Chang Judy C, Cluss Patricia A, Ranieri LeeAnn, Hawker Lynn, Buranosky Raquel, Dado Diane, McNeil Melissa, Scholle Sarah H
Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, 300 Halket Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, USA.
Womens Health Issues. 2005 Jan-Feb;15(1):21-30. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2004.08.007.
We sought to determine what women want from health care interventions for intimate partner violence (IPV) and understand why they found certain interventions useful or not useful.
We conducted interviews with 21 women who have a past or current history of intimate partner violence. Participants were given cards describing various IPV interventions and asked to perform a pile sort by placing cards into three categories ("definitely yes," "maybe," and "definitely no") indicating whether they would want that resource available. They were then asked to explain their categorizations.
The pile sort identified that the majority of participants supported informational interventions and individual counseling. Only 9 of 17, however, felt couple's counseling was a good idea with seven reporting it was definitely not useful. Half wanted help with substance use and treatment for depression. Interventions not well regarded included "Receiving a follow-up telephone call from the doctor's office/clinic" and "Go stay at shelter" with only 7 and 5 of the 21 women placing these cards in the "definitely yes" pile. "Health provider reporting to police" was the intervention most often placed in the "definitely no" pile, with 9 of 19 women doing so. The women described several elements that affected their likelihood of using particular IPV interventions. One theme related stages of "readiness" for change. Another theme dealt with the complexity of many women's lives. Interventions that could accommodate various stages of "readiness" and helped address concomitant issues were deemed more useful. Characteristics of such interventions included: 1) not requiring disclosure or identification as IPV victims, 2) presenting multiple options, and 3) preserving respect for autonomy.
Women who had experienced IPV described not only what they wanted from IPV interventions but how they wished to receive these services and why they would chose to use certain resources. They advised providing a variety of options to allow individualizing according to different needs and readiness to seek help. They emphasized interventions that protected safety, privacy, and autonomy.
我们试图确定女性对于亲密伴侣暴力(IPV)医疗保健干预措施的期望,并了解她们认为某些干预措施有用或无用的原因。
我们对21名有过亲密伴侣暴力过往史或当前仍受其影响的女性进行了访谈。参与者会收到描述各种IPV干预措施的卡片,并被要求通过将卡片分为三类(“肯定是”、“可能是”和“肯定不是”)来进行分类,以表明她们是否希望获得该资源。然后,她们被要求解释自己的分类。
分类结果显示,大多数参与者支持信息干预和个体咨询。然而,在17名参与者中,只有9人认为夫妻咨询是个好主意,7人表示这绝对没用。一半的人希望在药物使用和抑郁症治疗方面得到帮助。不受欢迎的干预措施包括“接到医生办公室/诊所的随访电话”和“去庇护所居住”,在21名女性中,只有7人和5人将这些卡片放入“肯定是”类别中。“医疗服务提供者向警方报告”是最常被放入“肯定不是”类别的干预措施,19名女性中有9人这样做。这些女性描述了几个影响她们使用特定IPV干预措施可能性的因素。一个主题涉及改变的“准备就绪”阶段。另一个主题涉及许多女性生活的复杂性。能够适应“准备就绪”的不同阶段并有助于解决相关问题的干预措施被认为更有用。此类干预措施的特点包括:1)不需要披露或被认定为IPV受害者,2)提供多种选择,3)尊重自主权。
经历过IPV的女性不仅描述了她们对IPV干预措施的期望,还描述了她们希望如何获得这些服务以及为什么会选择使用某些资源。她们建议提供多种选择,以便根据不同需求和寻求帮助的准备程度进行个性化定制。她们强调了保护安全、隐私和自主权的干预措施。