Introduction
Methods
Sources and Research Strategy
violence or abuse or aggression or batter* ANDpartner or couple* or domestic or intimate or dating or spouse AND“same-sex” or “same-gender” or gay or lesbian* or bisex* or lgb* or homosexual* or “m*n who ha* sex with m*n” or msm or “wom*n who ha* sex with wom*n” or wsw or “m*n who ha* sex with m*n and wom*n” or msmw or “wom*n who ha* sex with wom*n and m*n” or wswm or sexual minorit* or “m*n who love m*n” or “wom*n who love wom*n” AND“help seek*” or “treatment seek*” or “treatment engage*” or “service utilization.”
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Study Selection and Data Extraction
Results
Methodological issues
Main Findings
Article | Tools | Relevant participants | Relevant results |
---|---|---|---|
Bloom et al. (2015) | Semi-structured interview (topics: functioning of the developed IPV app; experiences of IPV among students) | 13 interviews: 8 college students and 5 college staff | BTH: Feelings of isolation; low awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon; low awareness of available resources; fear of discrimination |
Di Battista et al. (2020) | 165 lesbian women who lived at least one intimate relationship with other women or are currently involved in one | BTH: Low awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon HSM: Overall, 34% of the participants talked with someone about their experience of emotional abuse; 55% did not talk to anyone. The study discusses the frequency of use of formal and informal sources of help (Data available). Most contacted sources: friends (47.4%), psychologists (18%), family (16.4%) and colleagues (7.8%). Least contacted sources: helpline against intimate violence (0.9%), healthcare practitioners (1.7%), police (2.6%) FRHS: Participants who experienced “very frequent” abuse had a statistically significant lower likelihood of talking about it with anyone. Victims of denigration were the least likely to talk about the abuse HCI: Mentioned as a possible cause for the invisibility of violence among lesbian women | |
Coston (2019) | Dataset analysis (National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey) | 492 bisexual and non-monosexual women | FRHS: Seriousness of the violence was a significant factor in predicting whether the victim would seek help HSO: 90% of the respondents report receiving some form of help |
Donovan and Barnes (2020) | Mixed methods: surveys, semi-structured interviews (topics: experiences of IPV and help-seeking) | 872 surveys of LGBT people; 36 in-depth interviews with survey participants; 23 interviews with staff members from a perpetrator program | BTH: Low awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon; feelings of isolation; fear of discrimination; fear of inefficacy of the help request HCI: Hypothesized as a cause for several of the discussed barriers |
Donovan and Hester (2011) | Multi-method: surveys, focus groups, interviews (topic: help-seeking strategies) | 44 participants, self-identified as: 19 lesbian women, 19 gay men, 3 bisexual women, 3 female queers | BTH: Low awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon; fear of discrimination; fear of inefficacy of the help request HSM: Description of preference for informal sources. Friends, family, and relatives are described as the most consulted source (no quantitative data available) HCI: Hypothesized as a cause for (1) the lack of recognition of violence (IPV seen as a mostly heterosexual, physical phenomenon). (2) The lack of models for relationships. (3) Stigma (violence perceived as normal among same-sex couples) |
Freeland et al. (2018) | Focus group discussions (both online and in-person; main topic: coping strategies for IPV) | 64 gay and bisexual men | BTH: Low awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon; low awareness of available resources; feelings of isolation; fear of discrimination HSM: Discussion of use of informal sources (mostly family and friends); use of formal sources (counselors, therapy, IPV organizations, HIV centers); use of semi-formal sources (church); use of other coping strategies (substance abuse; ignoring the issue). (No quantitative data available) HCI: Identified in formal sources (police, IPV organizations, counseling services); identified as a personal belief (participants did not believe IPV counted as violence in same-sex couples) |
Guadalupe-Diaz (2013) | Dataset analysis (Virginia Anti-Violence Project) | 993 LGBT participants with SSIPV experiences | BTH: Feelings of isolation HSM: Description of use of formal (shelters, organizations, law enforcement and mental health professionals) and informal (friends and family) sources (no quantitative data available) Among SSIPV victims, 57.1% did not seek any help, 65.9% did not seek formal help, 65.5% did not seek help from friends and family FRHS: (1) Lower likelihood of formal help-seeking significantly associated with being part of a lower economic class (moderate relationship). (2) Lower likelihood of help-seeking in men of lower economic class when compared with women of the same economic class (strong relationship). (3) Lower likelihood of help-seeking in men of lower economic class when compared with men of higher economic class (strong relationship) |
Hardesty et al. (2011) | Semi-structured interviews (conducted by phone; main topics: experiences of IPV and help-seeking) | 24 lesbian mothers with physical SSIPV experiences | BTH: Negative feelings about one’s own sexual orientation; feelings of isolation HSM: Description of use of formal and informal sources: police, health care providers, domestic violence providers, friends, family (no quantitative data available) Authors identify three coping styles: overt help-seeking, covert help-seeking and trying to solve it alone FRHS: (1) The seriousness of the violence and the perception of the violence as intolerable were the main motives behind the help-seeking. (2) Four factors were positively associated with help-seeking: being openly out, with positive feelings about one’s own sexual orientation; previous positive experiences with help-seeking services; favorable socio-economic status when overtly help-seeking; supportive social circle when overtly help-seeking HCI: Covert help-seekers tended to show heterosexist stigma and shame about being victims of violence in a same-sex relationship (e.g., thinking women are not supposed to be violent) |
Irwin (2006) | Unstructured interviews | 21 lesbian women with SSIPV experiences | BTH: Feelings of isolation; fear of inefficacy of the help request HSM: Description of use of informal and formal sources: friends; lesbian communities; health, welfare, criminal justice systems; counselling services; medical services; support groups. (No quantitative data available) HCI: Widely identified throughout barriers |
McClennen et al. (2002) | 12-pages questionnaire (revised version of the questionnaire administered in Renzetti, 1992) | 63 gay men, self-identified as victims of SSIPV | HSM: Description of use of formal and informal sources along with perceived helpfulness (data available). Most contacted sources: friends (65%), relatives (56%), psychiatrist (52%), psychologist (51%). Least contacted sources: victim’s shelter, attorney (43%), crisis hotline (46%), police (48%) Most helpful sources (respondents rated “somewhat helpful” to “very helpful”): friends (58%), social worker (26%), psychologist (25%), religious advisor (22%). Least helpful sources (respondents rated “not helpful at all” to “a little helpful”): victim’s shelter (100%), medical doctor (93%), attorney (89%), hotline (86%) |
McDonald (2012) | Semi-structured interviews (main topics: experiences of IPV) | 40 women with SSIPV experiences (mostly victims, perpetrator rate unclear) | FRHS: Factors that seemed to influence help-seeking were (1) A positive coming out process (influenced the chance of help-seeking with family and friends); (2) The presence of a supportive community (the abusive partner was not the main connection to the queer/LGBTQ community) HCI: Mentioned: couples and services may have difficulties conceptualizing SSIPV as possible; there is a lack of specific protections for same-sex couples |
Merrill and Wolfe (2000) | 18-pages questionnaire (ad hoc) | 52 gay men, victims of SSIPV | BTH: Low awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon; fear of isolation; fear of repercussions HSM: Description of use of formal and informal sources, along with perceived helpfulness (data available). Most contacted sources: victims’ friends (85%), counselors (75%), gay men’s domestic violence programs (67%), police (65%). Least contacted sources: emergency shelter (8%), battered women’s service (10%), other (non-gay/lesbian) social service agency (12%), HIV-related agency (19%) Most helpful sources (rated “somewhat helpful” or “extremely helpful”): gay men’s domestic violence programs, HIV-related agency, social service agency (100%), gay and lesbian general agency (94%), support or self-help group (91%), individual counselor (90%). Least helpful sources (rated “not helpful at all” or “making things worse”: partner’s friends (73%) and family (71%), neighbors (63%), battered women’s services (60%) HCI: Mentioned as a cause for the lack of knowledge of the phenomenon: heterosexist definitions and depictions of IPV completely exclude mentions of same-gender relationships |
Meza-de-Luna et al. (2015) | Multi-method: semi-structured interviews (main topic: concealment of intimate partner violence) and photo-interventions | 61 people, 13 of which had same-sex partners | BTH: Gender stereotypes (e.g., idyllic conception of relationships and inability to cause harm for women; inability to be hurt, machismo and toxic masculinity for men); normalization of violence; fear of inefficacy of the request; feelings of isolation |
Ngo (2018) | Dataset analysis (Stalking Victimization Supplement, extracted from the National Crime Victimization Survey) | 942 stalking victims, divided into 4 dyads (M-F, F-M, M-M, F-F). Same-sex subsets included 123 men (M-M) and 199 women (F-F) | HSM: Description of use of formal and informal sources among stalking victims (data available) About 48% of victims in M-M dyads and 72.9% in F-F dyads (victim-offender) sought informal help from family, friends or attorneys; About 28.5% of victims in M-M dyads and 34.2% in F-F dyads reported the incident to the police FRHS: In stalking victims, (1) Intimidation by the stalker significantly correlated with help-seeking (police, informal sources). (2) Three factors (age of the victim, victim marital status, perpetrator ethnicity) significantly correlated with informal help-seeking in F-F couples only |
Oliffe et al. (2014) | Semi-structured interviews (main topic: experiences of IPV and coping strategies) | 14 men victims of SSIPV (9 gay men, 4 bisexual men) | BTH: Low awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon; fear of inefficacy of the help request; fear of discrimination; fear of being seen as weak HSM: Description of use of formal and informal sources (no quantitative data available; talking to friends after the relationship is over; following the recommendations of a healthcare professional in order to cope with the ensuing depression) |
Rausch (2016) | 91 women (cisgender, self-identified as lesbian or queer) | FRHS: The presence of emotional and combined abuse in childhood was significantly correlated with the perception of the lesbian and queer community as not supportive of help-seeking strategies | |
Renzetti (1989) | 12-pages questionnaire (ad hoc) and unstructured interviews | 100 lesbian women with SSIPV experiences, 40 of which were interviewed | BTH: Fear of inefficacy of the help request; feelings of isolation; fear of discrimination; negative responses from victims’ social networks HSM: Description of use of formal and informal sources (data available) Most contacted sources: friends (n = 69), counselors (i.e., psychologists or social workers; n = 58) relatives (n = 35), police (n = 19). Least contacted sources: psychiatrist (n = 7), medical doctor (n = 9), attorney, neighbors (n = 10), shelter (n = 13) Most helpful sources (i.e., rated as “very helpful”): counselors (n = 24), friends (n = 19), relatives (n = 8), shelters (n = 4). Least helpful sources (i.e., rated as “not helpful at all”): friends (n = 16), relatives (n = 13), police, religious advisor (n = 9), shelter (n = 8) HSO: (1) Having a family that was perceived as helpful increased the speed at which victims terminated their relationship with the abuser. (2) Feeling like they had nowhere to go was cited as one of the reasons for staying in the relationship (3) Receiving practical assistance from friends after help-seeking was cited as one of the reasons for leaving the relationship with the abuser |
Scherzer (1998) | 88-items questionnaire (ad hoc) | 256 self-identified lesbians | BTH: Fear of the inefficacy of the help request; feelings of isolation; fear of discrimination; economic issues; embarrassment HSM: Description of use of formal and informal sources (data available). 115 out of 137 women who saw the violence as a problem reported asking for help. Most contacted sources: counselors (78%), friends (71%), other family members (15%), other forms of help (13%), parents (7%). Least contacted sources: doctor (1%), religious counselor, legal assistance (2%), crisis line (3%) HSO: 27 respondents declared feeling like they had learned better communication skills, or that things had worked out, or that they learned to set better boundaries; 7 respondents declared that asking for help did not work as their partner did not or could not collaborate and their situation went back to the same; members of several couples declared feeling guilty for help-seeking as counselors and shelter staff portrayed their partner as “worse than she is” or for fear that help-seeking would make the situation worse or break up the couple |
St. Pierre & Senn (2010) | 280 victims of IPV, self-identified as gay, lesbian or queer | BTH: Low awareness and knowledge of available services; fear of inefficacy of the help request; feelings of isolation; fear of discrimination HSM: Description of use of formal sources of help among 180 respondents (data available). Most contacted sources: counselors/psychologists (40.5% women, 25.4% men), support/self-help groups (19% women, 9% men), police (12.9% women, 16.4% men), medical clinics (13.8% women, 12.7% men). Least contacted sources: shelter for battered men/lesbians/gay men, gay men’s/lesbians’ domestic violence program (0% women and men) FRHS: Significant positive correlation between outness and help-seeking No correlation was found between help-seeking and service availability, service sensitivity, past experiences of discrimination | |
Sylaska and Edwards (2015) | 77 LGBT people who were in a same-sex relationship that included physical violence | BTH: Feelings of isolation; fear of discrimination; thinking of IPV as a private matter; feeling like the situation was not serious HSM: All the participants had talked with at least an informal source (mostly friends; data available); 7% of the participants had talked with formal sources, counselors and therapists being the most common. Most contacted sources: friends (heterosexual/LGBT: 25%), parents (14%), counselors/therapists (6%), siblings (5%). Least contacted: campus/faculty staff, medical doctor (1%), law enforcement officer, other informal (3%) HSO: (1) Description of most helpful responses: empathic support (43%), listening to the victim (38%); offering practical help to the victim (24%); giving advice (14%). (2) Description of responses perceived as harmful: not understanding the situation (24%); offering unsolicited advice and attempting to take control of the situation (10%) | |
Walters (2011) | Semi-structured interviews (main topics: experiences of IPV, help-seeking behaviors, heteronormativity, and heterosexism) | 4 women, self-identified survivors of lesbian IPV | BTH: Fear of inefficacy of the help request; damage caused from an unsuccessful help request (e.g., police inaction emboldened the abuser, making her confident that she was not committing any crime and insinuating that the behavior was not abusive); low awareness and knowledge of the phenomenon; victim-blaming, either self-inflicted or by others; fear of discrimination (being seen as “representative” of homosexuality and putting it in a negative light by admitting the violence, especially with homonegative family members and acquaintances) HCI: Mentions of the presence of gendered beliefs on violence in the victims (inability to recognize violence as such when perpetrated by a woman; idyllic conception of relationships among lesbians) |