Abstract

Social networks are usually considered as positive sources of social support, a role which has been extensively studied in the context of domestic violence. To victims of abuse, social networks often provide initial emotional and practical help as well useful information ahead of formal institutions. Recently, however, attention has been paid to the negative responses of social networks. In this article, we advance the theoretical debate on social networks as a source of social support by moving beyond the distinction between positive and negative ties. We do so by proposing the concepts of relational ambivalence and consistency, which describe the interactive processes by which people, intentionally or inadvertently, disregard—or align with—each other’s role‐relational expectations, therefore undermining—or reinforcing—individual’s choices of action. We analyse the qualitative accounts of 19 female victims of domestic violence in Sweden, who described the responses of their personal networks during and after the abuse. We observe how the relationships embedded in these networks were described in ambivalent and consistent terms, and how they played a role in supporting or undermining women in reframing their loving relationships as abusive; in accounting or dismissing perpetrators’ responsibilities for the abuse; in relieving women from role‐expectations and obligations or in burdening them with further responsibilities; and in supporting or challenging their pathways out of domestic abuse. Our analysis suggests that social isolation cannot be considered a simple result of a lack of support but of the complex dynamics in which support is offered and accepted or withdrawn and refused.

Highlights

  • Domestic violence is a crime that affects a considerable number of women, and increasingly men (Black et al, 2008)

  • To describe and explain such complexities, which may happen within a single relationship and across the whole network (Trotter & Allen, 2009), and which may unveil over time, we propose the concepts of relational ambivalence and consistency, which describe the relational processes by which people in interac‐ tions, intentionally or inadvertently, disregard—or align with—each other’s role‐relational expectations, there‐ fore undermining—or reinforcing—individual’s choices of action

  • The interviews explored the relational expectations and practices embedded in the personal networks of 19 female victims of domestic violence in Sweden, who decided to report the perpetrator to the police and ter‐ minate the abusive relationship

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Domestic violence is a crime that affects a considerable number of women, and increasingly men (Black et al, 2008). To describe and explain such complexities, which may happen within a single relationship and across the whole network (Trotter & Allen, 2009), and which may unveil over time, we propose the concepts of relational ambivalence and consistency, which describe the relational processes by which people in interac‐ tions, intentionally or inadvertently, disregard—or align with—each other’s role‐relational expectations, there‐ fore undermining—or reinforcing—individual’s choices of action By looking at these alignments and discrep‐ ancies, we theoretically redefine the concept of social support by moving beyond the distinction between pos‐ itive and negative ties, to better understand why ties are perceived as supportive by the victim, and what role they effectively play in helping the victims to escape abu‐ sive relationships

Ambivalence and Consistency
Methods and Materials
Recognising the Violence
Roles and Responsibilities
Planning and Enacting Pathways of Escape
Conclusions
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call