Abstract
Over the past 50 years, programs serving intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors have expanded nationally. However, despite IPV program growth service gaps remain, particularly for the most marginalized and vulnerable survivor populations. Emerging practice models call for reimagining current IPV service delivery within an intersectional feminist, trauma-informed framework. An overview of intersectional (e.g. survivor-centered, full-frame, culturally specific) and trauma-informed IPV service approaches will be presented highlighting their shared emphasis on power sharing, authentic survivor-advocate relationships, individualized services, and robust systems advocacy. These approaches have the potential to transform IPV services and narrow service gaps if organizations can embed key elements into program design, implementation and evaluation processes. Recommendations for moving the IPV field forward include: 1) expanding survivors’ roles/input; 2) strengthening funding streams and organizational commitment to anti-oppressive, survivor-defined, trauma-informed services; 3) forging cross-sector advocacy relationships; and 4) building knowledge through research and evaluation.
Highlights
Over the past 50 years, programs serving intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors have expanded nationally
Emerging service models call for a reimagined Intimate partner violence (IPV) service delivery rooted in the philosophical values of intersectional feminism, a movement that strives to more broadly address the unique experiences of diverse populations, and trauma-informed care
The commentary illustrates how IPV programs using an intersectional trauma-informed approach can embed these key elements into program design, implementation and evaluation processes and concludes with strategic recommendations to help the field in move forward
Summary
IPV programs vary greatly in size, mission, and community contexts which translates into wide practice differences across programs (Bennett et al 2004; Lyon et al 2008). IPV service providers in the same study were much more likely to define success as being related to “changes in survivors’ perspectives about the abusive relationship” The study highlights what some IPV experts have identified as a common discrepancy between survivors’ expressed values, preferences, and needs and typical IPV service delivery assumptions (Davies and Lyon 2013; Smyth et al 2006). Recent IPV service approaches are seeking to reduce the gap between IPV survivors’ expressed needs and the services that IPV programs most typically offer. These approaches shift practice towards a more intersectional service delivery orientation, as well as encourage the integration traumainformed care principles. All approaches seek to expand the array of survivors’ needs addressed by IPV programs
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
