Lindhorst Taryn, Padgett Julianna D
University of Washington.
Soc Serv Rev. 2005 Sep;79(3):405-429. doi: 10.1086/430891.
This research uses analysis of qualitative interviews with 10 battered welfare clients and 15 frontline welfare workers to examine the implementation of the Family Violence Option (FVO) under welfare reform. States adopting the FVO agree to screen for domestic violence, refer identified victims to community resources, and waive program requirements that would endanger the women or with which they are unable to comply. The analyses find that none of the 10 clients in this study received these services. This lack of services reflects four critical disjunctures between the formal policy and the policy experienced by the clients. It also reveals several more basic structural factors that provide conflicting mandates to frontline workers. Frontline workers' discretionary behaviors enforce core rules related to welfare eligibility and reduce welfare caseloads but do not provide violencerelated services to victims.
本研究通过对10名受虐福利受助者和15名一线福利工作者进行定性访谈分析，来考察福利改革背景下家庭暴力选项（FVO）的实施情况。采用FVO的州同意筛查家庭暴力情况，将确认的受害者转介至社区资源，并免除那些会危及妇女安全或她们无法遵守的项目要求。分析发现，本研究中的10名受助者均未获得这些服务。服务的缺失反映出正式政策与受助者实际体验到的政策之间存在四个关键脱节。这也揭示了几个更基本的结构性因素，这些因素给一线工作者带来了相互冲突的指令。一线工作者的自由裁量行为执行了与福利资格相关的核心规定并减少了福利案件量，但并未向受害者提供与暴力相关的服务。
