Provider Perspectives of Immigrant Survivor Experiences Accessing the Violence Against Women Act

Background and Purpose: The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was first enacted in 1994, allowing immigrant domestic violence survivors who were abused by a citizen or permanent resident spouse to self-petition for immigration relief. Immigration provisions were later expanded through the VAWA 2000 reauthorization, to include victims of violent crime, sexual assault, and trafficking through the creation of U and T visas. One of the most impactful amendments has been its expanded provisions for immigrant survivors in 2005. Through this reauthorization, safe housing, immigrant relief, and other services are provided for a broad range of immigrant victims and their children. This study explores immigrant survivors’ experiences of utilizing VAWA provisions.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews (n=11) to learn how service providers are supporting immigrant survivors of intimate partner violence as it relates to the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The criteria for inclusion involved being 18 years or older, residing in the United States, and providing services to immigrant survivors regarding the utilization of VAWA in some capacity. The researchers were guided by the research question: “What are the experiences of service providers working with immigrant clients concerning the Violence Against Women Act?”. A convenience sampling method and inductive coding were used, followed by a thematic analysis of data obtained from the interviews.

Results: The results were categorized into four broad themes, which included 1) utilization, 2) barriers, 3) provider best practices, and 4) provider recommendations. The theme of utilization included providing legal support, case management, and education about VAWA provisions. The second theme, barriers, included three subthemes delineating barriers at the micro, mezzo, and macro levels. Participants reported micro-level barriers such as language challenges of clients, client fears/misconceptions related to the provisions of VAWA, challenges of male and female survivors, lack of social support for clients, cost concerns for clients, and the experience of sharing their stories is painful for the client. The mezzo-level barriers faced by providers involved funding challenges for specialized services, documentation, and a lack of interpreters for clients speaking different languages. The macro-level barriers included challenges in reporting abuse, uncertainty around visa rules, visa wait times limited number of visas, and lack of awareness of VAWA. The theme of provider best practices included subthemes of client-centered services, community partnerships for referrals, trauma-informed care, and culturally responsive services. Followed by the theme of provider recommendations for improving VAWA, including increasing funding, faster timelines to process paperwork, and increased housing availability.

Conclusion and Implications: Providers highlight the gaps in access to service provisions and strategies that ensure empowerment, safety, and support for the needs of immigrant survivors. Future research should include service providers from the Southwestern and Eastern United States. Service providers should utilize a client-centered, trauma-informed, culturally responsive approach when working with immigrant survivors. This approach can also enhance awareness of VAWA among immigrant clients. Additional funding for services specifically for immigrant survivors and improved document processing time is needed. More advocacy around accessible stipulations within the VAWA is urgently needed for immigrant survivors.