Betrayal Trauma and Barriers to Forming New Intimate Relationships Among Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence

Abstract

Many survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) experience betrayal trauma, which affects future intimate relationships. Yet many services extended to victims of IPV focus on keeping the victim safe, not helping survivors establish new healthy intimate relationships. Using betrayal trauma as a lens, this phenomenological study incorporates semistructured interviews to explore the various ways betrayal trauma manifests itself and acts as barriers to forming new healthy intimate relationships among survivors of IPV. Thematic analysis with nine survivors of IPV revealed four ways betrayal trauma manifests and acts as barriers to establishing new healthy intimate relationships: (a) vulnerability/fear, (b) relationship expectations, (c) shame/low self-esteem, and (d) communications issues. This article has implications for those working with survivors of IPV.

Keywords

domestic violence battered women mental health and violence

We don’t expect soldiers to come back from war and be like, “You’re not on the battlefield, so you should feel better.” I lived in a war zone for ten years. I have scars that are never gonna go away. Now, I don’t show ’em all the time, and I manage ’em, but you know what? I’m not the same person. So realize that, while, ideally, in a perfect world you would just reset, how are you gonna reset from that? (Quote from participant in the study)

Introduction

Intimate partner violence (IPV), defined as physical, sexual, or psychological harm against a current or former partner (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2017), is a pervasive public health issue. In the United States, nearly one in three women have experienced physical IPV in their lifetime, and one in 10 women have been raped by an intimate partner (Breiding, Chen, & Black, 2014). Although the physical harm may eventually heal, the resulting emotional and mental trauma may last a lifetime and affect future intimate relationships (Freyd, Klest, & Allard, 2005; Platt, Barton, & Freyd, 2009). Yet many IPV services focus on keeping victims safe while they are in abusive relationships or helping them leave if desired. Largely ignored is the fact that many survivors of IPV will, at some point, enter into new intimate relationships despite the betrayal they experienced by their previous intimate partners (Burton, Cherlin, Winn, Estacion, & Holder-Taylor, 2009). Using betrayal trauma theory as a lens, this study explores the effects of experiencing IPV on forming and sustaining intimate relationships.

Betrayal trauma theory refers to an individual’s experience of abuse committed by a person or institution that the individual is supposed to trust (Freyd, 1996, 2008; Freyd et al., 2005). In healthy intimate relationships, partners trust one another with their emotional and physical well-being. IPV results in a violation of that trust. A key component of betrayal trauma is that survivors experience a mismatch between how things “should be” verses “what is” (Freyd et al., 2005). Ideally, in intimate relationships, partners should not inflict harm on one another. However, after experiencing IPV, the realization that those who are supposed to love you may harm you is embedded in the psychosocial functioning of survivors and may manifest in behaviors and attitudes that are counterproductive to creating and sustaining healthy intimate relationships (Burton, Halpern-Felsher, Rankin, Rehm, & Humphreys, 2011).

The limited research on the experiences of domestic violence and relationship formation suggests that experiences of IPV are associated with negative relationship outcomes such as less likely to marry and cohabitate (Burton et al., 2009; Cherlin, Burton, Hurt, & Purvin, 2004; Macmillian, 2001; Manning, Trella, & Lyons, 2010; Vandervoort & Rokach, 2003, 2004, 2006). A potential reason for these trends is that survivors are adapting to their reality of how relationships work based on their experiences of IPV and, as a result, develop coping and defense mechanisms that are counterproductive to creating and sustaining intimate relationships (Estacion & Cherlin, 2010; Vandervoort & Rokach, 2003, 2004, 2006). For example, some survivors may purposely create emotional distance between themselves and partners or hesitate to commit to long-term relationships to protect themselves from being vulnerable and susceptible to IPV (Cherlin et al., 2004). To create effective interventions that help survivors of IPV form and sustain healthy relationships, it is important to understand the attitudes and behaviors that evolve from experiences of IPV, which act as barriers to this goal.

Method

Procedure

Using semistructured interviews in this phenomenological research design, nine women who are survivors of IPV shared their experiences of forming new intimate relationships. These women were recruited from an organization in Western New York, which provides free services for victims of domestic violence and their children. Information about the study was shared with the women at a soiree held at the home of the executive director. The survivors of IPV, who serve as advisors to the executive director of the organization, were given a brief verbal description of the study and informational fliers. In addition, follow-up emails were sent to the women to determine their interest in the study. Those interested in the study contacted the primary investigator via phone or email to arrange an interview time.

Written and verbal consent was obtained by all participants before the start of the interview. All interviews were held either at the office of the primary investigator or the homes of participants. The interviews lasted between 60 and 90 min. In addition, participants completed a brief 10-item sociodemographic questionnaire. Participants received a US$25 Visa gift card for their time. All interviews were audio recorded. At the completion of the interview, participants were given the opportunity to share how they were feeling. If participants expressed psychological distress, they were referred to the organization’s hotline. None of the participants were in need of immediate referral to the hotline following the interview.

Data-Collection Instruments

A semistructured interview guide containing four broad topic areas, with an additional three to four probes under each topic area was used to guide conversation between the participant and interviewer. The four topic areas included experiences of IPV, feelings about relationships, entering new relationships, and healing. Participants were also given the opportunity to offer any additional information. At the end of the interview, the participants were asked to complete a short 10-item questionnaire. These questions included sociodemographic information such as race/ethnicity, education, income, relationship status, number of biological children, and number of years one has been a survivor of IPV. Three relationship questions were included: type of abuse experienced in intimate relationships, knowledge of what a healthy relationship is, and to what extent would they agree with the statement, “I am currently in a healthy relationship.”

Data Analysis

Qualitative data were coded using methods similar to DeCuir-Gunby, Marshall, and McCulloch (2011). First, two data analysts individually reviewed the nine transcripts and identified potential codes (assignment of meaningful labels to phrases, sentences, and paragraphs prior to interpretation). The two data analysts met to discuss potential codes and develop a codebook, which contained the code name/label, full definition, and an example of when to use the code. The two data analysts individually recoded the nine manuscripts using the codebook. The two data analysts met regularly to review and reconcile their codes. The use of a codebook and two data analysts ensured reliability and validity through intercoder agreement. For this article, a thematic analysis of the theory-driven code “barriers to forming new relationships” was conducted. Using steps similar to the coding process, the two data analysts individually identified themes (interpreting patterns across transcripts that are relevant to the description of codes), which emerged from the data for the selected code. Data analysts met to combine, separate, or omit themes. Themes were defined and named. Transcripts were individually reviewed, and texts reflecting each theme were identified. Data analysts met to review and reconcile any differences that emerged. All transcripts were analyzed by hand and merged using Microsoft Word 2016. Finally, the responses to qualitative data were tallied by hand.

Sample Characteristics

A total of nine women were included in this study. The majority of women in this study (five) reported being survivors of IPV for more than 13 years. All the women in this study reported experiencing physical and emotional/psychological abuse. Four women experienced sexual abuse, and four women experienced stalking. Five women reported being married at the time of the study, two being divorced, one being single, and one dating without cohabitation. All of the women strongly agree (5) or agree (4) with the statement, “I know what a healthy relationship looks like.” The six women who were in relationships at the time of the study (five married, one dating) reported that they strongly agree (3) or agree (3) with the statement, “I am currently in a healthy relationship.” The majority of women in this study (seven) were white, college educated with a bachelors or a master’s degree (six), and reported annual incomes of US$50,000 or higher (six). The age of women in this study ranged from 31 to 67, with the average age being 46 and the median age being 47. The majority of the women (five) were married at the time of the study. All participants, except one, reported having biological children.

Results

Five themes emerged from the transcripts as barriers to establishing intimate relationships after experiencing IPV: (a) vulnerability/fear, (b) relationship expectations, (c) shame/low self-esteem, and (d) communications issues.

Vulnerability/Fear

Many women were hesitant to pursue new relationships out of fear of putting themselves in a situation where they were once again potentially susceptible to physical or emotional harm. One participant stated, “I was fearful. I’m scared to make that transition to a relationship like that because it may go—could go the same way.” Women often strategized on how to keep themselves out of vulnerable situations. One participant said, “I think that’s always part of my strategy (keeping herself from vulnerability). It’s horrible. I think it probably wasn’t until my ex-husband. I think that’s always been a struggle for me since then. I don’t want to be incredibly vulnerable with people.” Some women’s strategies included getting their sexual needs met while protecting themselves emotionally. One participant stated,

One person I dated, but I would say more he was like my—I slept with him. I don’t regret it. It was a friendship that went more. I think, at the time, I needed that, but I didn’t want the emotional connection, and I didn’t want the interaction with my son because I knew he wasn’t the right person for me. I also had physical needs that were being unmet.

Similarly, another participant said that after her abusive relationship, she met guys and had sex with them but made sure her feelings did not get too deep. She said,

Sex happened along the way with those—it wasn’t a good thing, it wasn’t a bad thing. But the giving my heart or really euphoric ‘I’m so happy I’m in love’ not part of our relationship. Well, this is good, this is nice, all those words that are in that good range rather than wonderful. Because I thought feeling wonderful put me at great liability I wasn’t ever gonna put myself at that liability again.

Some women gave up dating altogether. One participant discussed her strategy of preventing abuse from happening again. She said,

My strategy was probably not to date a lot, to prevent it from happening again. Cuz I think I still don’t trust myself. I think, like I said to you, I think I’m attracted to things that look good, but then they don’t really turn out well. I tend to have a naïve perception of people. I think really, I didn’t ever bring people around my son, until my husband. I just didn’t date very much at all during that time.

Despite their vulnerability and fear, many women in the study eventually dated while creating boundaries to keep themselves safe. One participant stated,

Oh, I said “I’ll never marry again. I’ll never have anything to do with a guy again. I am done” [laughter]. I didn’t have any need to date, want to date, just wasn’t the deal. That was the first year. Then I said okay, maybe I’ll date within a light boundary.

Although many women eventually married, some women said that their fear and vulnerability affected their partner selection. Some intentionally or subconsciously pursued mates who were the exact opposite of their abusive partners. One participant said the following about her husband:

He’s not emotional at all. I think I was attracted to that. In part, my brother has said before—when my ex-husband was here. He was a very social party animal, drinker, literally life of the party. My husband now, he comes home from work and he sits on the sofa, and he plays video games, and he doesn’t wanna socialize with people. My brother has said, I could understand you wanted to correct, after the first, but you went all the way to the opposite.

This participant went on to describe how she was basically looking for “somebody who didn’t have a heart beat and just sat on the couch and didn’t do a lot” because she did not “want to fight.”

Relationship Expectations

While many women refrained from relationships or found ways to reduce vulnerability by avoiding emotional connections, others allowed themselves to be vulnerable but expected that any relationship they found themselves in would eventually include violence. Some women demanded to know up front from men if they were abusive or had bad tempers. One participant describes her encounter with a man she met online and eventually married. She says,

We met for lunch, and I was instantaneously attracted. I was just blown away. As we sat having lunch I said, “What’s your fatal flaw?” He said, “What do you mean?” I said, “Well, do you like to get angry and stay angry and blame everything on your anger? Is your anger your most important thing?” He’s like, “No.” I’m like, “Do you find it hard to see only one woman at a time? Do you find that there’s always somebody else you wish you were dating along at the same time?” He was like, “No, that’s not me.” I’m like, “Do you get drunk on a Friday and sober up Sunday afternoon for work?” He’s like, “No.” I said, “Well, what’s your fatal flaw then ’cause I’m 40. I don’t have a whole lot of time to waste” [laughter].

Many women now found themselves in what they would describe as healthy relationships. Their new partners treated them with respect and were never violent. However, the expectation of violence is always there. One participant describes how the expectation of violence is always on her mind. When describing her relationship with her husband she says,

I kept waiting for the other shoe to drop. I kept waiting for the honeymoon period to be over when we were dating. I kept waiting for the thing that would make him really, really, really angry, and then he would physically attack me. It was, to me, like I was waiting for that process to happen all over again, and it never did. One night—we’re doing a number of renovations to our house. He went downstairs to the basement. He moved something. A gas pipe started leaking. He was trying to get his hand in there to tighten it, ended up cutting his hand. There was a piece of paneling in his way to get to it. He ripped the paneling out with his bare hands and threw it to the side, and the whole time loudly cursing. I was sitting upstairs, and I [deep breath]—I went into shell shock because the next thing I expected to happen was he was gonna come upstairs and then take it out on me because that happened. I get all the clumps just thinking about it. He didn’t. I tiptoed downstairs and said, “Hi.” He looked at me, and he was so upset that I had gotten that upset, but he understood. . . . [to me] It was just a realization that that was what was gonna happen because I had let myself fall for someone. It was gonna end up that I was gonna be hit again.

Another participant has a similar story. She and her husband were being playful and having a great time. She says,

He was goofing around with me one time. We hadn’t been married that long. I wasn’t pregnant yet. My first husband’s 6′2.″ He’s a big, bulky guy. My husband I’m married to now is 6′4.″ He’s even bigger. He’s more than twice my size. He’s like 6′4,″ almost 400 lbs. He’s a huge monster of a guy. He came up behind me and he grabbed me around the waist, goofing, and I did what I always did. I covered my face. I curled up into a ball and covered my face cuz I didn’t—it’s that reaction, that gut reaction. You don’t want facial bruising. He dropped me. He was like, “Oh my God, what are you doing?” I’m like, “Oh my God, I don’t know. What am I doing?” It doesn’t just go away.

Low Self-Esteem

Some women felt low self-esteem sabotaged new relationships. Women expressed feeling unworthy of love and suspicious of men who expressed interest in them. One participant describes dating a guy who was really into her. However, her low self-esteem prevented the relationship from moving forward. She constantly thought to herself, “There must be something wrong with them [any man interested in her]. What’s wrong with them if they like me this much?” Similarly, another participant describes a guy who really cared for her. She says, “I didn’t believe him. I don’t trust it. I don’t believe I’m worthy of being loved.” Another participant who expressed jealousy that her boyfriend was meeting with his divorced wife said, “I wasn’t thinking they were doing anything. Well maybe I did. I didn’t go ballistic . . . I just felt like shrugged shoulders like that’s okay. I wasn’t loveable, I guess.” The same participant explains how she constantly thinks negative of her husband as a result of her low self-esteem. She says,

I was trying to probably be negative about my husband probably cuz I feel so bad about myself. Nice dinner, and he would buy the CDs I liked, wine and flowers. He really did try. I’m probably the one who downplayed a lot of stuff.

One participant discussed how managing self-esteem is a constant battle and how IPV services should recognize that women need additional services besides assistance leaving the relationship. Although she entered into a serious relationship shortly after her abusive relationship, she does not recommend this to all survivors. She said,

I think that they (survivors) should look to heal the scars, though. Those scars don’t get healed the first year. You get support to finish working through your steps towards the door, but once, all of a sudden, you’re outside the least bit of something going wrong and your brain can take you back to, “You’re an idiot. You’re fat. You’re ugly.” It’s amazing how those scars don’t go away as much. Even though I have a wonderful relationship at home, when something goes wrong I am incredibly hard on myself.

Communication Issues

Some women expressed the difficulty in conveying to their new partners their experiences of IPV. Many women have survival behaviors that they adapted from their previous relationships. These behaviors often manifest themselves in their new relationships. Some women said that their inability to completely understand and communicate their experiences and the impact on their behaviors contributed to a disconnect between them and their partners. One participant said,

There’s all these behaviors that I had that he [current husband] has had to learn to deal with over the years: a lot of anxiety, fears, some irrational fears that have come out of that first marriage, some very rational fears that get blown out of proportion, but also irrational fears, like there’s no reason to be afraid of that. That was these behaviors that he didn’t know me well enough to know were there, but once we were together, to see me get super paranoid over something and he’s like, “What is happening right now? Why are you having this reaction?” . . . He didn’t know why. I don’t know if I knew why.

The same participant recognized that it took her many years to be able to convey to her husband the reasons behind her behavior. Until she was able to understand and explain her behavior, she would often blame her husband for not trying to understand. She says,

I would be like, “You don’t want to listen to me.” He does want to listen, but he doesn’t know what’s happening. You can’t articulate what’s wrong. All you do is sound like the Peanuts teacher. He didn’t know how to help, but I think in some ways he didn’t know—initially, we didn’t talk about the fact that it was a product of the first marriage. It wasn’t until, I don’t know, a couple of years later that I was really in the midst of trying to work through my issues that I had to start thinking like, “Wait a minute, what is really happening with me?”

Whereas the previous participant was eventually able to work through, understand, and articulate her behavior to her husband and experience increased marital bliss, other participants still struggled with communication. One participant described how her current husband, years after her first marriage, decided to rent a home that they owned to her abusive ex-husband once he was released from jail. She has been unable to effectively communicate her anxiety about this to her husband. She said,

Now that he [abusive ex-husband] is out of prison, he lives over there in that place where I used to live with my son and my son’s girlfriend since 6 years already. My current husband bought the house that they live in. Technically, I’m the landlord even though I don’t see him. He [current husband] doesn’t think of the effect it had on me.

Although many women struggled with communication at some point, not all of them did. One participant said that she told the first person she dated after her abusive relationship about her trust issues. She said,

Well, I told him up front . . . I told him what I went through. I said, “So—if I don’t hear from you for a couple days, I’m gonna start to panic.” He was—he actually was very good at understanding that and knowing that I needed his reassurance.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to explore the various ways betrayal trauma manifests itself and act as barriers to forming new intimate relationships among survivors of IPV. Four distinct ways survivors’ experiences of IPV made it difficult to form and maintain new relationships emerged. These include (a) vulnerability/fear, (b) relationship expectations, (c) shame/low self-esteem, and (d) communications issues. According to betrayal trauma theory, survivors must reconcile the inconsistencies between what should be in relationships to what actually occurs based on their experiences. The opposite of each of these themes “should” characterize healthy intimate relationships. However, our findings illustrate the attitudes and behaviors that evolve from experiencing IPV and its adverse effects on relationship formation.

Ideally, relationships should be a safe place to express vulnerability. However, as a result of experiencing IPV, many women in our study expressed vulnerability/fear as a barrier to forming and maintaining new intimate relationships. Many of the strategies used by the women in our study to minimize vulnerability/fear of experiencing abuse in future relationships were similar to the types of strategies used by women in Burton et al.’s (2009) study of gender distrust among low-income mothers. For example, in our study, women reported entering intimate relationships in which they avoided emotional connections. Burton et al. (2009) reported that women in their study who had experienced high levels of physical and sexual abuse participated in transactional relationships or relationships in which they relied on partners for very specific things to get their needs met, yet they minimized their emotional vulnerabilities with their intimate partners (referred to as suspended and compartmentalized trust). In addition, Burton et al. (2009) noted that the majority of women in their study who had extensive untreated physical and sexual abuse engaged in misplaced trust, which is characterized by trusting men easily and quickly entering into relationships. This was not the norm among women in our study. However, two women mentioned quickly entering into relationships with their current long-term partners shortly after the abuse. One possible explanation as to the differences in findings may be access to resources. The women in Burton et al.’s (2009) study were low-income, while the women in this study were middle to upper class. Many of them discussed the use of formal (i.e., therapy) and or informal (i.e., books on IPV and healing) resources as treatment. However, much of their resources did not include how to form healthy relationships. Vulnerability/fear in starting and maintaining new healthy relationships is something that should be addressed when working with survivors of IPV.

Considering that the majority of women in our study entered into new relationships, a second identified barrier was the expectation of eventually experiencing IPV. Ideally, people do not expect to experience IPV in their intimate relationships. However, survivors reported that they were waiting for their new partners to show their abusive sides. This is a consequence of betrayal trauma in which victims of abuse move from an optimistic view about people and the world to a pessimistic one (Freyd et al., 2005). Whereas many women in our study entered abusive free relationships, one women reported being the victim of another IPV relationship. This mirrors prior victimization studies in which a history of victimization is associated with increased risk for future victimization (Barrick, Krebs, & Lindquist, 2013; Swartout, Cook, & White, 2012). This is often related to poor mental health, which develops as a result of IPV. Work with survivors of IPV should include an assessment and intervention around how mental health, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and anxiety as a result of IPV directly affecting current and future intimate relationships. Therapeutic relationships should also focus on helping clients redefine their traumatic understanding of love (Gobin, 2012; Kahn, 2006).

In relationships, people should experience an increase in self-esteem as a result of the love and affection received. However, similar to other studies, survivors of IPV in our study experienced low self-esteem. Many women felt that they were not worthy of love and often questioned why anyone would express romantic interest in them. Matherson et al. (2015), in their study of IPV among low-income women who currently or previously experienced abuse, characterized this as an erosion of self. They stated, “Living with an abusive partner exposes a woman to constant attacks on her self-identity and self-esteem. Although women try to steel themselves from this erosion of self it is an inevitable result of the abuse” (p. 564). It is imperative that when building self-esteem among survivors of IPV, professionals intentionally explore self-esteem building within intimate relationships. For example, professionals should move beyond self-esteem related to life in general, such as, “you are capable of succeeding in life,” to helping survivors realize what they want, need, and deserve in intimate relationships. They should also help survivors connect their low self-esteem to their experiences of IPV.

Healthy relationships thrive on successful communication; however, many survivors in our study reported issues in communicating their IPV experiences to their new or current partners. This mirrors previous research on the inability of many survivors of various trauma to discuss their traumatic experiences (Bowen, Shelley, Helmes, & Landman, 2010; Ullman, Foynes, & Tang, 2010). Yet disclosure, particularly when positive responses are received, are associated with healing and positive recovery (Ullman et al., 2010). It is important that helping professionals recognize barriers to disclosure and assist survivors in talking through their experiences, illuminating how these experiences relate to their current actions, and helping them to convey to their intimate partners how the trauma of IPV is manifesting in their relationships. In addition, more resources should be made available to partners of survivors of IPV, which help them understand the effects of IPV and how to respond to and support their partners.

Finally, it is notable that the majority of survivors in this study were in intimate relationships that they described as healthy. Although this finding seems to contradict betrayal trauma theory, it is important to note that the participants in this study, on average, reported being survivors of IPV for 13 years. Many of the survivors discussed their current relationships by first discussing the challenges that plagued their relationships for years and how they were able to overcome them. Some women reported still struggling with these issues; however, they were better equipped to recognize and manage them.

Limitations

While the findings of this study contribute to the understanding of barriers to relationship formation among survivors of IPV, there are limitations. Primarily, due to the small sample size consisting of nine survivors of IPV, the fact that women were selected among a group of women who volunteer as advisors to a domestic violence organization, and the characteristics of the sample as predominantly white, college educated, and middle class, generalizability is limited.

Conclusion

In conclusion, experiencing betrayal trauma in the form of IPV leaves many wounds that are slow to heal and some that may never heal. These experiences are carried into new intimate relationships. If unattended to, the trauma that manifest can sabotage intimate relationships. It is recommended that domestic violence organizations go beyond helping victims of IPV, to exploring the various ways betrayal trauma affects relationship formation efforts of survivors and developing applicable prevention interventions. Furthermore, those offering formal treatment to survivors should routinely assess and address the effects of betrayal trauma on relationship formation. Finally, many survivors may not seek treatment, and therefore, service providers outside of the purview of IPV who may interact with survivors should assess their clients for betrayal trauma and offer resources that connect survivors with applicable information and services.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Susan Johnson

Author Biographies

Noelle M. St. Vil is an assistant professor at the University at Buffalo School of Social Work. She received her doctorate in social work and minor in women’s studies from Howard University. She completed a postdoctoral fellowship focused on violence in the family at Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing. Her research focuses on Black male–female relationships, including intimate partner violence, monogamous and nonmonogamous relationships, and other dating and marital issues.

Takisha Carter is an adjunct professor at Morgan State University, social work department. She received her doctorate in social work from Howard University. She conducts research on intimate partner violence, with a specific focus on substance abuse.

Susan Johnson is a recent graduate of the D’Youville College psychology undergraduate program.

References

Barrick

Krebs

C. P.

Lindquist

C. H.

(2013). Intimate partner violence victimization among undergraduate women at Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). Violence Against Women, 19, 1014-1033.

Bowen

Shelley

Helmes

Landman

(2010). Disclosure of traumatic experiences, dissociation, and anxiety in group therapy for posttraumatic stress. Anxiety, Stress, & Coping, 23, 449-461.

Breiding

M. J.

Chen

Black

M. C.

(2014). Intimate partner violence in the United States — 2010. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_ipv_report_2013_v17_single_a.pdf

Burton

C. W.

Halpern-Felsher

Rankin

S. H.

Rehm

R. S.

Humphreys

J. C.

(2011). Relationships and betrayal among young women: Theoretical perspectives on adolescent dating violence. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67, 1393-1405.

Burton

L. M.

Cherlin

Winn

Estacion

Holder-Taylor

(2009). The role of trust in low-income mother’s intimate unions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 71, 1107-1124.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2017). Intimate partner violence. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/intimatepartnerviolence/index.html

Cherlin

A. J.

Burton

L. M.

Hurt

T. R.

Purvin

D. M.

(2004). The influence of physical and sexual abuse on marriage and cohabitation. American Sociological Review, 69, 768-789.

DeCuir-Gunby

J. T.

Marshall

P. L.

McCulloch

A. W.

(2011). Developing and using a codebook for the analysis of interview data: An example from a professional development project. Field Methods, 23, 136-155.

Estacion

Cherlin

(2010). Gender distrust and intimate unions among low-income Hispanic and African American women. Journal of Family Issues, 31, 475-498.

10.

Freyd

J. J.

(1996). Betrayal trauma: The logic of forgetting childhood abuse. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

11.

Freyd

J. J.

(2008). Betrayal trauma. In Reyes

Elhai

J.D.

Ford

J.D.

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of psychological trauma (p. 76). New York, NY: John Wiley.

12.

Freyd

J. J.

Klest

Allard

C. B.

(2005). Betrayal trauma: Relationship to physical health, psychological distress, and a written disclosure intervention. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 6, 83-104.

13.

Gobin

R. L.

(2012). Partner preferences among survivors of betrayal trauma. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 13, 152-174.

14.

Kahn

(2006). The understanding and treatment of betrayal trauma as a traumatic experience of love. Journal of Trauma Practice, 5, 57-72.

15.

Macmillian

(2001). Violence and the life course: The consequences of victimization for personal and social development. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 1-22.

16.

Manning

W. D.

Trella

Lyons

(2010). Marriageable women: A focus on participants in a community healthy marriage program. Family Relations, 59, 87-102.

17.

Matherson

F. I.

Daoud

Hamilton-Wright

Borenstein

Pedersen

O’Campo

(2015). Where did she go? The transformation of self-esteem, self-identity, and mental well-being among women who have experienced intimate partner violence. Women’s Health Issues, 25, 561-569.

18.

Platt

Barton

Freyd

J. J.

(2009). A betrayal trauma perspective on domestic violence. In Stark

Buzawa

(Eds.), Violence against women in families and relationships making and breaking connections (Vol. 1, pp. 185-207). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing.

19.

Swartout

K. M.

Cook

S. L.

White

J. W.

(2012). Trajectories of intimate partner violence victimization. Western Journal of Emerging Medicine, 13, 272-277.

20.

Ullman

S. E.

Foynes

M. M.

Tang

(2010). Benefits and barriers to disclosing sexual trauma: A contextual approach. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 11, 127-133.

21.

Vandervoort

Rokach

(2003). Posttraumatic relationship syndrome: The conscious processing of the world of trauma. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 675-685.

22.

Vandervoort

Rokach

(2004). Abusive relationships: Is a new category for traumatization needed? Current Psychology, 23, 68-76.

23.

Vandervoort

Rokach

(2006). Posttraumatic relationship syndrome: A case illustration. Clinical Case Studies, 5, 231-247.