To Örebro University

Given the profound consequences of post-separation violence on the well-being and quality of life of many women and children, protecting victims from further violence is a paramount concern. Understanding the complex challenges faced by women at risk for such violence is crucial for improving strategies for managing this risk and ensuring the safety of these women and children. In Sweden, access to society’s protective interventions often relies on the women actively seeking them. The aim of this study was to analyse the process of protection against post-separation violence as described by women with children in Sweden. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with women who had experienced domestic violence and were assessed with low to moderate risk of revictimization. The interviews explored strategies they employed on their own and the risk management interventions they received. Through thematic analysis, we identified five themes: activating own safety strategies, seeking societal protection, utilizing societal protection, bridging gaps in societal protection, and resigning to live unprotected. Together, they form a process of protection characterized by mothers employing numerous strategies at different phases to safeguard themselves and their children, relying on their own initiative as well as the assistance offered by society. However, despite these efforts, some mothers and children remained unprotected and were obligated to resign to live with post-separation violence. This study underscores the extensive demands placed on women subjected to violence, despite the presence of relatively strong legal rights and a well-developed societal system.

People with cognitive disabilities are exposed to significantly higher rates of violence in close relationships than the general population. However, social workers may find it challenging to identify victims among them, make risk assessments, and provide support. This study contributes to the field by describing and analysing social workers’ practices with victims of violence in close relationships among people with cognitive disabilities in Sweden. Analysis of five focus-group discussions including 20 social workers revealed four main themes that describe the practices used with these victims, ‘Competency’, ‘The system of collaboration’, ‘Protective and supportive measures’ and ‘Instruments and tools’. Sub-themes illuminate the differences in competency and resources offered to victims of violence in close relationships between mainstream victim services and disability services. Mainstream victim services have a lack of practices adapted for people with cognitive disabilities, and disability services have a lack of practices for victims of violence. Additionally, these services were found to have insufficient collaboration. The findings are discussed in relation to previous research and theory. We suggest that future research should investigate the prerequisites for services to collaborate.

Children exposed to domestic violence (DV) face a heightened risk of many types of short- and long-term problems. Social workers can limit these risks if the support and help they offer is perceived as valuable by the child. The aims of this review were to identify what children exposed to DV value when meeting social workers, to suggest how this knowledge can be used in practice by professionals dedicated to working with these children and to identify and suggest key areas of focus for future research. A synthesis of 18 studies reveals that, in meetings with social workers, children exposed to DV value (1) basic requirements, (2) inclusion, (3) acknowledgement and (4) enjoyment. This review offers a smorgasbord of opportunities for practitioners to meet the wishes and needs of these children. However, comparative research is needed to facilitate adaptation and to distinguish between elements valued by children that are core prerequisites for helping them disclose their experiences and/or aiding their recovery and elements that are less crucial but still valued.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to investigate children’s sense-making about their fathers’ attitudes about using violence against the child’s mother. More specifically, we examine various ways in which the children reflect on whether, and if so how, their father showed regret.

Method: This study used data from interviews with 31 children (14 boys and 17 girls) aged between 10 and 14 years, using a semi-structured interview guide. The children’s narratives were analyzed using discourse analysis.

Results: We found that most of the children in this study positioned their fathers as regretful in relation to two discourses—on violence and on fatherhood—that are prominent in the interviews. Some children, however, positioned their fathers as inconsistent or non-regretful, saying they did not express regret emotionally, did not change their behavior, did not communicate regret, or communicated it in a self-contradictory way. In their narratives the children sometimes used interpretative repertoires—about feelings, actions, and communication—to explain why they thought their father did or did not regret his use of violence.

Conclusion: Positioning one’s father as regretful after having committed IPV can be a way to make the father’s attitudes about the violence understandable, both to the children and to others. Discourses on violence and fatherhood can, however, constrain children’s narratives about their fathers’ violence, which is important to keep in mind when working with children who have been exposed to IPV and making decisions that concern them.

The risk of violence in close relationships is higher for people with cognitive disabilities than in the general population. This is due to social isolation, and physical or financial dependence on others in everyday activities. To enable adequate protection for these victims, social workers need to take decisions and provide support that is based on knowledge about both violence and disability-related needs. By contrast, people with cognitive disabilities are de facto less likely to be provided with support adapted to their needs. Therefore, this study explores how social workers navigate barriers and facilitating aspects to support victims of violence with cognitive disabilities.Data were collected in individual interviews with 18 social workers, and analysed using content analysis. The inclusion criteria were 3 years or more experience in identifying and/or assessing exposure to violence in close relationships among people with cognitive disabilities.

The emerging categories illustrate how social workers face dilemmas when navigating the balance between individuals’ rights for self-determination and complex needs for protection and support. The policies that frame social workers' practice in Sweden are discussed in relation to the need for flexible interventions and accessible support based on interprofessional collaboration related to violence and cognitive disability. The categories also problematize the power dynamics involved and how different actors’ experiences, values, and power influence the support process. The different actors involved add to the complexity that social workers need to navigate.

This presentation focus on how social workers' practice is governed and hindered by policy, a focus on individuals' rights for self-determination, and the need to support and protect a group that may have difficulties to identify both violence and their needs for support.

Background: In Sweden, social workers are responsible for identifying, assessing, and supporting victims of violence among people with and without disabilities. Research has shown that people with cognitive disabilities are more likely to become victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) than non-disabled people. Some reasons for the high rates of victimization that people with cognitive disabilities have reflect a dependence on others in everyday activities, limited access to adapted communication, and lack of education about the victimization of IPV for this group among professionals and social workers. Yet, there are no official disability-adapted assessments to support this work. Very few studies explore the type of adaptations needed to identify and assess the risk of violence against this group. Therefore, this study aims to explore how social workers identify and assess victims of IPV with cognitive disabilities.

Method: An explorative and qualitative design using focus group interviews with five groups of social workers was conducted. Each group contained three to five social workers employed either at a municipality’s social services or NGO and having experience working with people with cognitive disabilities or IPV. Group discussions were led through six topics prompting participants to describe their experiences working with people with cognitive disabilities who are victims of IPV.

Results: Preliminary results point to both challenges and good examples of the practices concerning identification, assessment, and support of victimization among people with cognitive disabilities focusing on the resources at different types of organizations to meet the needs of this group. Local adaptions of government-recommended assessment tools such as adding picture support or verbally elaborating definitions of IPV were common. Some difficulties in cooperation between and within institutions were also described.

Conclusion: Final results and conclusions will be presented at the NNDR research conference in May 2023.