On the Structural Conditions Shaping Implementation of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ)-Inclusive Practices Within Intimate Partner Services in Australia

Dados Bibliográficos

ID6435523
AutoresGene Lim (0000-0001-9083-8883, La Trobe University, autor correspondente), Stephanie Lusby (0000-0002-4080-9520, La Trobe University, autor correspondente), Marina Carman (0000-0002-3697-3539, La Trobe University, autor correspondente), Amanda Bourne (0000-0001-5299-8835, La Trobe University, autor correspondente)
Ano2024
Volume40
Fascículo8
Páginas1511-1518
Data de publicação2024-02-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoJournal of Family Violence (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0885-7482 • E-ISSN: 1573-2851
EditoraSpringer Science+Business Media (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1007/s10896-023-00629-0
OpenAlexW4392269374
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas3
Referências citadas33

Purpose IPV constitutes a serious health concern for LGBTQ populations within Australia, yet inclusive service provision remains sparsely and unevenly accessible to victim-survivors. While poor availability and accessibility of inclusive services is widely recognized as an issue facing LGBTQ victim-survivors, few researchers have examined the structural or systemic basis of this problem. The current piece seeks to explore the structural conditions obstructing inclusive service provision to LGBTQ victim-survivors, from the perspective of service providers. Method N = 19 interviews were conducted with N = 21 key personnel with affiliations to a variety of: (i) general population service organizations, (ii) community-led service organizations and (ii) advisory or convening groups. Interviews explored the structural conditions of the IPV service sector, focusing on barriers and enablers to implementing inclusive service provision for LGBTQ populations. Results Three broad factors that obstructed or curtailed inclusive service implementation were identified. These were namely: (i) resistance from both internal and external sources around inclusive practice, (ii) accommodating keeping demands in resource constrained contexts, and (ii) political will and LGBTQ visibility within official policy. Responses to these challenges on the organizational level were sometimes sufficient to meaningfully – though only partially – ameliorate these factors, but seldom addressed the structural conditions that necessitate such responses. Conclusion Inclusive service provision is a crucial element of victim-survivor recovery. The sporadic accessibility of such services within Australia can be attributed to several core features of sector and policy landscapes, which demand a significant degree of inter-organizational collaboration and collective advocacy to overcome

Heteronormativity · Homosexuality · Legal psychology · Lesbian · Queer · Sexual minority · Sociology · Transgender · Gender Studies · LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy · Marriage and Sexual Relationships · Psychology · Reproductive Health and Technologies · Social Psychology