A systematic review on LGBTIQ Intimate Partner Violence from a Western perspective

Abstract

<jats:p>Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) as experienced by minority populations is poorly understood. Within the Western world, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex, and Queer or Questioning LGBTIQ population is one such group which suffers from misrepresentations and misunderstandings. In Western nations, IPV is primarily constructed as perpetrated by men and experienced by women. However, for the LGBTIQ population, this dichotomous view of IPV is inaccurate and invalidating. A systematic review was conducted to investigate the level of LGBTIQ inclusivity within IPV discourses in the Western world as discussed in peer reviewed literature. In particular, the review sought to understand how media, advocacy, policy, and legislation shape LGBTIQ IPV experiences and resulting discourses. The literature search was conducted between June 2018 and January 2019. The search included five electronic databases in psychology, health, and social sciences. Of the 206 articles identified by the search, 21 were reviewed. The review analyzed literature using a thematic approach. Eight key themes emerged, indicating media, legislation, policy, and advocacy are not entirely inclusive concerning LGBTIQ IPV. The review found that pervasive attitudes like heterosexism, cissexism, homophobia, transphobia, and biphobia reinforce institutional barriers and limited LGBTIQ IPV reporting. In addition, the review found low service and provider competency levels, and more broadly, the research was limited. It is likely that heteronormative frameworks and discourses mean many aspects of LGBTIQ IPV are still under-researched. Without a more robust inclusion of diversity in discourses on IPV, services and supports for LGBTIQ people will continue to be limited and based on heteronormative frameworks of victimhood.</jats:p>

Guide to providing culturally competent behavioral health services via telehealth.

“…In addition, IPV also exists in the LGBTQ+ community in the context of same-sex or queer relationships and for those who identify outside of the gender binary system of “male” and “female.” Thus, finding the most accurate way to describe IPV in the LGBTQ+ populations can become difficult because IPV language lacks neutrality and exists embedded with heterosexual norms (Ristock, 2005; Workman & Dune, 2019). Practitioners should remain aware that IPV within LGBTQ+ relationships includes the same forms of domestic violence, physical, emotional, and psychological abuse that occurs among heterosexual couples.…”

LGBTIQ CALD People’s Experiences of Intimate Partner Violence: A Systematic Literature Review

“…It is important to note that some forms of IPV are unique to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer or questioning (LGBTIQ) populations. LGBTIQ IPV may include withholding HIV medication or knowingly exposing their partner to HIV, outing a person, homophobia, biphobia, transphobia and heterosexism [ 2 , 3 ]. These distinctive types of abuse are unique and challenging to identify and therefore require targeted interventions to address.…”

“…Current policy, advocacy and media reporting within Australia focuses on DV and FV [ 3 ]. These reports centre on White, cisgender, heterosexual women’s victimised experiences that ultimately shape contemporary societal understandings of violence.…”

“…These reports centre on White, cisgender, heterosexual women’s victimised experiences that ultimately shape contemporary societal understandings of violence. Further, many groups remain overlooked, notably the LGBTIQ community [ 3 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Qualitative understandings of victims’ experiences are often missing in the current policy, advocacy, and media reporting from the LGBTIQ perspective.…”

“…For example, a Black, transgender woman with a disability and low education level may have different opportunities and outcomes from a Black woman with a disability and low education level [ 15 , 16 ]. Notably, people who have marginalised identities are more likely to have poorer health, wellbeing and criminal justice outcomes as they are less represented in policy, legislation and across all forms of media [ 3 , 8 ]. As such, the nexus of LGBTIQ- and culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD)-identity requires investigation given the compounded challenges this group faces.…”