Opening doors: Women's participation in feminist studies about domestic violence

Abstract

Qualitative research into sensitive and emotionally laden topics can pose a number of challenges for researchers. This paper presents reflections from two social work researchers who have led multiple feminist-based qualitative research studies about research participation enabling positive experiences for women who have survived domestic violence. It is argued, women can identify new insights, find alternative ways of looking at their experiences, and access opportunities to debrief in a unique way in the research interview setting that differs from counselling experiences. The authors use the metaphor of ‘opening doors’ to show how women construct their research participation experience in similar ways and how researchers can draw on social work skills to enhance positive experiences for women.

Keywords

Domestic violence ethics feminism interviewing sensitive topics women

Introduction

Undertaking qualitative research into sensitive and emotionally laden topics poses a number of challenges for researchers. These challenges become especially visible during the process of applying for ethics approval to gain access to potentially vulnerable participants (Alty and Rodham, 1998). Ethics committees, which have been described as acting as gatekeepers (McCosker et al., 2001), are rightly interested in protecting research participants who are perceived as vulnerable.

Human research can involve significant risks and it is the duty of researchers to anticipate such risks and build in appropriate strategies to address them. Yet, researchers such as Allen (2009) and Holland (2007) have raised the question whether the ‘risk’ or ‘sensitive’ discourse has grown so dominant that systems of governmentality in university and government agency settings are potentially stifling research into sensitive topics. For example Allen states: ‘how an institutional discourse of ethical research shapes the context of possibilities for research and research/participant subjectivities is a function of how discourse operates’ (2009: 399). Allen also reminds us ‘discourses are sets of meanings, practices and structures which act as “regimes of truth” that can be deployed to define ways of knowing and being in the world’ (2009: 399). Domestic violence is a social issue deemed ‘sensitive’ to research. How discourses of risk shape the contexts of research influences possibilities of who gets to speak and who does not, who is listened to and who is ignored (McLellan, 2010). Such questions are highly relevant in how violence against women and their children is researched.

As social work academics, we have been researching domestic violence in Australia for over a decade and have predominantly interviewed women face to face about their experiences of domestic violence. By domestic violence we refer to ‘the combination of physical and/or sexual violence with a variety of control tactics such as economic, emotional, social (constant monitoring) and spiritual abuse, the use of children and pets and threats and intimidation’ (Wendt and Zannettino, 2015: 2).We follow the World Health Organisation (WHO) in using the term domestic violence although, interpersonal violence, domestic abuse or family violence are terms used elsewhere. It is known that 25% of women worldwide are subjected to domestic violence (WHO, 2005).

As feminist qualitative researchers, who engage in distinctively open-ended, collaborative, methodologically eclectic and intimate ways of researching (Howe and Dougherty, 1993), we have not been immune to experiencing time-consuming, bureaucratic delays in receiving ethics approval as identified by Hemmings (2006). Furthermore, debates about what constitutes knowledge continue to occur and re-emerge in research settings (Buchanan, 2015: Lee-Treweek and Linkogle, 2000). For example interviews are seen in some disciplines to be open to value judgements, personal or political ideologies, misinterpretations and lacking validity because they can be emotionally laden (Lee-Treweek and Linkogle, 2000). However, D'cruz and Jones (2004) point out that with social work principles applied in research, subjectivity becomes valued as integral to the research process. Further, as McDermott (1996) notes, social work research seeks to identify the situation of those who are oppressed. Therefore, participants' subjectivity is valued as research is framed in a social work epistemology. Similarly, as feminist researchers attempt to identify the ways in which oppression impact on women's lives, they have created alternative approaches to research (Campbell and Wasco, 2000).

The protection of participants from risk of significant harm, both during the research process and as a consequence of the research, is a vital preoccupation of ethical guidelines and researchers (Rubin and Babbie, 2016). This is particularly so for a range of social issues such as mental health, sexual abuse and sexual culture to name a few (Allen, 2009; Holland, 2007). We therefore write this paper, not as an argument against attention to protection, risk, and potential harm, but as a counter narrative to highlight the benefits for women of participating in research focused on sensitive topics such as domestic violence. These benefits include being listened to by an empathetic and understanding researcher who is aware of the ramifications of domestic violence. The outcome can be that participants feel empowered through a process where they are valued as holders of knowledge (Liamputtong, 2006).

The costs and benefits of research participation

To give context to our discussion, we provide a brief narrative review of research literature which examines the costs and benefits of participation in research that is considered sensitive. Articles were selected for consideration by both authors. The costs and benefits of participants in sensitive research have been the subject of several published articles (Campbell et al., 2010; Davison, 2004; Griffin et al., 2003; McCosker et al., 2001; Sikweyiya and Jewkes, 2012). For example Griffin et al. (2003) investigated risk of harm by investigating the research experiences of 130 women who participated in two separate quantitative studies that used self-report questionnaires. One study investigated specific experiences of physical and sexual abuse while the other focused on experiences of domestic violence. The subset of women selected from these studies was subjected to extensive psychological and psycho-sociological testing in a laboratory over a period of 2 days. A qualitative component involved asking participants to talk about the traumatic event for 5 minutes without interruption. Questions about their experience of being assessed were included immediately after the assessment. Despite this lengthy and intense participation any distress found was said to be short lived. Using a Lickert Scale to assess responses most participants rated the experience as ‘a very positive and interesting one’ (Griffin et al., 2003: 226). The authors felt that the use of clinically trained, female interviewers who had additional training to deal with trauma responses helped to achieve positive outcomes for participants. They also concluded that assuring confidentiality and anonymity, stopping if the participant became too distressed plus providing a full debrief and encouragement to re-contact or use community services if needed after the study ended was helpful. The authors suggest that with these conditions in place, study into personal experiences of trauma was not harmful and can lead to participants perceiving benefits. Particular benefits are not specified. In addition, there was no long-term follow-up and, given that the participants had been recently traumatized, the effects of trauma followed by lengthy interrogation may have surfaced later.

Another example, looking at the impact of survey research on gender-based violence, Sikweyiya and Jewkes (2012) considered the negative impacts for participants completing a community survey. They conducted follow-up interviews with 23 of the 998 participants, finding that participants welcomed the chance to share their experiences. However, they found that women who participated in the study were more concerned that confidentiality may be breached and their partners or ex-partners would find out about their participation. In conclusion, Sikweyiya and Jewkes (2012) found that, although participants spoke of temporary distress, none perceived their part in the research as emotionally harmful and the majority saw their participation as beneficial.

McClain and Amar (2013), in their qualitative study of 12 female survivors of child sexual abuse, asked participants about suicidal ideation and safety after each of the two interviews conducted with each participant. All participants expressed positive feelings about taking part in the study with some saying it helped to talk about their experiences in a non-judgemental situation. Others identified that they believed their participation would help others (McClain and Amar, 2013). Similarly, Campbell et al. (2010) investigated the use of feminist qualitative research principles such as reducing hierarchy, providing information and resources and communicating warmth and respect in research with 92 female rape survivors. The participants were asked about their experiences of the interview and thematic analysis found that the interview was a positive experience for most participants and ‘instrumental in creating new ways of interpreting their experiences as survivors’ (Campbell et al., 2010: 72). Feeling in control and having choices during the interview, empathic responses from the interviewer and the perception that someone really listened with care and compassion and without judgement were seen as particularly helpful.

In summary, ethics committees and researchers are required to ensure that individuals are protected during the research process (McCosker et al., 2001). However, ‘doing sensitive research’ (McCosker et al., 2001: 13) attracts an emphasis on how to prevent harm rather than on the specific gains for participants. A clear intention of feminist research, historically and today, is to undertake research that is ‘beneficial for women, not just about women’ (Liamputtong, 2006: 10). However, participant personal gains are often not included in reporting of results.

As feminist qualitative researchers, we have found that women often offer insights about personal gain during the interview process. Hence, we wanted to explore the specific ways in which women saw the experience of participating as beneficial to themselves. It has been identified that participation can be helpful to women but how it helped is not often elaborated upon in publications of research. This paper, therefore, draws examples from our research with women who have survived domestic violence. We purport that women can experience participation in qualitative research into sensitive issues as healing, empowering and affirming. Based on the voices of women, we discuss the approaches to research that prove valuable, not just to the creation of knowledge but also to the personal growth of women who offer their experiences for scrutiny. In this article, we present and analyse perceptions from women who have participated in our research projects. We draw themes from participants' views to illustrate how their experiences as participants in research benefited them. We use the metaphor of “opening doors” to refer to various pathways from achieving personal growth through to experiencing catharsis and gaining insight about domestic violence through their involvement. We also consider how careful choice of methodology and methods underpins research that enables empowerment of participants and illustrate that our social work values, skills and beliefs are critical to this process.

Methodology and reflections

Over the past decade we have conducted in-depth face to face interviews and conducted focus groups with women who have survived domestic violence in six separate studies (Buchanan et al., 2013, 2014, 2015; Wendt and Zannettino, 2009, 2015; Wendt et al., 2015). Recently, we found ourselves engaging in conversations with each other about our experiences as interviewers. We shared similar stories about women telling us that they were motivated to participate in our studies in the hope of making a difference for other women who endured domestic violence. In other words, women told of their experiences so that knowledge created from their voices would open doors for other women when the research was applied in practice. This, in itself, can lead to a sense of efficacy for women and affirm strengths they used to overcome adversity. Seeing themselves as survivors with knowledge to contribute is empowering in itself and having that knowledge valued by a researcher who listens and confirms participants’ strengths is constructive (Roof, 2007).

With these conversations in mind, we both reviewed all our transcripts and notes from our completed research studies into domestic violence to read again the articulation of women's motivation for participating. In doing this, retrospectively we acknowledge that we did not ask women for their views of the research process at the time and, therefore, the views of women who did not volunteer an opinion are unknown. Regarding the comments volunteered by women, we looked for what Roof (2007) describes as ‘the personal model’ for constructing knowledge through reference to personal perceptions as evidence taken from lived experiences. As Roof points out, lived experiences, while building knowledge also outline the different ways in which women use experience to understand their own viewpoints. Once we both reviewed transcriptions we found that other doors opened for women as they participated in addition to the ‘hope to make a difference’ narrative that began our conversation. In the following sections, we illustrate, with the voices of women from several Australian studies, the various ‘doors’ that enabled women to identify research participation as a positive experience for them.

Opening doors: Findings

Opening the door to help others

Studies in the field of trauma research have investigated participants' experiences of research (Campbell et al., 2010; Griffin et al., 2003) and show that, when safeguards are in place, most participants report few, if any, negative effects. Some survivors of past trauma volunteer to participate because of a belief that their experiences will help to create knowledge that will help others in similar situations (Campbell et al., 2010; McClain and Amar, 2013). Participants report feelings of altruism and satisfaction resulting from their participation in studies. Our own experience researching domestic violence supports these findings and it was this observation that initially prompted us to re-examine our transcripts. For example we found that at the beginning or end of an interview many women say, unprompted, that they decided to participate in the hope of helping other women. This giving is an act we see repeatedly as researchers in this field. For example a woman aged in her mid-twenties, interviewed about spiritual abuse as a form of domestic violence said the following at the beginning of the interview:

I moved out, the abuse was so extreme, I couldn't stand it. I mean actually the reason why I am participating in this research is because for the first time I am seeking professional help because the abuse was so abusive…. I am participating because I have nothing to lose actually; I want to be a testimony for other people who experience this.

Other women reflect their desire to make a difference at the closing of an interview. A woman interviewed about her experiences seeking help for domestic violence while living in an isolated place in Australia said:

I was a little apprehensive about coming but then I thought unless something changes there will be another woman next week or will that woman be my daughter down the track? What the hell can we do?

As a result of our experiences of undertaking multiple, diverse studies with women who have experienced domestic violence we believe that some women find that participation in research also have personal benefit to themselves. This would seem particularly to be the case when women participate in qualitative research where their voices are valued, they are respected as bringers of knowledge and they can tell their stories without holding back on emotions. In short, we found benefits go further than ‘making a difference’, including feeling heard, feeling safe to show emotion, advocating and experiencing reflection.

Opening the door to being heard

Research has found that for women experiencing domestic violence, responses of informal networks, that is, family and friends can be quite unpredictable (Wendt and Zannettino, 2015). Whether or not family members and friends come to the defence of victims and support them, is unpredictable because of norms and values that go along with such connections. Responses to abuse are shaped by people's own values, hopes, fears and loyalties (Klein, 2012). Being able to speak about the details of their stories was an empowering experience for some women because they found that friends and family were unable to respond supportively:

Because most of them can't deal with that, like my family, they haven't even asked me, have you got counselling, how are you dealing with it, there's some serious, serious things that have happened that this man should be in jail for, I just appreciate the fact that I can do that in an environment like this.

Some women see participation as an opportunity to talk about their experiences and to express their feelings about what happened to them.

Sometimes all you need to do is speak, you don't need anyone to say oh it's in the past, you'll be okay, you've come so far- you just want to sit there and speak.

From our practice experience, we hypothesize that the inability of friends and family to listen to painful recollections may be based on discomfort because they feel out of their depth, want to offer an optimistic view, or fear that they will say the wrong thing. Some women valued the research interview because they perceived researchers being in a position to listen without judgement as their role is about receiving information to understand the phenomenon.

Similarly, researchers are seen to hold a different role and present a different relationship from that of counsellor/client. Some women appreciated that they could take their time and not be constricted by ‘appointment’ structures. While women approach counsellors expecting to be assessed and to address problems, researchers may be seen as ‘bystanders’-interested in women's stories but not there to problem solve. As researchers hold no expectations of participants beyond their involvement in the research, we found women often express satisfaction about being able to just tell their story with no anticipation of the need to make changes. We do not infer that counsellors perceive women as needing to change but women sometimes feared that this could be the case. Alternatively, women fear that their own self-blame, shame and negative self-perception might be shared by counsellors. Sometimes this view came from past experiences with service providers. As one participant stated, she needed just to tell her story: I think some people can't comprehend that – they find that hard to deal with. It seemed that in telling a researcher, the story could be told on the women's terms. In addition, through research participation women are contributing, not asking for help and therefore they may perceive themselves as an asset and not as a client with needs to be addressed. That is not to say that research participation is a substitute for counselling. For example a woman who had left her husband after 30 years of marriage said the following after a 2.5-hour interview about her experiences of domestic violence and seeking help.

I knew telling my story was going to take a long time and I was prepared for that … I am only just starting to reconnect with family members I haven't spoken to for about 30 years … now I am hearing their story … but you don't know your story or their story until you come out and just start telling it.

In other instances, participation in research is seen as an opportunity to ‘test the waters’ of telling their story to a sympathetic other. Some women open up for the first time about past experiences and saw participation as: time out to address what's going on for me. In this way participation in research may be a way of opening the door to counselling for women who are hesitant about seeking help:

… everyone thinks you're fine, so you think you're fine, but you don't know what your subconscious, or what that message is that you're sending out, and I think I've found that is very important now, for me to deal with that …

In other instances, participation seemed to enhance the women's pride in coping as it offers a unique experience that was not availed through counselling or friends. Friendships, family and counselling were valued and many participants spoke about helpful relationships and excellent counselling experiences but participating in research was different for them. Without assessment or a problem solving purpose women may feel free to stand outside themselves and view their experiences through a different door. In a way, as participants, women can take a more objective view as the perception is that the research is not about them but about their story and the issue of domestic violence.

The door to advocacy

Some women participate in research interviews because they see it as an opportunity for advocacy. Before, during or after the interview, we have found women asking questions about how we are going to use their interviews. They are particularly interested in knowing how the research will potentially change understandings or responses to domestic violence. A small number of women have re-contacted us after the interview, enquiring how the research was progressing and if they could have a copy of the publication or recommendations made. For example one woman emailed us directly, showing interest in the research process.

Thanks for a copy of your article. It's a great piece. I presume I can quote it for advocacy purposes? (email)

Some women have volunteered to contribute to further research by being interviewed again or have re-contacted us to make further contributions after reflecting on the interview.

(Author 2), I wish to thank you for letting me share my story with you. I would be very happy to help you in any way on this subject matter. Like I said to you in our interview and I hope it be of help to you in the writing of your book … (goes on to write some other reflections in the email).

Others wanted to help the research process beyond their own personal interview. For example the women themselves sometimes suggested snowballing techniques.

After the interview last Wednesday … I thought of the {names an action group}. It is led by {names the group}. They are an advocacy group, they could help in finding participants … and if you wanted to ask me more specific questions, either shoot me an email or if you want to record another interview that's fine too (email).

For some women participating in a research interview enabled them to feel part of a wider movement to address domestic violence.

Opening the door to memories and tightly held emotions

Sometimes telling their stories in research interviews, with limited interruption, in a supportive space gives access to a residue of unexpressed emotions. At other times telling of lived experiences leads to uncovering forgotten or suppressed memories. For example when telling the story of raising her baby while enduring domestic violence one participant realized that she had little memory of her son as a baby: I didn't realise, I didn't realise I didn't have a memory of him. This woman was shocked at this discovery but in response to being asked how she felt about this she affirmed the agency she had used to remove herself and her child from this situation: Yeah. I'm just glad that for whatever reason I didn't let it continue.

However, sometimes, it surprises women when they begin to cry in re-telling their story. For example taken from a transcript:

Interviewer: If I was to use the phrase domestic violence, does that speak to you? Can you describe forms of abuse you experienced in your relationship at the time?

Interviewee: Yeah, so we had-

(Pause while participant was emotional)

Interviewer: Please don't be embarrassed, crying, it is understandable-

Interviewee: No.

Interviewer: Lots of women cry and that is ok.

Interviewee: I'm glad to get it all out – I just haven't actually thought about it for a long time.

We find that enhanced rapport leads to women feeling free to express emotions. As social workers and feminist researchers, we are comfortable with women expressing feelings in the interview setting and we value the knowledge held in emotions. It would appear that women as participants also value the opportunity to express emotions as they see that telling their stories complete with the feelings enables authentic expression.

I need to have a good blub and then I get it out of my system and then I'll laugh and then I can talk again.

The reference to laughter does not surprise us as we have found that once emotions are accepted in interview there is room for relief as well as tears. The release of tears during interviews seems cathartic.

Yeah I'm okay, I'm okay (Crying). It was good to actually, to actually say it for what it is.

In interviews, it can be affirming to find that the researcher accepts emotions and normalizes the expression of feelings. Further, in a focus group situation, following individual interviews, group members can feel safe to cry in front of each other. The sharing of tears seems to establish common ground between women as this segment from a focus group transcript shows:

Participant 1: I'm an emotional person, here I am crying!

Participant 2: Yeah, nothing wrong with tears.

Participant 3 : I had to use a serviette when I did my interview with (Author 1)

Participant 4 : I cried too.

Because all were participating in a study about domestic violence, although strangers to each other, the women knew that they shared experiences and they expected to have feelings in common. Shared emotions can lead to women quickly establishing a bond and, in the instance mentioned above, the women chose to go together for coffee after the focus group and to keep in touch in future. Through participating in the study, members of this group found others who could listen and understand.

I thought it was great all it really did was cement the idea that I already had that it's not about us it's about … it's not our fault, these are all beautiful women here that the thing that we've got in common is that we've all been abused by somebody else, and … I think it kind of gives you a special, like you don't need to ask for details because you know.

In this instance, with focus groups held after interviews, as well as contributing to answering the research question, the focus group sessions provided a unique opportunity to hear women discussing their views of participating in the interviews.

Among these women were some who would not attend a therapeutic group about domestic violence because of preconceived ideas about group work and their own stand as ‘survivors’. Joining with others through the research enabled them to meet with other women who they perceived as survivors. This allowed a shared understanding of what it took to survive and enabled a climate where shame, joy, pride and laughter was expressed and understood. In this way, women supported each other through sharing experiences and acknowledging their mutual strengths.

It has been noted by Davison (2004) that forming close relationships with participants, while enhancing rapport that enriches findings, can lead to participants perceiving a relationship with the researcher as a personal friendship. Thus over-disclosure may be a hazard when the researcher seeks to ensure that the participant is comfortable to tell her story (Daley, 2012). Daley refers to interviewing young people, however, over-disclosure must always be considered in case the participant wants to retract the information given or is left with feelings of discomfort. We take particular care to give clear information, both in writing and verbally, about expectations of participation including the right to withdraw at any stage. We also provide information about local, free counselling services and, when appropriate, take time with women to explore options for ongoing support. Further, if we are concerned that a woman has been particularly distressed we contact her after our meeting. For example when one woman seemed emotionally overwhelmed during a focus group the researcher telephoned her that evening and was told; hey, I've got a new crowd of friends, you know, ones who've been through it too.

Participation in research may be a conduit to help seeking. A small number of women we have interviewed expressed deep distress and we have urged them to seek counselling so that they could better deal with feelings they wanted to explore. In addition, we have found that the focus group setting can offer this too, whereby participants encouraged some women to seek counselling for themselves and hence normalising the idea of seeking help. We also encourage women to re-contact after the research if they have any concerns about their participation. Rather, we find women re-contact because they want to add more detail.

The door to reflection

Another door that may open through participation in qualitative research is the door to reflection. As women are consulted they can consider their experiences from a different view point. For example when we asked about protectiveness towards children in domestic violence women reached back and found times that they were protective but had not seen this as such. Being asked to reflect on protection uncovered many instances that had passed unnoticed. Through the telling and listening to their own voices, women uncover insights not considered previously:

I didn't even realise that I had been ripped off until I did my interview with Fiona and really thought about my relationship with my youngest and I don't have a memory of playing with him and I don't have a memory of anything but protecting him, holding him and trying to shelter him from all that other stuff.

Sometimes, it is simply time set aside to focus on themselves and their stories that is valued by women and that allows them to reflect on their lives now:

It's a funny society we live in isn't it where … life is so busy and you get caught up with that sort of keeping face and when you are the person left in this situation, you don't get much time … to allow myself to address what's going on for me.

In other situations, participation in research provides space for women to reflect on the image they portray to others compared to the reality of their inner world:

I get counselling and stuff like that to help me to realise that I do need to deal with it … and mine's fairly recent and it was only last year, but I don't want to get into the habit of, yes I'm fine and I'm getting on with … got everything together and I'm moving on and doing stuff, but not really dealing with things, because I did most of my life from things that happened in childhood, etc., etc…

Some women had spent much time reflecting on their experiences of domestic violence either privately or through counselling and hence felt they could come to the research interview with particular insight to share after surviving domestic violence.

I remember the first time it happened; there is a couple of memories that really stick out. See now because I'm aware of myself and I know what's right and wrong, things would be a lot different but looking back I can see some points where I got upset because things weren't right.

Discussion: What helps to open doors?

We acknowledge that sensitive topics have long been argued to present particular kinds of theoretical and methodological problems for qualitative researchers (Alty and Rodham, 1998; Campbell, 2002; Johnson and Clarke, 2003; Lee, 1993; Lee and Renzetti, 1990; Liamputtong and Ezzy, 2005). Instead of having a research direction mapped at the outset, parameters of the research unfold during the course of the investigation (Daley, 2012; Howe and Dougherty, 1993). For example as Birch and Miller (2000) assert, unstructured, open-ended interviews are frequently used in research investigating private aspects of people's lives and such topics cannot readily be investigated through means of single direct or closed-ended questions. Although some qualitative researchers construct initial guiding questions, most do not formulate testable hypotheses (Hemmings, 2006). As critical enquiry, feminist research accesses the meanings and contexts of people's lives by asking them to describe their experiences so that oppression is unveiled and social norms challenged (Fossey et al., 2002). In this way, feminist research opens doors to new ways of seeing social issues. Simultaneously, when we reflect on our own practice we consider how women open doors for themselves through interaction with us as researchers. As researchers we reach for ways that assist women to tell their stories and reflect. As found in prior studies the thoughtful construction of research is designed to help participants feel respected and valued (Curtis et al., 2004; Daley, 2012). In this way, caring relationships take precedence and researchers are responsive to individual participants (Daley, 2012). We do not claim that only social workers can do this work as feminist research is based on principles that honour women but as feminist researchers we put our social work knowledge and skills to good use. Namely, we listen empathetically using nonverbal expression to convey care and compassion; we are comfortable with emotional responses, and well practiced at dealing with trauma. Confidentiality and transparency on our part is important and we bring honesty and a high regard for women's courage to sharing their experiences. As with social work, practice skills in building relationships with others facilitates the ability to communicate fully and, in research, helps participants to lead the research into areas important to them and hence opens doors that are of value. As noted by Davison (2004) ‘narrative methods have a natural synergy with the training and process of professional practice’ (p. 380).

As experienced social workers we are conscious of power differentials and the need to reduce the difference in power between worker and client. In interviews, we are holding the stories and emotions and we understand that this is emotional work for both participants and researchers (Davison, 2004). We never discount emotions as we affirm that: ‘a critical feminist perspective uses critical enquiry and reflection on social injustice by way of gender analysis, to transform, and not simply explain the social order’ (Ackerly and True, 2010: 2). Coming from this perspective, we invite women to see themselves in context and examine context. Our knowledge of the social contexts of domestic violence, women's rights as human rights, and social justice issues informed by social work are brought to research design and our interactions with participants.

In researching sensitive issues such as domestic violence we need to continually think about ways to reduce the potential for harm; however, at the same time not become consumed with dominant discourses about women who have experienced violence and abuse as ‘damaged’, ‘on the edge’ or ‘easily manipulated’; which can be constructed in formal ethics processes and contexts (O'Dell, 2003). Engagement with only these discourses does not allow alternative discourses to be noticed. We argue, like Corbin and Morse (2003), that assumptions that all interviews are potentially harmful take away participant agency and control over what is said, how it is said, or if anything is said at all about a topic. It is not unusual for people to be overcome by grief when talking about sensitive topics during interviews. Being overly concerned about potential risks of re-traumatization can imply that distress aroused by talking to the researcher is greater than that experienced when talking about the same topic to family or friends (Corbin and Morse, 2003). Yet, as social workers we build rapport, hear and contain emotions and are empathetic while asking difficult questions and hearing difficult answers.

This article focuses on studies undertaken in Australia and it would be useful to build on our perceptions through research in other countries and contexts. Similarly, further research exploring women's views of the costs and risks of participating in research, and their ideas for managing risks, would be valuable.

Conclusion

In this article, we aim to show that research being ‘beneficial’ to women who have experienced abuse is an alternative discourse to research being ‘harmful’. Research has demonstrated that collaborative relationships in the interviewing process have a particular value for participants because the researcher is interested in hearing the story in ways that are different from family and friends or counsellors (Dickson-Swift et al., 2006; Johnson and Clarke, 2003). The opportunity to tell a researcher your story can have a cathartic affect and often validates the experiences of the participant (Dickson-Swift et al., 2006). Our research concerns women who have endured domestic violence but the same may apply to anyone who has endured trauma, whether emotional or physical. As sensitive research addresses some of society's most pressing social issues and policy questions it is vital that we facilitate its conduct as opposed to its discouragement. Lack of understanding generates misunderstandings that can cause researchers to abandon challenging inquiries in favour of more innocuous studies in order to minimize the danger of risk averse ethics committee reviews (Hemmings, 2006). If we, as feminist qualitative researchers, abandoned our research into violence and abuse what does this mean for women's experiences of abuse and their potential contribution to knowledge building in this field?

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.

References

Ackerly

True

(2010) Doing Feminist Research in Political and Social Science, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Allen

(2009) ‘Caught in the act’: Ethics committee review and researching the sexual culture of schools. Qualitative Research 9(4): 395–410.

Alty

Rodham

(1998) The ouch! factor: Problems in conduction sensitive research. Qualitative Health Research 8: 275–282.

Birch

Miller

(2000) Inviting intimacy: The interview as therapeutic opportunity. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 3(3): 198–202.

Buchanan

(2015) Touching on emotions: Using clay work in a context of relational empowerment to investigate sensitive issues. In: Bryant

(ed.) Critical and Creative Research Methodologies in Social Work, Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, pp. 189–203.

Buchanan

Power

Verity

(2013) Domestic violence and the place of fear in mother/baby relationships: “What was I afraid of ?: Of making it worse”. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 28(9): 1817–1838.

Buchanan

Power

Verity

(2014) The effects of domestic violence on the formation of relationships between women and their babies: “I was too busy protecting my baby to attach”. Journal of Family Violence 29(7): 713–724.

Buchanan

Wendt

Moulding

(2015) Growing up with domestic violence: What does protectiveness mean?. Qualitative Social Work 14(3): 399–415.

Campbell

(2002) Emotionality Involved: The Impact of Researching Rape, New York: Routledge.

10.

Campbell

Adams

Wasco

et al. (2010) “What has it been like for you to talk with me today?”: The impact of participating in interview research on rape survivors. Violence Against Women 16(1): 60–83.

11.

Campbell

Wasco

(2000) Feminist approaches to social science: Epistemological and methodological tenets. American Journal of Community Psychology 28(6): 733–791.

12.

Corbin

Morse

(2003) The unstructured interactive interview: Issues of reciprocity and risks when dealing with sensitive topics. Qualitative Inquiry 9: 335–354.

13.

Curtis

Roberts

Copperman

et al. (2004) ‘How come I don't get asked no questions?’ Researching ‘hard to reach’children and teenagers. Child & Family Social Work 9(2): 167–175.

14.

Daley

(2012) Gathering sensitive stories: Using care theory to guide ethical decision-making in research interviews with young people. Youth Studies Australia 31(3): 27.

15.

Davison

(2004) Dilemnas in research: Issues of vulnerability and disempowerment for the social worker/researcher. Journal of Social Work Practice 18(3): 379–393.

16.

D'cruz

Jones

(2004) Social Work Research, London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

17.

Dickson-Swift

James

Kippen

et al. (2006) Blurring boundaries in qualitative health research on sensitive topics. Qualitative Health Research 16(6): 853–871.

18.

Fossey

Harvey

McDermott

et al. (2002) Understanding and evaluating qualitative research. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 36(6): 717–732.

19.

Griffin

Resick

Waldrop

et al. (2003) Participation in trauma research: Is there evidence of harm?. Journal of Traumatic Stress 16(3): 221–227.

20.

Hemmings

(2006) Great ethical divides: Bridging the gap between institutional review boards and researchers. Educational Researcher 35: 12–18.

21.

Holland

(2007) The epistemological bias of ethics review: Constraining mental health research. Qualitative Inquiry 13(6): 895–913.

22.

Howe

Dougherty

(1993) Ethics, institutional review boards, and the changing face of educational research. Educational Researcher 22(9): 16–21.

23.

Johnson

Clarke

(2003) Collecting sensitive data: The impact on researchers. Qualitative Health Research 13: 421–434.

24.

Klein

(2012) Responding to Intimate Violence Against Women: The Role of Informal Networks, New York: Cambridge University Press.

25.

Lee

(1993) Doing Research on Sensitive Topics, London: Sage.

26.

Lee

Renzetti

(1990) The problems of researching sensitive topics: An overview and introduction. American Behavioural Scientist 33: 510–528.

27.

Lee-Treweek

Linkogle

(2000) Danger in the Field: Risk and Ethics in Social Research, London: Routledge.

28.

Liamputtong

(2006) Researching the Vulnerable: A Guide to Sensitive Research Methods, Sage.

29.

Liamputtong

Ezzy

(2005) Qualitative Research Methods, 2nd ed. South Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

30.

McClain

Amar

(2013) Female survivors of child sexual abuse: Finding voice through research participation. Issues in Mental Health Nursing 34: 482–487.

31.

McCosker

Barnard

Gerber

(2001) Undertaking sensitive research: Issues and strategies for meeting the safety needs of all participants. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research 2(1):. Available http://nbnresolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0101220.

32.

McDermott

(1996) Social work research: Debating the boundaries. Australian Social Work 49(1): 5–10.

33.

McLellan

(2010) Unspeakable: A Feminist Ethic of Speech, Townsville, Queensland: Otherwise Publications.

34.

O'Dell

(2003) The “harm story” in childhood sexual abuse: Contested understandings, disputed knowledges. In: Warner

Reavey (eds) New Feminist Stories of Child Sexual Abuse: Sexual Scripts and Dangerous Dialogues, London: Routledge, pp. 131–147.

35.

Roof

(2007) Authority and representation in feminist research. In: Hesse-Biber

(ed.) Handbook of Feminist Research: Theory and Praxis, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

36.

Rubin

Babbie

(2016) Empowerment Series: Research Methods for Social Work, Cengage Learning.

37.

Sikweyiya

Jewkes

(2012) Perceptions and experiences of research participants on gender-based violence community based survey: Implications for ethical guidelines. PLoS One 7(4): e35495.

38.

Wendt

(2009) Domestic Violence in Rural Australia, Annadale, NSW: The Federation Press.

39.

Wendt

Buchanan

Moulding

(2015) Mothering and domestic violence: Understanding maternal protectiveness within gender power relations. Affilia: The Journal of Women and Social Work 30(4): 533–545.

40.

Wendt

Zannettino

(2015) Domestic Violence in Diverse Contexts, London: Routledge.

41.

World Health Organization (2005) WHO Multi-Country Study on Women's Health and Domestic Violence Against Women: Initial Results of Prevelance, Health Outcomes and Women's Responses, Geneva: World Health Organization.