader societal gendered stereotypes about both the perpetration and survival of IPV and much work can be done by sharing experiences to destigmatize male survivors (Scott-Storey et al., 2023). However, a much more fundamental change also needs to occur within policy, legislature, and the organizations and individuals charged with protecting others. More than one individual to whom we spoke relayed being told—during formal proceedings—that their accounts of abuse and violence were “impossible” due to differences in size, stature, and gender, and others were informed that (as men) they must have been complicit in their abuse because they did nothing to stop it; Huntley et al. (2019) identified similar findings in a review of male help-seeking literature. Deterring men from contacting the police specifically about IPV results in experiences of shame, not being taken seriously, and believing that the police cannot (or will not) do anything to help (Drijber et al., 2013). Such feelings were also expressed by several of the midlife and older men who took part in this study. Being met with disbelief at a systemic level when seeking help appears to have contributed to secondary trauma for several men we spoke with. Negative reactions to disclosures have been found to increase trauma symptoms among IPV survivors (Dekel et al., 2019; McCarrick et al., 2016; Schackner et al., 2017). To address this, it is vital that those in positions that are likely to encounter male survivors of female-perpetrated violence and abuse are informed about (and sensitive to) such phenomena and the individuals who have experienced it. As such, it is imperative to develop and deliver trauma-informed training that is age and gender sensitive to such organizations.

The midlife and older men in our study described ongoing abuse from their partner as well as the legal system being set up to support women. Post-separation abuse occurred in the form of threatening to take children away and using children as a form of financial exploitation. Such findings are consistent with previous research findings among male survivors in general (e.g., Bates, 2019; B. Hines, Bates, & Wallace, 2022) and financial exploitations among older male survivors (Bates & Carthy, 2020). The ability to leave the abusive relationship was often due to support from family and friends rather than other modes of more formal support. It is unclear if the reliance upon informal support is specific to the midlife and older adult male population; however, it could be considered that the limited emotional and practical support available to male survivors in general leaves little option but to seek support from those around them. Furthermore, not knowing where to seek support rather than not being willing to ask for support is a further barrier for this population reinforcing the need for continuous support and raising awareness which is inclusive to all survivors in terms of age and gender.

The helpfulness of seeking support from family and friends has been previously highlighted (e.g., Hines et al., 2015; Huntley et al., 2019). Such experiences may be attributed to explaining the underreporting of female-perpetrated IPV by men. However, receiving support through informal networks can pose additional burden on those through which the support is obtained. For example, there is a limit to the support that family and friends can offer due to not being formally trained to work with or signpost survivors. B. Hines, Bates, and Wallace (2022) identified how call handlers of a male helpline found supporting family and friends felt it to be difficult as many of the family and friends they worked with felt helpless and limited as to how much they could protect the survivor. This can place a significant burden on those who are already distressed by what is happening to their loved ones. Lack of training for family members and friends has implications for midlife and older people as inappropriate or unhelpful responses from formal support services may result in barriers to leaving or further isolation when others do not understand how difficult it is to leave (Wydall et al., 2020).

Implications

Much of what we know about IPV is based on a feminist discourse; yet, this study provides information that will inform policy development in terms of better inclusivity for midlife and older male survivors. With limited guidance and training aimed at supporting midlife and older male survivor’s policymakers, practitioners, and service providers may have conscious or unconscious biases toward partner violence and abuse which can have a detrimental impact on recovery (Crowe & Murray, 2015). It is important for service providers, particularly those services within the CJS and support services, to be aware of any personal and systemic biases toward midlife and older survivors and perpetrators of abuse and where such biases have originated (Wydall et al., 2020). Our article supports findings of others that suggest continuous and wider awareness raising for male survivors regardless of age is necessary (Hines et al., 2022). Age-related barriers for the participants of this study in leaving an abusive relationship are often linked to commitments such as finances, children, and longevity of the relationship; and they may need a compassionate, trauma-focused approach to enable them to recognize their own needs and articulate their experiences. For example, self-isolation from family and friends for midlife and older male survivors is likely to be experienced due to shame associated with being in a long-term abusive relationship (Wydall et al., 2020). Ensuring that all practitioners have the knowledge to help those in abusive relationships is important to ensure that the practitioner can respond to disclosures in a supportive manner (World Health Organization et al., 2020). Such training should be inclusive to ensure that the diversity of IPV survivors and their perpetrators are represented.

Given that informal support networks were crucial to survival in our sample, a further implication for practice and policy is how best to inform communities so that they can identify and support survivors of all genders, ages, and backgrounds. It is important that all training, support, and guidance within practice and policy are evidence based to ensure that it best meets the needs of all. Holistic services need to be in place to support survivors, but they also need to provide therapeutic support to those who are supporting survivors. Adult children who are likely to have witnessed IPV between parents may be struggling with their own challenges because of the impact of intergenerational trauma and the helplessness. As researchers, we can use our power and privilege to investigate and challenge discrimination and prejudice; however, we need impactful policy and practice to use this information to make a measurable difference in society.

Conclusions

This study has provided novel insights by hearing the stories of abuse and help-seeking from midlife and older men, a normally overlooked population in the literature on IPV. Future research should look at international comparisons to examine the similarities in experiences, different challenges to ending and moving on from abuse, and other ways of working that can be more inclusive to midlife and older male survivors. Furthermore, our research focused on female-perpetrated IPV and this may not be comparable to the experiences of men who have suffered IPV from male partners. The men in our study described gendered biases in the provisions that were available, and further insight is needed to determine if those biases remain when the perpetrator identifies as gay, bisexual, or nonbinary. The participants predominantly described themselves as White. We used open advertising in the study and gaining an ethnic homogeneous sample was not intended; further research is needed to ensure inclusivity of experiences for all male survivors. The aim of the research was to look at midlife and older male experiences, the sample achieved an age range of 45 to 65 years, future research should aim to explore the stories of abuse from those survivors who are 65 years and older as well as those who are 45 years and under as they are not represented by the current findings. The study made use of a self-selecting sample which may have influenced the homogeneous nature of the sample as this approach relies on those willing to discuss their experiences coming forward to take part in the research; furthermore, despite being offered the option of a face-to-face interview, the participants preferred to do the interviews remotely which may have also limited access to older participants. Therefore, future research should consider recruiting from within services that support male survivors or older adults to engage those who are 65 years and over, to ensure that all survivors voices are heard.

Despite a growing interest in male survivors of female-perpetrated IPV, there is still a long way to go in terms of service development for men as well as professional and public awareness. Services that focus on the impact and consequences of IPV for all survivors rather than gender-specific services is one step forward. Therefore, the direct effects on practice include changes to practitioner knowledge and understanding of the prevalence and needs of midlife and older male survivors and increasing professional and public awareness of male victimization and female perpetration. Training around inclusivity can contribute to achieving this aim.