Systems-Facilitated Economic Abuse: Exploitative "By Design"

Background and Purpose

Studies show that as many as 99% of intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors experience economic abuse (EA). Economic abuse is a primary reason why IPV victims are unable to leave or choose to return to an abusive relationship, and the long-term consequences of experiencing EA are severe. Within the range of IPV research on economic abuse, there is a gap concerning economic exploitation via systems. This study examined the relationship between intimate partner violence economic abuse and interactions with institutional structures and systems.

Methods

Using a constructivist grounded theory approach, this exploratory qualitative study used targeted semi-structured interviews with professionals working in several key systems that IPV survivors interact with regularly: Child Support, Child Protective Services, Consumer Credit, Family Law, Healthcare, Housing, Immigration, and Welfare. The choice of targeted interviews was intentional to secure representation from all identified systems, with a further qualifier that each professional must have at least two years of experience already working with IPV survivors within their respective system(s). Participants were identified via contacts from within the PI’s network of domestic violence advocacy professionals in the state of Washington. There was an estimated 60+ years of IPV professional advocacy experience and 2800+ clients served among the participants.

The interviews were conducted over Zoom and recorded, then transcribed. Analysis began with initial, line-by-line coding for each transcript, including the regular use of in vivo codes. Iterative secondary coding and thematic analysis followed, leading to the identification of 21 categories grouped into five key themes.

Results

Study results overwhelmingly showed that systems-facilitated economic abuse is an effective method to establish power and maintain control over an intimate partner. One theme revealed that IPV support systems are themselves exploitative, exacerbating their exploitability by abusers. This is especially true for IPV victims who experience multiple forms of intersecting structural vulnerabilities to both interpersonal and systemic violence. The recurring centrality of power and control in economic abuse was abundantly evident, particularly when participants described how the systems themselves are exploitative and have been set up in such a way that abusers can get away with such abusive behavior and avoid most, if not all, punitive consequences.

Conclusions and Implications

Exploitative system design allows social and financial power to extend within the systems themselves, where abusers can then use coercion, threats, harassment, sabotage, and obstruction to restrict access to the resources and support survivors need to leave an IPV relationship and find economic stability. Ongoing consideration of system-facilitated economic abuse must include consideration of the historic, social, and situational contexts of the systems themselves and discussion of the elements of power and control embedded within. Systems-facilitated economic abuse provides opportunities for abusers to continue to exert control long after an abusive relationship ends. Future EA prevention and intervention efforts should include a focus beyond attempting to change individual behavior to the modification of existing policies and systems to combat IPV at a structural level.