Are All Interventions Equal in Enhancing Latina Immigrant IPV Survivors' Safety?

Background and Purpose: Intimate partner violence (IPV) had negative implications for the safety and emotional wellbeing of Latina immigrant survivors. To increase their safety, survivors may seek help from supports such as religious leaders, healthcare, victim services, and legal systems. Multiple types of non-emergency interventions exist, including safety planning, information and referral, advocacy financial empowerment, immigration relief, and personal protection orders. There has been limited research examining Latina immigrant survivors’ perceptions of the helpfulness of these interventions and if these interventions are equally helpful with enhancing their safety. Drawing upon the Empowerment Process Model, this study examined Latina survivors’ experiences with multiple interventions to identify those that were most helpful in improving their safety.

Methods: Using a qualitative grounded theory framework, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 40 Latina survivors who were primarily first-generation Spanish-speaking from a large urban community. Three analysts engaged in initial coding followed by focused coding to identify patterns and relationships among the codes, which led to the thematic formation. Further, axial coding was conducted, which involves relating categories to subcategories to examine contingencies (Charmaz, 2014). Further, several procedures were undertaken to verify the credibility of the conclusions drawn.

Results: The study found survivors received three overarching types of safety interventions: 1) information about their legal rights including immigration, marital, and family laws; 2) assistance with identifying options and resources, and developing safety plans and financial literacy; and 3) step-by-step assistance, advocacy, and accompaniment by bilingual supports to help survivors receive immigration relief, personal protection orders, and other legal remedies.

The participants believed each type of intervention was beneficial; however, the combination of all three had the most positive impact on their safety. The first two types of interventions helped survivors feel relief and hope that they had options to leave their relationships or to seek legal remedies. However, they felt too intimidated or overwhelmed to engage in safety-seeking behaviors such as obtaining a personal protection order, applying for financial assistance, or leaving home. Conversely, survivors who received all three interventions reported more ease of and success with terminating the relationship and obtaining resources and legal remedies.

Implications: This study found that step-by-step guidance and accompaniment can mitigate common barriers for Latina immigrant survivors in accessing legal remedies and leaving their abusive partners. While each type of intervention was helpful, the combination of all three was essential for survivors to engage in safety-seeking steps and obtain safety-enhancing resources. The authors will discuss the implications of these findings on social workers and other human service professionals who have the opportunity to enhance survivors’ safety.