Clare E.B. Cannon, Regardt Ferreira, Fredrick Buttell and Allyson O'Connor
Few studies investigating disaster have examined the risks associated with surviving both disaster and intimate partner violence (IPV). IPV is psychological or physical abuse in a…
Abstract
Purpose
Few studies investigating disaster have examined the risks associated with surviving both disaster and intimate partner violence (IPV). IPV is psychological or physical abuse in a personal relationship. Using an intersectional approach, the purpose of this study is to investigate contributions to and differences in perceived stress and personal resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic among a sample of predominantly female-identified IPV survivors (n = 41) to examine risks associated with this vulnerable population during disaster.
Design/methodology/approach
Using a structured interview guide, IPV survivors were interviewed regarding their perceived stress (i.e. perceived stress scale), personal resilience, (i.e. Connor Davidson Resilience Scale), type of violence experienced (i.e. physical violence), COVID-19-related stressors (i.e. loss of income due to the pandemic) and relevant socio-demographic characteristics (i.e. race).
Findings
These interviews indicate that participants exhibited low levels of resilience and a moderate amount of stress exposure highlighting risk factors associated with experiencing personal violence during disaster.
Originality/value
At the height of their need for support and assistance, the disaster generated additional rent and nutritional stress compounding the pressures violence survivors face. These findings suggest those who are socially vulnerable due to violence need structural support services to cope with disaster and violence-related stresses.
Details
Keywords
This paper presents the theory of the global environmental system to explain the different climate change regimes emerging from advanced industrialized nations. Using data…
Abstract
This paper presents the theory of the global environmental system to explain the different climate change regimes emerging from advanced industrialized nations. Using data collected regarding the formation of domestic climate change regimes in the United States, Japan, and the Netherlands, the specifics of the theory are outlined. I begin by analyzing the expectations of some of the more prominent sociological theories about the society‐environment relationship in the advanced world finding that they do not explain the disparate responses to the regulation of greenhouse gases in these countries. The theory of the global environmental system is proposed as an alternative to the rather extreme expectations of the sociological literature on society/environment relationships. Through this proposed theory, we can better understand successful cases of global climate change regimes within the context of the interrelations among domestic and international actors.