This study aims to understand when and how domestic violence victims’ relational autonomy changes and to propose an intervention model stemming from the findings. Using qualitative and social network analysis, we study the actions of network members, as well as changing features of victims’ networks. Results show that victims base their decisions on their expectations toward others, and on a desire to preserve their autonomy. Their relational autonomy tends to increase when they leave abusive partners and stay in shelters, but maintaining relational diversity proves challenging once they exit shelters. A network-based model of intervention that aims to improve the victims’ relational autonomy is proposed.
BakerP. L. (1997). And I went back: Battered women’s negotiation of choice. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 26(1), 55–74.
2.
BorgattiS. P.EverettM. G.FreemanL. C. (2002). Ucinet 6 for Windows. Analytic Technologies.
3.
BurtR. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.
4.
BurtR. S. (2004). Structural holes and good ideas. American Journal of Sociology, 110(2), 349–399.
5.
BurtR. S. (2005). Brokerage and closure: An introduction to social capital. Oxford University Press.
6.
BybeeD.SullivanC. M. (2005). Predicting re-victimization of battered women 3 years after exiting a shelter program. American Journal of Community Psychology, 36(1/2), 85–96.
7.
CokerA. L.SmithP. H.ThompsonM. P.McKeownR. E.BetheaL. (2004). Social support protects against the negative effects of partner violence on mental health. Journal of Women’s Health & Gender-Based Medicine, 11(5), 465–476.
8.
DobashR. E.DobashR. (1979). Violence against wives: A case against the patriarchy. Free Press.
9.
El-BasselN.GilbretL.RajahV.FolenoA.FryeV. (2001). Social support among women in methadone treatment who experience partner violence: Isolation and male controlling behavior. Violence Against Women, 7(3), 246–274.
10.
EverettM.BorgattiS. P. (2005). Ego network betweeness, Social Networks, 27, 31–38.
11.
GlennC.GoodmanL. (2015). Living with and within the rules of domestic violence shelters: A qualitative exploration of residents’ experiences. Violence Against Women, 21(12), 1481–1506.
12.
GoodmanL. A.BanyardV.WoulfeJ.AshS.MatternG. (2016). Bringing a network-oriented approach to domestic violence services: A focus group exploration of promising practices. Violence Against Women, 22(1), 64–89.
13.
GoodmanL. A.DuttonM. A.VandosN.WeinfurtK. (2005). Women’s resources and use of strategies as risk and protective factors for reabuse over time. Violence Against Women, 11(3), 311–336.
14.
GoodmanL. A.DuttonM. A.WeinfurtK.CookS. (2003). The Intimate Partner Violence Strategies Index: Development and application. Violence Against Women, 9, 163–186.
15.
GoodmanL. A.SmythK. F. (2011). A call for a social network-oriented approach to services for survivors of intimate partner violence. Psychology of Violence, 1(2), 79–92.
16.
HoffL. A. (1990). Battered women as survivors. Routledge.
17.
HoyleC.SandersA. (2000). Police response to domestic violence: From victim choice to victim empowerment?British Journal of Criminology, 41(1), 14–36.
18.
JohnsonM. P. (1995). Patriarchal terrorism and common couple violence: Two forms of violence against women. Journal of Marriage and Family, 57(2), 283–294.
19.
JohnsonM. P. (2006). Conflict and control: Gender symmetry and asymmetry in domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 12(11), 1003–1018.
20.
JohnsonM. P. (2008). Intimate terrorism, violent resistance and situational couple violence. Northeastern University Press.
21.
KaterndahlK.BurgeS.FerrerR.BechoJ.WoodR. (2013). Differences in social network structure and support among women in violent relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28(9), 1948–1964.
22.
KleinR. (2012). Responding to intimate violence against women: The role of informal networks. Cambridge University Press.
23.
KnickmeyerN.LevittH.HorneS. G. (2010). Putting on Sunday best: The silencing of battered women within Christian faith communities. Feminism & Psychology, 20(1), 94–113.
24.
LaranceL. Y.PorterM. L. (2004). Observations from practice: Support group membership as a process of social capital formation among female survivors of domestic violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19(6), 676–690.
25.
LattaR. E.GoodmanL. A. (2011). Intervening in partner violence against women: A grounded theory exploration of informal network members’ experiences. The Counselling Psychologist, 39(7), 973–1023.
26.
LempertL. B. (1996). Women’s strategies for survival: Developing agency in abusive relationships. Journal of Family Violence, 11(3), 262–289.
27.
LevendoskyA. A.BogatG. A.TheranS. A.TrotterJ. S.von EyeA.DavidsonW. S. (2004). The social networks of women experiencing domestic violence. American Journal of Community Psychology, 34(1/2), 95–109.
28.
LiangB.GoodmanL.Tummala-NarraP.WeintraubS. (2005). A theoretical framework for understanding help-seeking processes among survivors of intimate partner violence. American Journal of Community Psychology, 36(1/2), 71–84.
29.
LutenbacherM.CohenA.MitzelJ. (2003). Do we really help? Perspectives of abused women. Public Health Nursing, 20, 56–64.
30.
LyonE.LaneS.MenardA. (2008). Meeting survivors’ needs: A multi-state study of domestic violence shelter experiences, final report. National Institute of Justice.
31.
ManciniJ. A.NelsonJ. P.BowenG. L.MartinJ. A. (2006). Preventing intimate partner violence. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 13(3–4), 203–227.
32.
MarinA.HamptonK. N. (2007). Simplifying the personal network name generator: Alternatives to traditional multiple and single name generators. Field Methods, 19(2), 163–193.
33.
MoeA. M. (2007). Silenced voices and structured survival: Battered women’s help-seeking. Violence Against Women, 13, 676–699.
34.
NavedR. T.AzimS.BhuiyaA.PerssonL. A. (2006). Physical violence by husbands: Magnitude, disclosure and help-seeking behavior of women in Bangladesh. Social Science & Medicine, 62, 2917–2929.
35.
NettoL. A.Vascondelos MouraM. A.França AraujoC. L.de Nascimento SouzaM. H.FernandeseSilvaG. (2017). Social support networks for women in situations of violence by an intimate partner. Texto Contexto Enferm, 26(2), 1–11.
36.
OlsenL. (n.d.). Shelter rules: The good, the bad and the ugly. Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
37.
OshanaM. (2006). Personal autonomy in society. Ashgate.
38.
PenceE.PaymarM. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model. Springer.
39.
RobertsJ.HorneyJ. (2010). The life event calendar method in criminological research. In PiqueroA. R.WeisburdD. (Eds.), Handbook of quantitative criminology (pp. 278–304). Springer.
40.
RoseL. E.CampbellJ.KubJ. (2000). The role of social support and family relationships in women’s responses to battering. Health Care for Women International, 21(1), 27–39.
41.
RousseauD. M.SitkinS. B.BurtR. S.CamererC. (1998). Introduction so special topic forum: Not so different after all: A cross-discipline view of trust. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 393–404.
42.
SmythK. F.GoodmanL.GlennC. (2006). The full-frame approach: A new response to marginalized women left behind by specialized services. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 76(4), 489–502.
43.
TanC.BastaJ.SullivanC. M.DavidsonW. S. (1995). The role of social support in the lives of women exiting domestic violence shelter: An experimental study. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 10(4), 437–451.
44.
ThompsonM. P.KaslowN. J.KingreeJ. B.RashidA.PuettR.JacobsD.MatthewsA. (2000). Partner violence, social support, and distress among inner-city African American women. American Journal of Community Psychology, 28, 127–143.
45.
TrotterJ. L.AllenN. E. (2009). The good, the bad, and the ugly: Domestic violence survivor experiences with their informal social networks. American Journal of Communicty Psychology, 43, 221–231.
