The Experience of Latina Victims of Domestic Violence in Seeking Support Services.

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study

Latina is the feminine form of the word, so for this study the term, Latina was

used to refer to women of Latin descent. Intimate partner violence (IPV), commonly

known as domestic violence, specifically against Latinas, constitutes a major concern.

Compared with their non-Latina counterparts, Latinas are disproportionately affected by

the occurrence and aftermath of domestic violence (Sabina, Cuevas, & Zadnick, 2015).

Kulkarni, Racine, and Ramos (2012) emphasized the need for researchers to remain

proactive with regard to investigating the effect of cultural perceptions related to

domestic violence and the role of social networks in facilitating Latina victims of

domestic violence leaving abusive relationships. The findings of this study might lead to

positive social change by providing to psychologists, antidomestic violence advocates,

policy makers and other mental and health care professionals additional insights about

factors that influence the decisions of Latina victims of domestic violence to seek support

services after experiencing domestic violence and how to better empower these women

In this chapter, I discuss the following content: (a) background, (b) problem

statement, (c) purpose of the study, (d) research question, (e) theoretical framework, (f)

nature of the study, (g) definitions, (h) assumptions, (i) scope and delimitations, (j)

limitations, and (k) significance of the study. There is a summary at the end of this

chapter.

Background

Domestic violence against women constitutes a major social problem. Various

studies found that compared with other ethnic groups, domestic violence rates are greater

for Latinas (Black et al., 2011). Curvas, Sabina, and Milloshi (2012) indicated that 53.6%

of Latinas who were surveyed experienced at least one type of domestic violence.

Brabeck (2008) and Yashioka and Choi (2005) agreed that one of the key challenges for

Latina victims of domestic violence is that they are more likely to reside in communities

that lack adequate resources.

Flicker et al. (2011) maintained that the reluctance of Latina victims of domestic

violence to seek support services is to a great extent the result of their cultural beliefs in

terms of privacy. Perilla, Serrata, Weinberg, and Lippy (2012) affirmed that diversity

within the Latino community and the effects of many problems Latino groups encounter

make it difficult for service providers to competently help these populations. Previous

studies revealed numerous and interconnected impediments that Latina victims of

domestic violence encounter when determining to seek help (Bhuyan & Velagapudi,

2013).

Similarly, Marrs Fuchsel, Murphy, and Dufresne (2012) posited that a variety of

obstacles such as cultural expectations, economic and cultural dependency prevent

victims from disclosing to informal or formal support networks. Ahrens, Isas, Rios-

Mandel, and Lopez (2010) argued that in addition to cultural beliefs, gender role

ideologies and traditional beliefs regarding marriage as well as respect for authority play

a significant role on discouraging Latina victims of domestic violence from seeking help.

Gonzalez-Guardia et al. (2012) asserted that machismo and marianismo, which promote

traditional gender roles within the Latino community, are major factors engendering

various stressors related to immigration and acculturation process, including the

obligation not to bring shame upon the family.

Tracy and Rosano (2013) argued that maintaining closed relationship with both

immediate and extended family members, including prioritizing family‘s interests instead

of individual ones, constitutes the key value of familismo. Ingram (2007) posited that

another major challenge for Latina victims of domestic violence is that despite their

immigration status, language barriers, and lack of awareness regarding available

resources, their status as members of an ethnic minority group may contribute not only to

their victimization, but also to their resistance with regard to seeking help. Falconier et al.

(2013) found that there is a need to expand domestic violence research on Latina victims

who have never contacted any type of advocacy service to understand the experiences

that influences their decisions.

In my review of the research literature, I did not find studies about the lived

experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence who do not seek support services. I

filled this gap in the literature through this phenomenological study. This study might

lead to the discovery of strategies that antidomestic violence agencies can use to facilitate

Latina victims of domestic violence to seek support services. In addition, information

related to Latina victims of domestic who do not seek support services can play a

significant role in raising awareness of this issue to mental health professionals providing

services to victims of domestic violence, particularly Latinas and developing appropriate

treatment interventions for these women. Finally, the results might augment the

information accessible about Latina victims of domestic violence who do not seek

support services.

Problem Statement

Studies have reported that lifetime physical IPV among Latinas range between

19.5 and 35.2% (Black et al., 2011). Truman, Langton, and Planty (2013) contended that

among serious violent crime such as domestic violence, including crime in which

weapons and or/injury are involved, the rate is higher within the Latino population than

the Caucasian population. Meanwhile, Dichter and Gelles (2012) maintained that the

majority of women victims of domestic violence do not solicit formal social services.

Mookeriee, Cerulli, Fernandez, and Chin (2015) maintained that compared with

their White and African American counterparts, the rate of violence against Latinas is

higher. However, among the many challenges for Latina victims of domestic violence is

their reluctance to seek help. Even though previous studies have provided some

explanations about women victims of domestic violence and their help-seeking

behaviors, a gap in the research exists about the lived experience of Latina victims of

domestic violence who do not to seek support services.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to explore the factors that

influence the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence whether to seek support

services after experiencing domestic violence. A primary focus of this study was to

describe the perceptions of Latina victims of domestic violence about their decision not

to seek support services. The lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in

their decisions not to seek help from antidomestic violence agencies were captured

through the use of semistructured interviews.

Research questions

The central research question that was explored in this study was:

What are the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking

help from antidomestic violence agencies? A secondary question was: How do Latina

victims of domestic violence describe reasons whether or not to seek support services?

Theoretical Framework of the Study

Intersectionality theory provided a framework for understanding why Latina

women may not seek help when involved in domestic violence. Introduced in 1989 by

Crenshaw, intersectionality is a methodology of investigating the relationships among

multiple aspects and modalities of social relationships and subject formations (McCall,

2005). The core issue for intersectionality theory is the understanding that women

experience oppression in varying orders and degrees of potency (Cho, Crenshaw, &

McCall, 2013).

The point remains that while all women potentially experience oppression based

on gender, women are differentially oppressed by the varied intersections of other

systems of oppression and discrimination. For instance, intersectionality includes various

systems of power and discrimination such as sexuality, ethnicity, culture, socioeconomic

status and ability and is concerned with the manners in which constructed identities

interface to form numerous selves or aspects of individuals (Cramer & Plummer, 2009).

Jones and McEwen (2000) and Abe, Jones, and McEwen (2007) affirmed that

intersectionality is compatible with the perspective of multiple identities, which entails

that identities such as gender, race and class are interconnected. Additionally, the

application of intersectionality theory (Veenstra & Patterson, 2016) played a significant

role in determining whether these women‘s language, cultural identity, religious beliefs,

gender, sex, socioeconomic status, and immigration status contribute to their decision to

not seek help from any antidomestic violence agency. In addition, structural violence was

used as a second theory to frame this study. Structural violence constitutes a thorough

framework to describe the system through which social forces such as poverty, language

barriers, economic, immigration status and gender inequity become integrated as

individual experiences and access to social services (Galtung, 1990).

A structural violence framework concedes and examines intersecting inequalities

in the concealment of human capacity and can be a helpful instrument in structuring an

intersectional examination of the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence not to

seek help when involved in domestic violence (Qureshi, 2013). Therefore, an

understanding of whether or not all of the potential factors overlap was imperative. The

failure to simultaneously focus on all these factors might lead to a lack of understanding

of the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence who do not to seek help from any

antidomestic violence agency. A more detailed explanation of intersectionality theory and

structural violence theory is in Chapter 2.

Nature of the Study

The nature of this study was a phenomenological approach. I applied

transcendental phenomenology because the purpose was to gain an in-depth

understanding of the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence who may

not seek help from antidomestic violence agencies. Greenhalgh and Taylor (1997)

explained that phenomenological methodology is an appropriate means of investigating

the thoughts and perceptions that shape individuals‘ behaviors. Therefore, I used a

phenomenological approach to obtain the core of the experience of Latina victims of

domestic violence who do not seek support services.

Through this study, I attempted to gain the essence and meanings of these

women‘s experiences about their decision not to seek support services. I recruited a

purposive sample of 8 Latina victims of domestic violence who met the inclusion criteria

from churches in the state of New York. I examined the lived experiences of Latina

victims of domestic violence using semistructured interviews, which was composed of

open-ended questions.

The interviews lasted approximately 60 minutes and I recorded them. Participants

had the option to stop at any time during the interview process. This method of

interviewing led to detailed qualitative descriptions of these women‘s lived experiences.

In order to analyze the data, a transcendental phenomenological method was used

(Moustakas, 1994). Following Moustakas‘s (1994) steps, the horizons and invariant

constituents were identified and clustered; the invariant constituents were grouped into

themes and a composite description was developed reflecting the essence of Latina

victims of domestic violence who do not seek support services.

Definitions

In this study, the following key terms were crucial for better apprehension.

Domestic violence. Domestic violence is defined as a pattern of assaultive and

coercive behaviors including physical, sexual, and psychological attacks, as well as

economic coercion that adults or adolescents use against their intimate partners

(Schechter & Ganley, 1995).

Gender. In this study, the term gender is in conformity with the socially

constructed definition, which entails either being a woman or a man (Lerner, 1986).

Help-seeking. The disclosure of victimization to receive some assistance (Mays,

Caldwell, & Jackson, 1996). In this study, the concept of support services is defined as

available community agencies from which victims of domestic violence can receive

psychological and emotional help, law enforcement agencies such as police stations

where victims can go to seek protection and community legal services.

Latino/a. The U.S. Bureau of Justice defines Latino/a as ―individuals who

consider themselves as Mexican American, Chicano, Mexican, Mexicano, Puerto-Rican,

Cuban, Central American, South American, as well as people who come from other

Latino cultures regardless of care‖ (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008). Latina is the feminine

form of the word so for this study the term Latina will be used to refer to women of Latin

descent.

Lived experiences. Lived experience means the individual apprehension of a

group of people involving in a distinct and complicated phenomenon (Moustakas, 1994).

Machismo. The masculine force, which one way or the other drives all masculine

behaviors (Andrade, 1992).

Victims. For the purpose of this study, this refers to those who have experience

domestic violence (Bourke, 2007).

Assumptions

The assumption was that Latina women victims of domestic violence who may

not seeking support services and would honestly answer interview questions about this

issue. It was anticipated that the use of semistructured interviews was adequate to

understand the lived experience of the participants. It was also assumed that participants

would provide rich descriptive data about their lived experiences of seeking services after

instances of domestic violence.

Scope and Delimitations

The lived experience of Latina victims of domestic violence who may not seek

support services was the focus of this study. The aim of this study was to explore factors

that may contribute to their decision not to seek support services. A purposeful sample of

eight to 10 self-identified Latina victims of domestic violence, 21 years old and older;

living in the state of New York; English speaking and who experienced domestic

violence in a relationship within the past 2 years were interviewed. A delimitation of this

study was that the findings of the study were not expected to be generalizable to all

Latina victims of domestic violence or to the larger population of women who have

experienced domestic violence. Aanstoos (1984) maintained that the focus of

phenomenological research is not on making generalization of findings, but rather on the

descriptions of experience.

Limitations

This study had two major limitations that were addressed because the study

sample was restricted only to Latina victims of domestic violence and who do not obtain

support. The first limitation was about ethnicity and location. A second limitation was

that a small sample of participants was used with this phenomenological study and the

findings may only be relevant to these participants. A third limitation was that as a

woman, it is possible for me to sympathize with participants and such sympathy might

lead me to using some leading questions. Creswell (2009) maintained that for researchers

to report the experiences of participants correctly, it is important not to inflict biases into

the study data and analysis. I used bracketing to address any personal bias by making sure

that I gathered the data without any preconceived attitudes, beliefs or opinions of

participants‘ experiences.

Significance

The significance of this phenomenological study is that it will make an original

contribution to the research literature by helping to fill the gap about Latinas who are

victims of domestic violence yet do not seek support services. The potential findings of

this study could lead to positive social change by creating awareness of these women‘s

views. Understanding these women‘s perceptions of domestic violence and the necessity

to address factors that may contribute to their decision not to seek support services was

imperative. This study provided a unique opportunity to listen to these women and

highlight the need for additional debate about this crucial issue.

In addition, the findings from this study might help antidomestic violence

advocates and policy makers to thoroughly understand these women‘s perceptions and

perhaps take appropriate steps to encourage all women victims of domestic violence,

particularly Latinas to seek support services. Psychologists and other mental health

professionals need to understand factors that influence these women‘s decisions not to

seek advocacy or other services, to improve outreach and services to this group

(Goodman, Fauci, Sullivan, DiGiovanni, & Wilson, 2016). Moreover, this study might

shed light on the necessity for antidomestic violence agencies to develop programs that

are more accessible to Latina victims of domestic violence.

Aldarondo and Mederos (2002) posited that the most efficient antidomestic

violence agencies that provide services to Latinas are those that strongly focus on

reaching out and engaging women which lead them to trust institutions. Kulkarni et al.

(2012) highlighted the need for researchers to remain proactive about investigating the

effect of cultural perceptions related to domestic violence and the role of social networks

in facilitating Latina victims of domestic violence leaving abusive relationships. In terms

of positive social change, the result of this study might play a fundamental role in

improving services provided by antidomestic violence agencies.

Summary

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to explore the factors that

influence the decisions of Latina victims of domestic violence whether to seek support

services after experiencing domestic violence. This phenomenological study helped fill

the gap in the research literature to understand this phenomenon. The theoretical

framework that guided this study is intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1989). In terms of

data collection and analysis, I used semistructured interviews to collect rich data from the

participants. This data, which I transcribed verbatim, led to a textural and structural

description of participants‘ lived experiences that engendered a greater understanding of

their common experiences (Moustakas, 1994).

The findings of this study provided additional insights regarding the lived

experience of Latina victims of domestic violence who may not seek support services. In

Chapter 2, I present a review of the literature regarding the theoretical framework and

key concepts such as culture, family, language barriers, immigration status, and gender

roles, which may influence the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence when

seeking support services.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to explore the factors that

influence the decision among Latina victims of domestic violence of whether to seek

support services after experiencing domestic violence. The existing literature is replete

with research studies regarding domestic violence against women of various ethnicities,

including their help seeking behaviors (Enosh, Leshem & Buchbinder, 2016). The current

literature also shows that there is limited research regarding the decision of Latina

victims of domestic violence not to seek help (Rodriguez et al., 2018). There is a need for

ongoing research to investigate this understudied phenomenon.

In this chapter, I present a review of the literature related to Latina victims of

domestic violence who do not seek help. Reina, Maldonado, and Lohman (2013)

contended that Latina victims of domestic violence seem to be less apt to seek either

formal or informal help. Aysa-Lastra, Rojas, Dillon, Duan, and De La Rosa (2012)

posited that domestic violence constitutes a determined strategy purposely used by family

members to harm the victim both physically and or psychologically. Breiding et al.

(2014) found that, in the United States, one in three Latinas have experienced domestic

violence at some point in their lives. Therefore, it is important to highlight various factors

that contribute to this problem.

Mookerjee et al. (2015) argued that there is a lack of understanding regarding the

impact of sociocultural factors on women‘s experiences of domestic violence, including

how they manage to cope with it. Reina et al. (2013) contended that although there is a

pattern within the contemporary literature for domestic violence among various

immigrant communities to be linked to culture, little attention has been given to how the

entrenchment of culture and social structure determines immigrants‘ life conditions and

struggles. Therefore, reviewing the content of the literature regarding this entrenchment

was vital.

A review of research literature by Cheng and Lo (2016) indicated that domestic

violence is a social problem and illuminated how the intersection of various factors, such

as family, culture, language, immigration status, education, acculturation, gender roles,

formal and informal help-seeking behaviors, machismo, and domestic violence programs

may contribute to the reluctance of Latina victims of domestic violence to seek help

Existing research studies failed to address factors influencing the decision of Latina

victims of domestic violence not to seek help (Reina et al., 2013). Exploring the

experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence who do not seek help facilitated an

understanding of sociocultural factors that influence women‘s decisions and helped fill

this gap in the literature. Perilla et al. (2012) argued that the perpetuation of power

unbalance that continues to support the subordination of women to men is the root of

physical, emotional, and sexual abuse that characterize domestic violence. To better

understand this argument, intersectionality theory by Crenshaw (1989) and structural

violence theory by Galtung (1990) were the theoretical framework for this study.

Intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1989) and structural violence theory (Galtung,

1990) were merged to form the theoretical framework to understand how sociocultural

factors such as culture, formal and informal help seeking, machismo and marianismo,

family involvement, immigration, domestic violence programs, gender roles, and

acculturation influence women‘s decisions. Intersectionality and structural theories,

which constitute the theoretical framework, were originally developed to offer insights on

a different but related phenomenon, oppression against women, primarily African

Americans in the United States. Despite its original intent, this theoretical framework can

provide a lens to explore the experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence who do

not seek help.

I present information about the theoretical framework with detailed analysis of its

two major components. I discussed key concepts related to the problem, including issues

related to domestic violence as a social problem, help seeking and culture, formal and

informal help seeking patterns, machismo and marianismo, family involvement,

acculturation and gender roles, domestic violence program, and immigration status. A

summary and conclusion end the chapter.

Literature Search Strategy

The aim of the literature review was to provide a context for this study through

the establishment of a theoretical framework guiding the research process and the

examination of relevant concepts that shed light on the decision of Latina victims of

domestic violence not to seek help. Databases searched for this study included

EBSCOhost, CINAHL, SAGE Journals Online, and Taylor Francis from which a

significant number of peer-reviewed articles were published within the past 5 years.

The following list of key words and phrases were used in the literature search:

domestic violence against women, intersectionality, structural violence, structural theory,

perceptions of domestic violence, Latina victims and help seeking behaviors, Latina

victims of domestic violence and culture, Latino culture and machismo, Latina

immigrants and acculturation, domestic violence, Latinas, and immigration status,

domestic violence, Latinas, and religious beliefs, and domestic violence programs. These

terms were used to identify peer-reviewed journal articles related to the experiences of

Latina victims of domestic violence who do not seek help. Various research approaches

were used by other researchers to justify the research methodology that will be used in

this study. Each of the peer-reviewed articles was reviewed to confirm that the content

was consistent with the context and significance of this study.

Theoretical Framework

Intersectionality Theory

Intersectionality theory is used to investigate relationship and subject formation

(Crenshaw, 1989). This theory is the study of intersections between various forms or

systems of oppression such as racism, sexism, classism, colonialism, heterosexism,

ageism, and ableism (Crenshaw, 1989). With this theory, race, class, and gender interact

with each other, which often leads to multiple dimensions of disadvantage (Macionis &

Gerber, 2011). Hulko (2009) argued that intersectionality facilitates debate regarding the

personal sphere of suppression aiming to have a deeper understanding of the effect of

structural relations of dominance.

To address not only legal failures, but also rhetorical and political failures within

feminism and antiracism, intersectionality was used to draw attention to a variety of ways

that Black women were excluded from employment in different places, especially in

industrial arenas that were segregated by both gender and race (Crenshaw, 1989).

Therefore, intersectionality sheds light on various ways women of color used to be

discriminated against in the labor force. Crenshaw (1989) maintained that beyond the

intersection discrimination, the combination of race and gender policies, there was a

structured intersectional form of discrimination, which was sustained by the

discrimination of the court that prevented discrimination cases from moving forward

because these Black women had to combine two cases of action so that they could prove

to the court that they were discriminated against. Crenshaw posited that although the

court‘s excuse was about avoiding given special preference to any particular group, both

White men and women did not have to combine two cases of action for their

discrimination to be understood.

Therefore, intersectionality explains how structures make certain identities the

vehicles for vulnerability (Crenshaw, 1989). Historically, identities such as gender and

race, which are socially constructed, have been used as the means of oppression. For

example, women have been traditionally portrayed as the weaker sex, incompetent,

unintelligent; in the same way, individuals of ethnicities other than White Caucasian are

usually perceived as inferior. In this study, intersectionality theory was used to

demonstrate how the intersection of various characteristics such as immigration status,

race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status, and language barriers contribute to the decision

of Latina victims of domestic violence not to seek help.

Mohantry (1984) posited that intersectionality has established itself as a

framework outlining ideas from various groups engaged with understanding and

transforming inequalities, including those concerned with low and middle-income

countries and has been greatly applied in health systems research. Moreover, Mohantry

argued that instead of portraying a specific social group as systematically negative,

intersectionality focuses on people‘s ability to concurrently encounter and symbolize

advantages and disadvantages as various social orders merge in diverse models across

time and various places. For instance, Latinas experience domestic violence differently

because of their gender, language barriers, immigration status, and their place in the

United States social structure.

Within this context, Hulko (2009) maintained that intersectionality helps

demystifying the dynamic nature of the advantages and disadvantages that pervade health

systems and impact health, as it concentrates on the interaction of race, ethnicity,

indigeneity, gender, class, sexuality, geography, age, disability, ability, migration status,

and religion as various social categories, including the power structures that underpin

those categories at various levels. Even though the intersection of various social

inequalities remains the essential component of intersectionality theory, Nygren and

Olofsson (2014) and Ravindran (2014) argued that far from being a simple analytical

method for understanding how different social inequalities fuse, intersectionality is

viewed as an extensive philosophy underlying research and activism. In this study, I used

intersectionality as a tool to address how the intersection of multiple discriminations

might play a role in the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence not to seek help

and provide an increased understanding of how different sets of identities impact access

to rights and opportunities.

As a theoretical approach, intersectionality explains how the relationships among

various aspects and procedures of social relationships underscore the experiences of

women who not only have been marginalized, but also have been made invisible in the

dominant discussions about abused women (Kanuha, 1960). However, there is

disagreement among scholars about using gender ideology primarily as the key

explanatory model of domestic violence, as they advocated for the exploration of how

different types of inequality and oppression, such as racism, ethnocentrism, class

privilege, and heterosexism intersect with gender oppression (Sokoloff & Dupont, 2005).

Therefore, in this study, intersectionality theory provided a framework for understanding

factors that may influence the decision of Latinas not to seek help when they experience

domestic violence. The core issue for intersectionality theory is the understanding that

women experience oppression in varying orders and degrees of potency (Choo & Ferree,

2010).

Although many women potentially experience oppression based on gender,

women are, differentially oppressed by the varied intersections. Within this context,

McCall (2005) referred to intersectionality as the core theoretical foundation for studies

related to women‘s studies. Within this context, the application of intersectionality theory

played a significant role in determining whether these women‘s language, cultural

identity, religious beliefs, gender, sex, socioeconomic status, and immigration status

contributed to their decision not to seek help from any antidomestic violence agency. An

understanding of how potential factors overlap was imperative. Failure to focus on all of

these factors might lead to a lack of understanding of the decision making of Latina

victims of domestic violence who do not seek help from antidomestic violence agencies.

Structural Violence Theory

Compared with interpersonal violence, structural forms of violence are invisible

because they are located within the social, political, and economic structure of society,

while sustaining inequalities between different groups of people (Richard, 2012). In this

study, structural violence theory was useful for identifying and understanding the

interplay of potential structural factors that influence the decision of Latina victims of

domestic violence not to seek help. Although Yllo (1993) affirmed that conventional

feminism portrays violence against women as the result of socially constructed and

culturally endorsed gender inequality, Jenkins (1990) contended that structuralist theories

emphasize the need for changes within both the social structures and cultural norms and

ideologies, so that violence against women can be reduced.

However, Sokoloff and Dupont (2005) argued that although it is evident that

domestic violence against women may be justified by using culture, considering the

culture‘s role in domestic violence as an exclusively gloomy force constitutes a risk.

Galtung (1975) referred to cultural violence as the political, economic, and social

conditions of a society that prevent individuals from fulfilling their full potential in life.

The argument made by Sokoloff and Dupont is self-evident, because whenever there is

the perceived or real threat of violence in society, individuals become understandably

preoccupied with concerns regarding theirs and their family well-being to the exclusion

of thoughts about effectively fulfil their various roles in that society.

In addition to intersectionality theory, I used structural violence theory as

framework for understanding this study. Galtung (1990) argued that there is a difference

between structural violence and personal violence or direct violence, specifically because

of the indirect nature of structural violence. Richard (2012) maintained that because the

violence is established within the structure and clearly demonstrates inequalities in terms

of power and opportunities, the occurrence of interpersonal violence may be inexistent.

The contrast is that although there is a tendency within our society to condemn

domestic violence, it is likely to be normalized by the existing social structure. Therefore,

it is crucial for researchers to recognize that factors such as unemployment, starvation,

military occupation, racism, sexism, ageism, and denial of access to medical or social

services serve as an extension of cultural violence, which entails the deprivation that the

structure imposes on people who are disenfranchised by those in power (Galtung, 1990).

In agreement with Galtung, Mann and Grimes (2001) contended that for studies in the

areas of domestic violence to keep evolving, there must be a major focus on both

individual and structural examinations of race, class, and gender inequality and

marginalization in communities that are culturally diverse.

Galtung‘s (1990) argument is that although personal or direct violence is

subjective, structural violence is objective. The point remains that personal or direct and

structural violence are justified by cultural violence (Confortini, 2006). In addition,

Confortini posited that through the theory of violence, Galtung reaches out to theorists

and practitioners in the field of violence against women, by presenting them a framework

that helps exploring violence against women through a broader lens of societal violence.

Within this context, Monstesani (2015) contended that there is one relevant

United Nations Declaration, which initially offers an international statement defining

violence against women through a broader lens that look at gender, family, community,

including the state, as leading entities where gender-based violence occurs. Based on the

United Nations‘ declaration, Monstesani (2015) maintained that gender-based violence

entails any violent act, whether it injures women physically, sexually, psychologically, or

takes away women‘s freedom privately or publicly. Monstesani‘s contention is that the

rationale for the invisibility of structural violence is that it relates to institutions.

Monstesani‘s argument is that, it is more difficult to transform the system in

which the violence is embedded than to appeal to particular individual criminals who

engage in direct violence. Galtung (1990) affirmed that the way cultural violence

functions is by sustaining the visibility of the acts of violence, or at last minimizing the

nature of the violent acts. For instance, with regard to direct violence, the global or

national rate of homicide, domestic violence, or sexual assault can be empirically

verifiable, as it is open to statistical analysis, compared to structural violence in which the

focus is on the system allowing the emergence of these violent acts (Confortini, 2006).

It is important for scholars to recognize that although direct violence involves

intentionality, in structural violence, the system is independent of intentionality, which

constitutes a facet of human cognition. Galtung (1990) posited that cultural violence

portrays both direct and structural violence in a way that makes them appear to be

normal, or at least not bad. Therefore, there must not only be an understanding, but also

the creation of a system which can help identify the threat of violence.

Queseda, Hart, and Bourgeois (2011) asserted that although structural violence, as

a concept, has been mainly applied with the purpose of shedding light on oppression and

economic injustice of a particular class, cultural violence has also incorporated gender

inequality and racism as cultural factors. For example, from a structural violence

perspective, unequal access to resources is not only historically structured, but is also

frequently radicalized, gendered and socially categorized, leading to disparities in social

services (Monstesani, 2015). Austin and Kim (2000) affirmed that even though there has

not yet been a scientifically proven causal connection, it is common among feminist

researchers to link gender inequality to various other cultural roots, such as poverty.

To understand what prevents Latina victims of domestic violence from seeking

help, one should take into consideration social, political, and financial structural

inequalities, which constitute the genesis of domestic violence, access to appropriate

services, and these women‘s decision not to seek help. Galtung (1990) posited that

disparity in domestic violence programs are a form of structural violence, because

although native-born or English-speaking women victims of domestic violence have

access to services, many Latina victims of domestic violence have either limited or no

access to services, due to language barriers. Accordingly, Parson et al. (2016) argued that

the more this type of structural violence remains a normal pattern, the less noticeable are

the barriers to services.

With regard to domestic violence, although there is a common history among

White people and women of color who have been violated by men, it is important for

White women to recognize the benefits they receive simply because they are White

(Collins, 1998). Even though Gultang‘s (1990) structural violence theory plays a

significant role in terms of contextualizing domestic violence against Latinas and their

decision not to seek help, Quesada, Hart, and Bourgois (2011) maintained that there

should not be any assumption that only Latino immigrants are linked to cultural

vulnerability. People who are poor, medically uninsured, and struggling with drug and

alcohol dependency are also affected. Therefore, to better understand potential factors

influencing Latina victims of domestic violence not to seek help, I analyzed social and

structural attributes of their milieu.

Literature Review Related to Key Concepts

Domestic Violence as a Social Problem

Domestic violence constitutes a leading multifaceted health, social, criminal, and

human rights problem (Campbel, 2001; World Health Organization, 2005). Galvez,

Mankowski, and Glass (2015) explained that domestic violence is nothing but a

widespread social problem facing the United States. According to Galvez, Mankowski,

and Glass, domestic violence presents insecurity to women‘s health, links to higher

percentage of mortality, injury and disability, inadequate health care, and other health-

related repercussions.

Approximately $5.8 billion is spent every year in areas such as medical and

mental health, as well as loss of fecundity related to domestic violence (Stockman,

Hayashi, & Campbell, 2015). Cuevas, Sabina, and Milloshi (2012) posited that domestic

violence constitutes a critical phenomenon, which impacts the lives of over half of

Latinas. Accordingly, Nava, Mcfarlane, Gilroy, and Maddoux (2014) argued that while

immigrant women victims of domestic violence in the United States experience

insufficient resources, social isolation, and lack of social support, they also have to deal

with cultural, economic, and legal challenges that non-immigrant women victims of

violence do not have to address.

However, although the acts of violence against women by their partners do not

discriminate, regardless of women‘s racial and ethnical backgrounds, De Santis,

Provencio-Vasquez, Mancera, and Mata (2016) maintained that as of 2013, the number of

Hispanics in the United States accounted for approximately 50.5 million individuals.

Cuevas, Dawson, and Williams (2016) asserted that the number of Hispanic is estimated

to expand to approximately 29% of the populace by the year 2050. Black et al. (2011)

found, that compared to 43.7% of African American and 37% of Hispanic women, 34.6%

of White women have been victims of rape, domestic violence, and/or stalking.

In spite of the expansion of research in the domain of domestic violence, the

current literature lacks information about Latina victims of domestic violence who do not

to seek help from antidomestic violence agencies. Reina et al. (2013) argued that, besides

prioritizing the occurrence of domestic violence against White American women, it is

imperative for researchers to devote more resources and time investigating the occurrence

of domestic violence against minority groups, especially Latinas. The rationale remains

that as national boundaries related to ethnic diversity continue to be less defined, due to

increasing globalization, the number of Latinas in various cultural contexts keeps

increasing. Therefore, studies related to domestic violence should not be limited only to

women from ethnic majority groups. In view of this fact, it is fair to argue that additional

research investigations regarding this phenomenon will add valuable contributions to the

contemporary literature.

Falconier et al. (2013) indicated that there is an inclination among Latina victims

to seldom use formal services offered at various domestic organizations, clinics, social

service agencies, and law enforcement institutions, including the criminal justice system.

Falconier et al. also explained that lack of sensitivity towards Latino values, restricted

availability of programs in Spanish, as well as the inability of service providers to

acknowledge the role that sociohistorical contextual factors play in domestic violence

have been considered as the primary criticisms of services and domestic violence

programs. The argument made by Falconier et al. is consistent with that of Reina et al.

which asserted that there should not be disparity among women victims of domestic

violence. Instead there should equitable commitment of resources to studies related to

domestic violence against women.

The findings of a focus group conducted by Reina et al. (2013) revealed that in

addition to feelings of shame that Latina victims of domestic violence are struggling with,

inadequate Spanish speaking service providers, lack of understanding of American

cultural profundity of domestic violence against women, and limited information

regarding suitable services. For instance, Grieco et al. (2012) affirmed that when

comparing native-born Americans to various immigrant groups, first-generation

immigrant Latinos are presumably in the weakest position in terms of education, income,

household size, English proficiency, and health coverage. Since these constitute the

additional currency for upward mobility in a society, it is, therefore, understandable that

any group without these means would indeed be in extremely weak position.

Natsuaki, Chang, and Chen (2013) argued that women from ethnic minority

groups who are victims of domestic violence are vulnerable in terms of facing

tremendous cultural and structural obstacles such as lack of insurance coverage, stigma

and restricted competence with regard to speaking English. Natsuaki et al. (2013) also

affirmed that from these identified barriers emerge discrepancies in mental health

services, leading to a deferment in treatment. Similarly, Lawson and colleagues (2012)

maintained that domestic violence constitutes a disproportionate impediment for

Hispanics, Blacks, and women, because obstacles related to soliciting medical services is

a significant factor in terms of victims‘ access to appropriate help. Within this

framework, Reina et al. (2013) proposed that there should be more studies regarding

Latina victims of domestic violence who not to seek help.

Reina et al. (2013) argued that, compared to White women, Latinas are more

vulnerable to domestic violence as evidence of previous studies, particularly those

conducted during the 1990s which revealed the significance of formal and informal

networks in detecting the feasibility for undocumented Latinas to get access to

appropriate help which can facilitate them leaving their abusive partners. Given the

various factors mentioned by Falconier et al, the status of being undocumented engenders

emotions, fear, and uncertainty which constitute tremendous barriers which prevent these

women from seeking needed help. These women although being abused by their partners

often view these men as protectors.

Latina Victims of Domestic Violence and Help Seeking and Culture

Randell, Bledsoe, Shroff, and Pierce (2012) found that other people‘s

interventions usually play a crucial role in the help-seeking process of women victims of

domestic violence, although these interventions are not always successful. Ben-Goodley

and Fowler (2006) observed that Latina victims of domestic violence can seek help from

family, various kind of organizations such as human services and religious, and law

enforcement. However, Chen and Ulman (2010) contended that because of lack of

services for minority groups, only some Latina victims of domestic violence reported

positive experiences of seeking help.

Similarly, Gonzalez-Guarda, Ortega, Vasquez, and De Santis (2010) maintained

that absence of community outreach related to disenfranchised communities, especially

Immigrant Latina victims of domestic violence, tremendously impact help-seeking.

Sabina, Cuevas, and Schally (2012) argued that limited access to competent linguistic

services places these victims at a disadvantage position, thereby perpetuating their

victimization. Vidales (2010) explained that Latinas‘ lack of fluency in English plays a

critical role in their vulnerability to domestic violence and their isolation.

Murphy-Erby, Stauss, and Estupinian (2013) posited that the development of

culturally competent programs needs to do more than making sure that those programs

and evaluation materials are translated in different other languages. For instance, Ryan

and Siebens (2012) explained that when comparing Latinos with other minority ethnic

groups, Latinos‘ level of education is lower. Silva-Martinez and Murty (2011)

emphasized the significance of researchers and service providers becoming familiar with

the cultural, social, and economic backgrounds of these women, both in their countries of

origin and in the United States.

Zarza and Adler (2008) advocated for domestic violence service providers to

evaluate cultural, linguistic, and programmatic obstacles that preclude Latina victims of

domestic violence from receiving adequate services. Within this context, Reina et al.

(2013) found that due to the role of society and culture in ascertaining the type of

networks for undocumented Latinas, compared to those with formal networks, Latina

victims of domestic violence who belong to more informal networks have less access to

appropriate help. According to Reina et al., having less access could facilitate their

departure from the violent relationship.

Further, Reina et al. (2013) asserted that these types of informal networks

constitute structural barriers making it more difficult for Latina victims of domestic

violence to exit their violent relationships. However, Sokoloff and Dupont (2005) argued

that there has been a long pattern of blaming culture as the key factor in examining

violence and oppression in communities of color, leading to stereotypes against entire

groups. Edelson et al. (2007) claimed that some unambiguous factors in Latino

communities may impact Latina victims of domestic violence and that cultural insiders

are more apt than service providers from the dominant culture to participate in cultural

debates regarding the meaning of domestic violence.

Kulkarni et al. (2012) contended that there should be a focus on the cultural

definition of domestic violence. Within this context, Kulkarni et al. (2012) suggested that,

as a concept, there has not been a conventional agreement about the definition of

domestic violence, which varies across cultures. For instance, within the Latino

community, there is not a consensus whether behaviors such as verbal aggression and

stalking should be considered as domestic violence.

Meanwhile, Agoff, Herrera, and Castro (2007) revealed that a significant number

of Mexican women who are victims of domestic violence were reminded by older women

that the occurrence of violence within victims‘ families is part of the sacrifice that they

have to undergo for the well-being of their family and children. Within this context,

Kulkarni et al. (2012) recommended for current community outreach services related to

domestic violence to be more inclusive in terms of establishing a partnership with the

Latino community, which might lead to the emergence of more innovative programs.

Vidales (2010) highlighted the necessity for educational, governmental, social, and

medical institutions to work as a team to develop programs and policies that are more

culturally inclusive and take into consideration the needs of Latina victims of domestic

violence.

Vidales (2010) maintained that more than 20% of these women identified their

limited ability to speak English as one of the key obstacles to seeking help and getting

adequate services. However, D‘Orazio, Taylor-Ford, and Meyerowitz (2014) posited that

while exploring sociocultural beliefs and values of Latinos, one should be mindful that

even Latinas tend to be placed into a homogenous group, within-group diversity should

not be dismissed. Arguably, Murphy-Erby, Stauss, and Estupinian (2013) highlighted the

significance of understanding the existence of various traditions, cultures, and beliefs

within the Latino populations residing in the United States. In addition, D‘Orazio et al.

maintained that this within-group diversity is not only complex, but also contains various

facets, since it cannot always be differentiated through county of origin because of racial

dissimilarities, language, class, and religious affiliations.

Formal and Informal Help Seeking

Kyriakakis (2014) advocated for more studies regarding how Latino victims of

IPV seek help and assistance, so that interventions intended to extend services to this

vulnerable population can improved. McCart, Smith, and Sawyer (2010) argued that

studies related to social and cultural influences on help-seeking are limited. Rizo and

Macy (2011) affirmed that many studies revealed that, compared to White women, Latino

women usually are less eager to seek formal help for their victimization.

Klevens (2007) maintained that even though it is true that Latina victims of

domestic violence are in need of both informal and formal help sources, some of these

victims do not ask for help or wait for a long time before doing so. Lewis et al. (2005)

posited that although several studies found the occurrences of domestic violence within

the Latino community are high, for many Latinos, domestic violence is a family or

marital issue, as opposed to a social problem. Contextually, Brabeck and Guzman (2008)

argued that some people within the Latino community tend to view domestic violence as

normative behaviors, which plays a fundamental role in discouraging Latina victims of

domestic violence from seeking help.

However, Kyriakakis, Dawson, and Edmond (2012) found that social

characteristics such as social isolation, humiliating languages and rude attitudes, loss of

personal freedom, and internalized feeling of being worthless, from the views of Latina

immigrant victims, constitute the definition of domestic violence. Ahrens et al. (2010)

explained how the effect of traditional beliefs and gender role ideologies play a key role

preventing immigrant women from seeking help. Due to such lack of consensus among

members of the Latino community about the kind of behaviors that should be classified

as domestic violence, Kulkarni et al. (2012) proposed that researchers should be more

proactive in terms of exploring the effect of cultural perceptions related to domestic

violence and the role of social networks in facilitating Latinas to leave their abusive

partners.

Part of the argument made by Kulkarni et al. is that cultural barriers play a

meaningful role in promoting stigma and self-blame, which are major factors in keeping

Latina victims of domestic violence from seeking help. However, Gomez and Speizer

(2009) disagreed with Kulkarni et al. (2012) suggesting that as long as the socioeconomic

conditions of women are improved, ethnoracial dissimilarities are irrelevant. Cuevas and

Sabina (2010) maintained that a contemporary study regarding Latina victims of

domestic violence revealed that only 20% of these women sought formal help due to their

skepticism about disclosing to formal help sources. Concurrently, 58% of Latina victims

of domestic violence were more comfortable disclosing to their parents, family members,

friends, and neighbors as informal sources of help (Cuevas & Sabina, 2010).

Rodriguez et al. (2010) emphasized the importance of support from family

members as a precautionary consideration in the process of seeking help. Contrary to

Rodriguez et al. (2010), Vidales (2010) posited that divulging intimate problems such as

domestic violence might be regarded as disgraceful from the perspective of Latino

women.

Help Seeking, Machismo, and Marianismo

Fernandez-Esquer, Diamond, and Atkson (2010) posited that through concepts

such as machismo and marianismo, beliefs about Latino gender roles are manifested.

Therefore, the crucial role of cultural concepts such as machismo and marianismo in

these women‘s help-seeking behaviors should not be ignored. Although both machismo

and marianismo, in the Latino culture, constitute significant cultural and social constructs

that shape people‘s perceptions and behaviors (Ortiz-Torres, Serrano-Garcia, & Torres-

Burgos, 2000), Sears (2008) referred to machismo as cultural norms and values that

underline the traditional role of men as families‘ defenders and caretakers.

Peragallo et al. (2012) defined marianismo as a supplement of machismo‘s norms

and values fostering women‘s sexual purity, submissiveness, and obedience. Although

Messing, Becerra, Ward-Lasher, and Androff (2015).) contended that the patriarchal

systems of power, which are embedded in the social structure, serves as a catalyst for the

sustenance of structured power and control of women by men and usually encompass

physical and sexual violence, MarrsFuchsel, Murphy, and Dufresne (2012) argued that a

variety of principles relating to machismo and marianismo may guide the behaviors of

both men and women involved in a relationship. Meanwhile, Vidales (2010) alleged that

while families and friends are occasionally considered strong sources of support, at other

times they are viewed as hurdles. Postmus et al. (2014) claimed that cultural and

community norms such as machismo are considered some of the most important barriers

to help seeking.

Casey and Lindhorst (2009) maintained that any attempt to effectively address the

needs of Latina victims of domestic violence should clearly identify culturally applicable

standards such as machismo and marianismo, as well as the cultural definition of abuse.

Vidales (2010) refers to machismo as Latinos‘ expected way of behaving, although many

people link the term machismo to perceived negative attributes such as the possession of

fierce sexual aptitude, consumption of much alcohol, or being belligerent. Nevertheless,

concepts such as honor, courage, responsibility, and obligation to the family are viewed

as positive aspects of machismo.

However, consistent with Vidales (2010), Ojeda and Pina-Watson (2014)

affirmed that machismo constitutes the negative characteristics of masculinity within the

Latino culture, which is grounded in hypermasculine attributes such as control,

aggression, and chauvinism. Marianismo refers to the set of beliefs regarding how

Latinas are expected to act, including traits such as submissiveness, deference to others,

and self-sacrificing behaviors (Gonzales-Lopez, 2007; Marrs Fuchsel, 2013).

Furthermore, based on this cultural ideology, women are socialized to neglect their

personal needs and desires, so they can strive to nurture and care for others, particularly

men (Sabina, Cuevas, & Schally, 2013).

Nunez et al. (2016) maintained that although there is a tendency for previous

studies to focus primarily on bravery, honor, dominance, aggression, sexism, sexual

prowess, reserved emotions, and more as negative characteristics of masculinity, there is

another aspect of machismo, known as traditional machismo, which encompasses

chivalry, bravery, and family as positive images of gender role. Sastre et al. (2015)

argued that while the secular concept of marianismo promotes women‘s submissiveness,

which incorporates attributes common to all countries in Latin America, it allows men

more sexual freedom to boast about their prowess. For example, Sabina et al. (2013)

explained how the concept of respeto, or respect, is a powerful concept clarifying the

unequivocal power of the father in families.

In a study conducted by Monlina and Abel (2010) regarding Latina victims of

domestic violence and culture, it was found that the majority of participants believed that

culture was unhelpful in their struggle to remove themselves from their abusive

relationships. Within this context, Kyriakakis (2014) affirmed that the reluctance of

Latina victims of domestic violence to seek help may be associated with Latino family

and gender-based expectancies such as marianismo and deference. Gonzalez-Guarda,

Florom-Smith and Thomas (2011) affirmed that machismo, marianismo, and respeto have

such an integrating impact on Latino families that they primarily shape the effect of

domestic violence on victims. Hence, it is imperative to explore what the existing

literature discloses about domestic violence agencies and Latina victims who do not seek

help. Therefore, there is an intertwining relationship between machismo and marianismo

regarding promoting social constructs delineating socially admissible standards and

values that sustain traditional gender roles underlying a patriarchal system (Nunez et al.,

2016). Thus, the exploration of help-seeking behaviors of Latina victims of domestic

violence, as well as family implications was essential.

Help Seeking and Family Involvement

Cho and Kim (2012) affirmed that the failure to seek available help constitutes

one of the key challenges relating to the underreporting of domestic violence among

Latinas. Falconier (2013) found that most Latino victims of domestic violence usually do

not seek help, and when they seek help, they mostly reach out to their local churches or

agencies providing services, particularly to Latinos. Reina and Lohman (2015)

maintained that despite the significance of obstacles such as financial insecurity, limited

access to transportation, lack of information about available services, and willingness to

maintain the abusive relationship, family comprises the essential factor in the decision

making process of Latina victims of domestic violence.

Cruz-Santiago and Ramirez Garcia (2011) argued that while Latino families are

far from being a homogenous group, familism is among the most common cultural values

they share. To concur with this, Leavell, Tamis-LeMonda, Ruble, Zosuls, and Cabrera

(2012) posited that some studies revealed that familism promotes considerable

dependence on, including spending more time with parents and family members. Reina

and Lohman (2015) maintained that the Latino culture places high value on family unity

and that the inclination to preserve family dignity reinforces the tolerance of domestic

violence.

Gloria and Castellanos (2012) maintained that Latinos strongly believe in

interpersonal connections, supportive relationships, and shared responsibilities for the

benefits of family and community from which emerge the power and worth of

interconnections and interdependence. Within this framework, Rossello, Bernal, and

Rivera-Medina (2008) asserted that the concept of familismo within the Latino culture

entails that family needs always have priorities over individual needs. Compared to Reina

and Lohman (2015), Chang, Natsuaki, and Chen (2013) argued that although there is a

tendency among Latino Americans to depend on extended family members for emotional

support, the concept of familism which encompasses interrelated values such as loyalty,

mutual respect, and emotional support is commonly known to play a protective function

or attenuate the need for family network support.

Arguably, Sabogal et al. (1987) identified that familial obligations which entail

allegiance to supply material and emotional help to family, perceived support from

family, which is about perception of family members as dependable supplier of assistance

and support resolve problems; and family as referents which is about family members

serving as role models as the three vital tenents of familism. Within this framework,

Vidales (2010) argued that Latinas tend to link the well-being of their children to family

unity. Fugate, Landis, Riordan, Naureckas and Engel (2005) contended that there is a

belief within the Latino culture that the initiative to seek help is equivalent to ending the

relationship. This explains the decision of some family members to remain uninvolved

(Chang, Natsuaki, & Chen, 2013). Therefore, Latinos‘ tendency to strong cultural values

that are embedded in family and community cohesion should not be undermined.

Kaltman et al. (2011) posited that usually, instead of providing Latina victims of

domestic violence with appropriate support so that they can get out of their abusive

relationship, some family members often emphasized the significance of being a wife and

the necessity for children to be with their father. Within the same vein, Pescosolido

(2011) contended that help seeking constitutes a process responsive to social influence.

Therefore, looking at what the present literature discloses about Latin victims of domestic

violence, acculturation, and gender roles was critical.

Acculturation and Gender Roles

Galvez, Mankowski, and Glass (2012) insisted that there is a significant

relationship between acculturation and violence against women. Caetano, Ramisety-

Mikler, Caetano-Vaeth, and Harris (2007) referred to acculturation as the process of

transitioning and adapting from one‘s native culture to one‘s adopted culture typified by

the adoption of the new language and acceptance of and adherence to the norms and

values of the adopted culture. Cho, Velez-Ortiz, and Parra-Cardona (2014) posited that

many studies found that country of origin is considered a probable antecedent for

domestic violence among Latinos. For example, Falconier (2013) maintained that there is

a possibility for Latinos who are more committed to traditional gender role to feel

challenged in the United States where, not only egalitarian relationships are encouraged

but also often essential for meeting economic needs.

Accordingly, Beauchamp et al. (2012) asserted that although the male partner

who has been culturally accustomed to being the sole protector of household integrity

may feel uneasy about accepting any changes related to female role, in this process of

adapting to the new environment, the female partner who, before, has been submissive to

domestic violence may be willing to reject it by completely challenging any attitudes that

can sustain it. Falconier et al. argued that although this more liberal gender role

perspective in the United States can empower Latinas to demand changes in the

relationships, it can engender more conflict and violence. Understanding how such

demand for relationship changes can be a potential source of conflict and violence

between Latina victims of domestic violence and their male partners is important.

Cho, Velez-Ortiz, and Parra-Cardona (2014) argued that the way Latinas perceive

the severity of domestic violence may be shaped by their country of origin and may guide

their help-seeking behaviors predicated on fear of retaliation from their families.

However, Estrada-Martinez (2011) emphasized the necessity to avoid viewing Latinos as

a homogenous group. Similarly, Dupont-reyes, Fry, Rickert and Davidson (2015)

maintained that researchers must be cautious about portraying Latinos as a homogenous

group, while undermining heterogeneity among regional groups in terms of their level of

acculturation, country of birth, impoverishment, and particular cultural norms.

Gender Roles

In terms of gender roles, Aguirre and Turner (2011) argued that although it is true

that the presence of Mexicans in the United States is accounted for over 200 years,

Latino‘s diversity and ongoing migration to the United States have fostered an assortment

of various experiences, and, consequently, identities. Within this context, Gloria and

Castellanos (2012) advocated for the acknowledgement of the significant role of history,

gender ideology, including sociocultural and sociopolitical systems and procedures, in

numerous aspects of identity. Meanwhile, Sabogal et al. (1987) and Steidel, Lugo, and

Contreras (2003) found that Spanish colonization and the Catholic Church, two

institutions that foster a male-centered structure of society, constitute the idiosyncratic

root of Latino gender norms.

Nunez et al. (2016) emphasized the need for recognition that most of the

information within the current literature regarding male gender roles has been gathered

from research participants who are college students and non-Hispanic Whites and has not

been consistent in term of considering cultural components of gender roles. Fernandez-

Esquer, Diamond, and Atkinson (2010) argued that not only is the persuasiveness of

Latinos to the effect of norms evident as the result their allocentric alignment to family

values and relationships, it is also possible for greater social cohesion to expand the

potentiality of dispersing information and fortifying norms in Latino social networks.

Fernandez-Ezquer, Diamond, and Atkinson maintained that gender norms sway different

facets of sexuality, sexual relationships, family planning, contraception, and domestic

violence.

Accordingly, Ruiz (2012) contended that determining the magnitude of the impact

of gender roles on Latina immigrants is contingent on their ethnicity, class, migration

status, level of acculturation, family and household characteristics, sexual orientation, and

environment. Sabina, Cuevas, and Schally (2013) maintained that applying the native

countries‘ ways of handling domestic violence may complicate help-seeking, since

compared to the United States, violence against women usually does not bear the same

repercussions as countries of origin. However, Harris, Firestone and Vega (2005)

discovered that Latinas who mostly adhered to traditional gender role beliefs, whether

born in Mexico or the United States, were less eager to disclose abuse to researchers than

those who barely followed gender role constructs.

Ma and Malcom (2016) affirmed that factors such as acculturation and family, as

well as gender roles appear to play a significant role in domestic violence among Latinos.

Sastre et al. (2015) posited that it is feasible for Latinas‘ views of gender roles to be

transformed as they start acculturating to different expectations from women within the

new culture. Sabina, Cuevas, and Schally (2013) found that, opposite to the common

views that gender roles, family, and culture sustain domestic violence; recent studies

revealed that Latinos orientation seems to preserve women from victimization. However,

differently from Sabina et al. (2008), Oliffe and Phillips (2008) explained the possibility

for gender socialization to influence the willingness of Latina victims of domestic

violence to seek services related to their emotional and psychological well-being.

Vasconcellos (2005) contended that studies regarding domestic violence on

Latinos might be biased, viewing them as one homogenous ethnic group. For instance,

although fewer acculturated Latinas are more open to submit to traditional values and

norms linked to machismo, Latinas who are highly acculturated tend to be more

forthcoming, in terms of resisting oppressive and patriarchal norms (Sabina et al. 2013).

Sabina et al. (2012) found that as there is a decrease in language barriers and an increase

in acculturation, immigrant Latino women are more apt to recognize and report domestic

violence.

Within this context, Gonzalez-Guarda et al. (2013) affirmed that the intertwining

relationship between cultural norms and values in Latin American societies, which

underline the significance of family and community bond, may preclude victims of

domestic violence from seeking help from formal institutions. Furthermore, Gonzalez-

Guarda argued that while Latinas born who are U.S. born are more inclined to view

domestic violence as a crime and acknowledge their legal rights to report abuse, Latinas

born in Latin America may view domestic violence, which is highly accepted in various

Latin American countries, as normal behavior. This argument resonates with Ruiz (2012)

who posited that although it is true that challenges such as poverty, unemployment, lack

of health care, language barriers, acculturation, discrimination, and undocumented legal

status may significantly affect Latina immigrants generally, it is important to recognize

that Latinas endure all these aforementioned challenges with regard to traditional gender-

based dynamics that empower males. Thus, examining the role of religious beliefs and

cultural values in the decision of these women not to seek help was a necessity.

Domestic Violence Programs

Lawson, Laughon, and Gonzalez-Guarda (2012) posited that although both

Hispanic and Black women victims of domestic violence are in great need to access

health-related services, one should be aware of a variety of obstacles that restrain these

women from that access to standard and culturally sensitive services. These obstacles are

not limited to lack of knowledge about where and how to get access to services, cultural

and linguistic barriers, but also to strong feelings of distrust about health and social

services (Cuevas & Sabina, 2010). Likewise, Belknap and VandeVusse (2010) affirmed

that while barriers such as language, isolation, immigration-induced economic changes,

and legal status, to help-seeking for domestic violence in the Latina community are high,

the help-seeking process may be even more complex, since Latinas tend to use their

home countries as key frames of reference.

The rationale remains that in these women‘s home countries, the consequences of

domestic violence are less harsh than those of in the United States (VandeVusse, 2010).

Ruiz (2012) emphasized the significance of reaching out to less acculturated Latina

immigrants in a way that reflects their cultural values, so that reciprocally empathetic

relationships can be established. Falconier, McCollum, Austin, Wainbarg, Hasburn and

Mora (2013) emphasized the need for domestic violence programs to develop culturally

competent interventions, taking into consideration the views of victims, abusers, and

including those providing services within the Latino community. Therefore, taking a

deeper look of what the current literature reveals about the immigration status of these

women and their help seeking behaviors was important, as it may offer greater

apprehension of these women‘s decision.

Immigration Status and Help Seeking

Stockman, Hayashi, and Campbell (2015) contended that although domestic

violence against women continues to be a major problem in the United States, women

who migrated from Mexico, Central America, South America, and the Caribbean are

more likely to be victimized than those born in the U.S. Within this context, Stockman et

al. (2015) maintained that the vulnerability of those who were not born in the United

States is the result of poverty, social isolation, disparities in economic and social

resources, including immigration status. Similarly, Cho et al. (2014) contended that

undocumented Latina victims of domestic violence often rely on their abusive patterns

for financial support and view reporting their situation to law enforcement as a liability in

terms of the possibility to be deported or go to jail.

Contextually, Menjivar and Abrego (2012) maintained that opposite to other

punitive laws that primarily focus on people‘s behavior, a specific category of people

without any social characteristics like language or physical means can make them

becoming the primary target of the existing immigration laws and their application.

Belliveau (2011) and Salcido and Menjivar (2012) maintained that the junction of

culturally constructed concepts such as gender, family, racial discrimination, ethnicity

and cultural diversity, language, citizenship status, and socioeconomic status has a

divergent influence, not only on Latinas‘ fear of deportation, but also on trust of the

systems designed to shield them against violence, thus impacting their inclination to

report offence. Menjivar and Abrego (2012) posited that, to some extent, laws that have

violent effects, including immense repercussions are passed by legislators and politicians,

regardless if their impact might be viewed as a form of structural and symbolic violence,

they constitute legal violence due to their insertion in legal sanctioned practices, actively

enacted using traditional methods, and accepted as normal laws.

Marrs Fuchsel et al. (2012) underlined the probability for Latinas‘ intuitions of

the relevance of reporting victimization to be impeded by the fact that they are not only

residing in sexist and patriarchal society, but also one in which legal immigration status is

a major concern. For instance, Rhodes et al. (2015) argued that it is possible that because

of the increased enforcement of immigration policies, immigrants might be less willing to

seek needed care, which can only not negatively impact them but also the public health.

Nevertheless, on the one hand, Sokoloff and Dupont (2006), Wing (2003), Bograd

(2006), and Crenshaw (1995) contended that there is a consensus among liberal and racial

feminist activists, including many theorists, that all women are vulnerable to gender

violence.

Sokoloff and Dupont (2006), Wing (2003), Bograd (2006), and Crenshaw (1955)

also argued that despite this consensus regarding women‘s vulnerability to gender

violence, not all women have the same capability to withdraw from abusive relationships

when their racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, and immigration, sexual, religious and political

backgrounds are taken into consideration. There is an agreement among Androff and

Tavassoli (2012), Falcon (2007), and Villalon (2010) that the criminal justice system‘s

asymmetrical treatment of Latina immigrants, including the brutality of the immigration

detention process, illegal incarceration of immigrants, as well as other human right

violations can serve as justification of Latinas‘ fear and lack of trust, with regard to the

fairness of the criminal justice systems. Arguably, Phillips and Sobol (2010) highlighted

the historical pattern of police using legal standards as a scapegoat to elude conventional

response to domestic violence against women.

However, Bauer, Rodriguez, Quiroga and Flores-Ortis (2000), Erez (2000),

Menjivar and Salcido (2002), and Rivera (1994) are all in agreement that factors such as

language barriers, ethnic discrimination, and sexism constitute some of the primary

stumbling blocks that prevent Latinas from seeking assistance from law enforcement

agencies. Rizo and Macy (2011) argued that among the many barriers to help seeking

faced by Latina victims of domestic violence, fear of deportation is considered to be

crucial. In agreement with Rizo and Macy (2011), Bailliard (2013) identified distrust in

government institutions and law enforcement as the primary factors determining Latina

immigrants‘ decision not to seek help.

Rizo and Macy (2011) argued that although women from other ethnic groups who

are victims of domestic violence also face similar barriers regarding help seeking,

language barriers and fear of deportation seem to be more related to Latinas. In addition,

Rizo and Macy maintained that these women victims‘ fear of being discarded by their

abusers in a country in which they are new residents constitutes a major barrier to help

seeking. For example, Gradstein and Schiff (2006) and Canales (2007) argued that the

stricter enforcement of laws related to immigration led to the intensification of individual

uncertainty, prejudice within the labor force, and segregated communities.

Rhodes et al. (2015) argued that although barriers such as languages, lack of

culturally sensitive services, restricted health competency, little public transportation, and

inadequate awareness of available services should not be underestimated, fear of

deportation, lack of legal forms of documentation, interaction with law enforcement

personnel, and racial profiling are key factors preventing Latina victims of domestic

violence from seeking help. Queseda, Hart, and Bourgois (2011) underscored the passage

of the Arizona Senate bill in 2010 allowing police officers to apprehend people perceived

to be undocumented solely based on their image, as concrete evidence of xenophobia,

which negatively impacted many Latino immigrants. Arguably, Villatoro, Morales, and

Mays (2014) affirmed that Latinos may be more eager to use family members as

substitutes to mental health professionals, with regard to seeking help and support, since

they have stronger trust and confidence in these family members.

Summary and Conclusion

In this chapter, various potential interconnected factors that shape the decision of

Latina victims of domestic violence not to seek help were explored. Two theoretical

perspectives, intersectionality theory (Crenshaw, 1989) and Structural violence theory

(Gultang, 1990) which form this study‘s conceptual framework, were addressed.

The conceptual framework facilitates an understanding of how potential factors

such as culture, formal and informal help seeking, machismo and marianismo, family

involvement, acculturation, gender roles, domestic violence programs, and immigration

might influence the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence not to seek help. The

review of the contemporary literature also showed domestic violence, as a serious health

and social problem, affects the lives of more than a half million Latinas. Further, the

literature review indicated a link between the reluctance of Latina victims of domestic

violence to seek help and a variety of cultural barriers such as adherence to family norms

and values (Ortis-Torres, Serano-Garcia, & Torres-Burges 2000), gender socialization

(Sabina et al., 2012), and powerful cultural constructs such as machismo and marianismo

(Vilades, 2010).

Moreover, the review of the literature showed how compared with their White

counterparts, Latina victims of domestic violence are less willing to seek formal help

(Kyriakakis, 2014) and expressed feelings of distrust for social services (Cuevas &

Sabina, 2010). Finally, the review of the literature shared light upon the fear of

deportation (Rizo & Macy, 2011), linguistic barriers (Cuevas & Sabina, 2010), and

immigration status (Stockman, Hayashi, & Campbell, 2015) were among many factors

influencing these women‘s decision not to seek help (Campbell, 2001; World Health

Organization, 2005). Therefore, the absence aspect of the decision of Latina victims of

domestic violence not to seek help is exactly the gap in the contemporary literature this

study intended to address.

Overall, the findings which emerged from the perspectives of Latina victims of

domestic violence who may not seek help fulfilled the gap by enhancing the existing

literature and providing to mental health professionals working with Latina victims of

domestic violence, especially those in the field of psychology with additional insights

about potential factors influencing these women‘s decision not to seek help. In Chapter 3,

there is an explanation about how this study was conducted, including the recruitment of

participants. In addition, a justification for using the phenomenological methodology as

the relevant model for examining the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic

violence who do not seek help was offered. Moreover, the types of methods that were

used to organize and analyze the collected data, as well as ethical considerations and

trustworthiness will be addressed.

Chapter 3: Research Method

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to explore the factors that

influence the decision among Latina victims of domestic violence of whether to seek

support services after experiencing domestic violence. Chapter 3 includes research

design, the participant selection criteria, the research instrument, data collection

procedures, type of data analysis, the role of the researcher, trustworthiness, and ethical

procedures.

Research Design and Rationale

In this study, I explored the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic

violence who do not seek support services. The current literature lacks enough

information about the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence not to seek help.

The central question that guided this phenomenological study was: What are the lived

experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic

violence agencies?

A secondary question for this study was: How do Latina victims of domestic

violence describe reasons for not seeking support services?

In the process of answering the central question and fulfilling this study‘s

purpose, I used a qualitative research methodology, particularly a phenomenological

research design. The rationale for using a qualitative methodology is that the objective of

qualitative research is to explore a phenomenon. Patton (2002) asserted that the

effectiveness of qualitative approaches is that they are more effective about investigating

data that is difficult to be quantified, especially participants‘ personal experiences

described by first-hand descriptions. Dahlberg, Dahlberg and Nystrom (2008) argued that

the aim of phenomenology is to describe a phenomenon as it is lived and experienced by

individuals or groups. In this study, the focus was on the lived experiences of Latina

victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies.

This study reflects the holistic, expectations of qualitative inquiry, which

emphasizes the understanding of different correlations among dimensions that emerge

from the data instead of making assumptions or enumerating a hypothesis regarding the

symbiotic or sequential relationships (Moustakas, 1994). I used phenomenology as the

research design because it facilitated the use of participants‘ own categories of meanings

as they related to their lived experiences to have a greater understanding of the

phenomenon being investigated (Merleau-Ponty, 2000).

Moustakas (1994) maintained that the focus of phenomenology is an in-depth

exploration of participants‘ lived experiences. Other qualitative methods were

considered. Narrative research weaves together a sequence of events. It is about exploring

what a participant‘s story means and the lessons to be learned from it (Creswell, 2013).

Grounded theory seeks to provide an explanation or theory behind the events. In

grounded theory, the researcher primarily interviews and existing documents to build a

theory based on the data (Corbin & Straus, 1994). Case study involves a deep

understanding through multiple types of data sources. For instance, it is feasible for case

studies to be explanatory, exploratory, or describing an even (Creswell, 2013).

Meanwhile, in ethnography, the researcher learns and describes the culture‘s

characteristics. Ethnographical method often immerses the researcher as a participant for

extended periods of time (Creswell, 2013). These methods do not fit the purpose of this

study which is the exploration of the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic

violence in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies. The appropriate method

for exploring the lived experiences of the participants is using transcendental

phenomenology (Moustakas, 1994).

Role of the Researcher

In this study, I served as the observer. This role encompassed data collection,

analysis, and interpretation of qualitative research. I used simple language for participants

to fully understand potential risks and benefits of this study. I signed the informed

consent form, along with the participants, and gave a copy to each research participant to

ensure the continued consent of research participants. More importantly, I was

empathetic to the research participants‘ stories.

Although it was not be possible to extinguish my own views of the experiences of

Latina victims of domestic violence, I was as objective as possible. I assured that the

writing was consistent with participants‘ views of their experiences, without any feelings

of marginalization. I wrote the results of this research study in a simple manner to avoid

any misinterpretations from readers.

Errasti-Ibarrondo et al. (2018) affirmed that the concept of bracketing entails the

process of keeping the focus of a researcher on the study‘s topic and phenomenon by

remaining aware of instances when personal views and anticipations are already

influenced by any part of the research methodology, particularly throughout the

recruitment process, data collection and analysis. I used bracketing to control my biases

and preconceived views regarding Latina victims of domestic violence who do not seek

support services (Moustakas, 1994). The use of epoche played a significant role in terms

of increasing my competency in examining the experiences of Latina victims of domestic

violence and who do not seek support services with a fresh perspective and contributed to

my openness to receive new insight and information (Moustakas, 1994).

Moustakas (1994) wrote that it is not feasible for a researcher to eradicate all his

or her influence, particularly as it relates to the interpretative nature of qualitative

research. Through the use of transcendental phenomenology, I used epoche, which is a

process of provisionally suspending the researcher‘s own biases, preconceptions, and

assumptions about the phenomenon to obtain the purest description of the phenomenon

under inquiry (Moustakas, 1994). I kept a reflective journal in which I wrote about the

awareness of bias. Using epoche was important to accurately present the voices of these

women. I did not have any personal or professional relationships with participants, or

supervisory or instructor relationships involving power over the participants.

Methodology

Participant Selection Logic

In this study, the targeted population was Latina victims of domestic violence

who did not seek support services. Polit and Beck (2012) argued that researchers must set

clear criteria that define the study population. The sample consisted of eight to 10 self-

identified Latina victims of domestic violence, 21 years old and older; living in the state

of New York; English speaking and who experienced domestic violence in a relationship

within the past 2 years.

I used a purposeful sampling to recruit participants. Purposeful sampling entails a

nonprobability sampling method in which the researcher selects participants based on

personal judgment about which ones will be most informative (Gibbs, 2002). The sample

size in a qualitative research is based upon data saturation, which means collecting

qualitative data to the point where a sense of closure is attained because new data yield

redundant information (Gibbs, 2002). Polit and Beck (2012) asserted that to reach data

saturation, most qualitative research studies require a sample size of 10 to 20 participants.

In this study, I collected and analyze data from eight to 10 Latina victims of

violence who do not seek support services. This sample size is aligned with the

recommended guidelines for phenomenological studies (Polkinghorne, 1988). Merriam

(2009) contented that the use of purposive sampling provides more flexibility for

qualitative researchers to collect data and since participants are more disposed to

participate in a research study and dispense appropriate information for the study. All

eight to 10 participants were recruited by flyers, which contained my name, phone

number, and email address, and were placed in three local churches in New York City

frequently attended by Latinos (see Appendix A).

The flier was specific about self-identified Latina victims of domestic violence,

21 years-old or older, living in the state of New York, English speaking, and who were in

a domestic violence relationship within the past 2 years. Participants were offered a $10

gift card to offset any expenses related to attending the interview, such as transportation.

When a potential participant contacts me, I reviewed the criteria for participation through

a short screening questionnaire (Appendix B).

Instrumentation

I conducted semistructured, face-to-face interviews with Latina women to gather

rich and in-depth data necessary for this phenomenological research study as proposed

(Moustakas, 1994). I conducted the semistructured interviews using open-ended

questions that guided by the interview protocol. The interview protocol (Appendix C)

contained the interview questions that I created to gather the data. I also addressed these

women‘s perceptions of the types of services provided to victims of domestic violence,

particularly Latinas, and their views about the role of culture, immigration status, and

gender ideology in their decision not to seek help. Within this context, I formulated

interview questions which led to a deeper understanding of the lived experiences of

Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies.

I submitted the interview protocol for review by my dissertation committee members so

that the credibility and validity of the instrument could be verified (Lincoln & Guba,

1985). The committee appraised the organization, content, and language of each element

of the instrument so that they could establish their correctness to the study and

authenticate their overall accuracy as a method of collecting pertinent data, making

criticism which I built upon to enhance the interview protocol.

Procedures for Recruitment, Participation, and Data Collection

I scheduled interview appointments in a public library where there was a private

room which provided a sense of privacy, comfort and was free of interference for

participants. I provided a copy of the informed consent for each research participant to

review prior to each interview. Interviews were recorded and transcribed. I interviewed

eight to 10 Latina victims of domestic violence who do not seek support services using

open-ended and follow up questions. Each interview lasted approximately 60 minutes.

I started each interview with an introduction reviewing the content of the

informed consent form with each participant. The consent forms were signed prior to the

start of the interviews. I asked questions based on the interview protocol, and asked

follow up questions when needed. I provided participants the opportunity to ask

questions, seek clarification or convey any concerns they had. At the end of the

interview, I provided a $10 gift card to each participant. I transcribed each taped

interview verbatim so that I could maximize the level of credibility and confirmability of

the data. I conducted member checks to ensure content validity (Lincoln & Guba, 1985)

by providing each participant a summary of their interview transcript so that

misinterpretations could be corrected, or any additions could be made.

Data Analysis Plan

I analyzed the data using Moustakas‘s (1994) steps in transcendental

phenomenology. I began with the epoche process where I acknowledged my biases and

preconceived views about the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence

who do not seek support services by journaling all my biases before the interview and

data analysis process. This process of assuaging the potentially prejudicial consequences

of prejudgments which has also been called bracketing, helped me to set aside my

personal views and attitudes about these women‘ experiences so that I could look at the

data with unbiased eyes. Moustakas‘ (1994) eight-step data analysis process was used:

1. Horizonalization: In this step, I listed all relevant expressions pertaining to

Latina victims of domestic violence who do not seek support services,

through the development of a list of non-repetitive and non-overlapping

notable statements.

2. Reduction and Elimination: I appraised the assertions, eliminate or revise

all information that does not meet specific requirements, including any

repetitive, unclear and overlapping words. My evaluation of all assertions

was based on whether an assertion is associated with the experience so

that it can bring further understanding about the experience and whether

the assertion can be captured and named to become a valuable element of

the experience. This process resulted in the invariant constituents of the

experience.

3. Clustering and Thematizing the Invariant Constituents: In this step, I

clustered related invariant constituents and then labeled these clusters as

the themes of the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence

in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies.

4. Validation: In this step, after generating all the themes, I began to examine

them against the dataset. This was a way for me to ensure that my themes

were representative of the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic

violence in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies and help tell

the participants‘ stories.

5. Development of Individual Textural Descriptions: I used verbatim

examples from the transcripts to present the textural descriptions of the

experience.

6. Development of Structural Descriptions: I used verbatim examples from

the transcripts to present the structural descriptions of the experience.

7. Development of Textural-Structural Description: In this step, I created a

textual-structural description of the experiences of Latina victims of

domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies.

8. Composite Description: I developed a composite description of the

meanings and essences of the experience representing the group as a

whole.

Issues of Trustworthiness

In this study, to address issues of trustworthiness, a precise and thorough

procedure, which included credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability

will be used as suggested Lincoln and Guba (1985). The rationale remains that these four

criteria are considered to be counterparts of the positivist‘s criteria of internal validity,

reliability, objectivity, and external validity (Polit & Beck, 2012).

Credibility

Through the lenses of Lincoln and Guba (1985), credibility entails credence in the

veracity of the data and interpretations of them. From the views of Lincoln and Guba, it is

imperative for qualitative researchers to attempt to demonstrate truth in the results for the

specific participants and circumstances in the study. Within this context, triangulation,

member checking and saturation were applied.

Lincoln and Guba (1985) asserted that triangulation constitutes various sources of

data collection. Creswell (2013) maintained that the use of three different sources of data

collection can facilitate the genuine application of triangulation. Within this context, I

used member checking. I ensured that the three elements of triangulation confirmed that

the themes that emerged came from the data collection and analysis.

To ensure the accuracy and consistency of the transcriptions regarding the lived

experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic

violence agencies, I used member checking (Moustakas, 1994). This was a significant

part of the study because I was able to bring the data back to the participants. Participants

were able to check for accuracy and add to the credibility of the experience (Creswell,

2013). Participants were asked to provide feedback about the transcripts. Polit and Beck

(2012) affirmed that member checking is about confirming the credibility of qualitative

data. Participants received a summary of their transcribed interview to propose any

changes or add information.

Similar to most of qualitative research studies, in phenomenological research, the

researcher continues to interview participants until saturation is reached. Charmaz (2006)

contended that in every facet of qualitative research, the focus of the research is more on

the depth of the data instead on the quantity of participants. Saturation was reached once

no new data emerged from the interviews.

Transferability

The concept of transferability constitutes the potentiality for the results to be

transferred to or can be replicated in other settings (Polit & Beck, 2012). Because the

results of qualitative research studies are distinct to not only specific environments but

also a small number of participants, it is not feasible to demonstrate that the results and

conclusions can be applied to other conditions and populations. Maxwell (1992)

maintained that compared to quantitative research studies, qualitative research studies are

not commonly generalizable since their results usually connect to a targeted and small

number of participants or environments.

Korstiens and Moser (2018) argued that it is not feasible or constructive to show

that results or conclusions from qualitative research studies can be applied to other

populations. Transferability does not necessitate extensive assertions, but instead invites

readers to establish relationships between various components of a study and their

personal experience, using thick descriptions was imperative.

I used rich, thick description of the lived experiences of Latina victims of

domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies to increase the

study‘s transferability (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) as well as enable the reader to get a full

and clear understanding of the phenomenon (Moustakas, 1994). I also used detailed

descriptions of lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help

from antidomestic violence agencies and settings. Patton (2002) argued that detailed

descriptions will help me to transfer the meanings and essences of my study to other

locations as a way to determine the applicability of the results to other Latinas who have

been victims of domestic violence and who do not seek support services. In addition, I

used various participants‘ quotes as suggested to describe the details about their views.

Dependability

Dependability plays a significant role enhancing trustworthiness since it

demonstrates the level of consistency and repeatability of the findings of the study Polit

and Beck (2012) asserted that without dependability, it is not possible for the researcher

to obtain credibility. Within this context, it is vital for the researcher to ensure that there

is consistency between the results and the collected raw data (Cypress, 2017). Although a

variety of techniques could be used to establish dependability, in this study, I maintained

an audit trail and used triangulation.

As previously mentioned, triangulation is about using numerous sources so that

the data can be validated through cross verification (Patton, 2002). Polit and Beck (2012)

alleged that through triangulation, the researcher can apprehend a more complete and

contextualized picture of an essential event. I used method triangulation through

interviews so that I could get a comprehensive understanding of the lived experiences of

Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies

Patton (2002) contended that method triangulation is about the utilization of a variety of

methods of data collection about the same phenomenon.

Confirmability

Polit and Beck (2012) explained that confirmability is about objectivity which

means that the study‘s results are congruent with participants‘ narratives instead of the

researcher‘s biases, motivations, or viewpoints. To establish confirmability in this study,

I used reflexivity. Reflexivity is a valuable procedure in qualitative research, particularly

in phenomenological research. Wascher et al. (2017) argued that reflexivity is about

assessing the impact of the researcher‘s personal background, conceptions and interests

on the study. Koch (2006) maintained that using a reflexive journal, the researcher can

establish confirmability. Within this framework, I kept and maintained a reflexive journal

to reflect on the progression of the research process as it relates to my values and

interests.

Ethical Procedures

I obtained approval from the Walden University IRB prior to the data collection

process. I ensured that participants were fully aware of their rights to withdraw at any

time from the study without any fear of retaliation. I provided each participant the

informed consent form for their signature. Once confirming their willingness to

participate in the study, each participant was given a copy of the informed consent form.

With regard to maintaining the confidentiality and protecting the identity of

participants, I provided my phone number and personal email address so that participants

could reach me with questions or to receive communications such as the informed

consent from, establish the interview time, or receive the summary for member checking.

I replaced all participant names with a code such as P1, P2, P3, P4, P5, P6, P7, and P8. I

did not share the identification of participants to anyone at any time. For security

purpose, the interview transcripts, the digital recording device, notes, data sheet, and

other forms were stored in a locked and fire-safe cabinet inside my personal and private

office. Information on my computer was password protected. I was the only one with

access to the research materials. The data and information were kept for 5 years after the

completion of the research study. After 5 years, all the materials were destroyed through

burning, shredding or permanent deletion. Participants were informed that their

participation in the study was voluntary, and that there would be no retaliations if any

participant declined to participate in the study or left the study at any time. Each

participant received a $10 gift card to cover any possible expenses for participating in the

study, such as transportation costs to attend the interview.

Summary

This transcendental phenomenological study explored the lived experiences of

Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic violence agencies.

Participants were recruited through the use of purposive sampling based on the following

inclusion criteria: self-identified Latina victims of domestic violence, 21 years-old or

older, living in the state of New York, English speaking and who were in a domestic

violence relationship within the past 2 years ago. Data were collected through

semistructured interviews, using an interview protocol that was reviewed by my

dissertation committee before using it. Each interview was transcribed, and member

checked, and data was analyzed by using Moustakas‘ (1994) eight-step process for

analyzing phenomenological studies. Chapter 4 contains a detailed account of the

findings from the study.

Chapter 4: Research Findings

Introduction

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to explore the factors that

influence the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence whether to seek support

services after experiencing domestic violence. The central question that guided this study

was: What are the lived experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking

help from antidomestic violence agencies? A secondary question was: How do Latina

victims of domestic violence describe reasons whether or not to seek support services?

The data that emerged from the research questions divulged a variety of factors

that influenced their decision for not seeking support services. In the course of the

interviews, participants‘ descriptions of their lived experiences led to further

comprehension of the phenomenon. In this chapter, the findings constitute the outcome of

the analysis of the ensuing constituents: Setting, demographics, data collection data

analysis, trustworthiness of data and data results.

Setting

The setting for participants‘ interviews was a public library where there was a

private room which provided a sense of privacy, comfort, and freedom of interference for

participants.

Demographics

In this study, a total of eight self-identified Latina victims of domestic violence

participated. The participants‘ age ranged from 28 to 43 years old. All the participants

revealed that they reside in the State of New York, they were in a domestic violence

relationship within the past 2 years and they did not seek support services. To maintain

their anonymity, names were not used and replaced by codes such as P1, P2, P3, P4, P5,

P6,and P8.

Data Collection

For the purpose of this transcendental phenomenological study, I collected data

through the use of semistructured interviews of eight participants who met the inclusion

criteria to get a better understanding of the factors that influenced the decision of Latina

victims of domestic violence whether to seek support services after experiencing

domestic violence. Throughout the interviewing process, I followed all ethical procedures

which are outlined in Chapter 3. Before the interviews, each participant signed a consent

form. Each interview lasted approximately 30 minutes and was audio recorded using a

digital voice recorder. I asked questions based on the interview protocol and asked follow

up questions when needed. I transcribed each taped interview verbatim to maximize the

level of credibility and confirmability of the data.

Data Analysis

I started analyzing the data by transcribing each participant interview word by

word as well as organizing each file for additional analysis. I reviewed each transcribed

interview for the purpose of accuracy and clarification. I coded the data to identify

patterns and themes. By following Moustakas' (1994) steps in data analysis, I used

horizonalization and highlighted notable statements to understand the factors that

influenced the decision of Latina victims of domestic violence whether to seek support

services after experiencing domestic violence. Codes, terms, and phrases were

highlighted with different colors, which allowed me to sort and group the data by taking

into consideration the number of times a code or phrase appeared in each participant‘s

transcript. As such, I was able to identify factors that influenced the decision of Latina

victims of domestic violence whether to seek support services after experiencing

domestic violence.

From the identified codes, I identified patterns. The identified patterns led the way

to the development of meaning units. The way Creswell (2013) described clusters of

meanings is that they constitute units such as words, phrases, and patterns that are

noteworthy to the topic, and assemble these units jointly. From the meaning units, I

identified emerging themes from the participants' experiences. I used the themes to write

both textural and structural descriptions. Finally, I combined the descriptions to provide

the essence of the phenomenon. I identified five themes: (a) rationale for not seeking

support services, (b) family‘s influence on help seeking, (c) cultural constraints (d)

reasons for not calling the police, and (e) financial constraints. However, I looked for

discrepant cases from the themes, which revealed that only one participant believed that

her religious beliefs mostly influenced her decision not to seek support services and only

one participant declared that language barrier was the key factor for not seeking support

services.

Evidence of Trustworthiness

In this study, to address issues of trustworthiness, a precise and thorough

procedure, which included credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability

was used as suggested Lincoln and Guba (1985). The rationale remains that these four

criteria are considered to counterparts of the positivist‘s criteria of internal validity,

reliability, objectivity, and external validity (Polit & Beck, 2012).

Credibility

Through the lenses of Lincoln and Guba (1985), credibility entails credence in the

veracity of the data and interpretations of them. From the views of Lincoln and Guba, it is

imperative for qualitative researchers to attempt to demonstrate truth in the results for the

specific participants and circumstances in the study. Within this context, I applied

triangulation, member checking and saturation.

Lincoln and Guba (1985) asserted that triangulation constitutes various sources of

data collection. Creswell (2013) maintained that the use of three different sources of data

collection can facilitate the genuine application of triangulation. Within this context, in

addition to the collected data, I used member checking and I kept reflective journals

which provided me additional levels of detail about the data. I ensured that the three

elements of triangulation confirm that the themes that emerged came from the data

collection and analysis.

To ensure the accuracy and consistency of the transcriptions regarding the lived

experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic

violence agencies, I used member checking (Moustakas, 1994). This was a significant

part of the study because I was able to bring the data back to the participants. Participants

were able to check for accuracy and add to the credibility of the experience (Creswell,

2013). Polit and Beck (2012) affirmed that member checking is about confirming the

credibility of qualitative data. Participants received a summary of their transcribed

interview to propose any changes or add information. Similar to most of qualitative

research studies, in phenomenological research, I continued to interview participants until

saturation was reached. Charmaz (2006) contended that in every facet of qualitative

research, the focus of the research is more on the depth of the data instead on the quantity

of participants. Saturation was reached once no new data emerged from the interviews.

Transferability

The concept of transferability constitutes the potentiality for the results to be

transferred to or can be replicated in other settings (Polit & Beck, 2012). Because the

results of qualitative research studies are distinct to not only specific environments but

also a small number of participants, it is not feasible to demonstrate that the results and

conclusions can be applied to other conditions and populations. Maxwell (1992)

maintained that compared to quantitative research studies, qualitative research studies are

not commonly generalizable since their results usually connect to a targeted and small

number of participants or environments.

Korstiens and Moser (2018) argued that it is not feasible or constructive to show

that results or conclusions from qualitative research studies can be applied to other

populations. Transferability does not necessitate extensive assertions, but instead invites

readers to establish a relationship between various components of a study and their

personal experience, using thick descriptions was imperative. Moustakas (1994)

emphasized the significance of a rich and tick description of the data which can lead to a

full and clear understanding of a phenomenon. I also used detailed descriptions of lived

experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic

violence agencies and settings. Patton (2002) argued that detailed descriptions will help

me to transfer the meanings and essences of my study to other locations as a way to

determine the applicability of the results to other Latinas who have been victims of

domestic violence and who do not seek support services. In addition, I used various

participants‘ quotes to describe the details about their experiences.

Dependability

Dependability plays a significant role enhancing trustworthiness since it

demonstrates the level of consistency and repeatability of the findings of the study. Polit

and Beck (2012) asserted that without dependability, it is not possible for the researcher

to obtain credibility. Within this context, it is vital for the researcher to ensure that there

is consistency between the results and the collected raw data (Cypress, 2017). Although a

variety of techniques could be used to establish dependability, in this study, I maintained

an audit trail and use triangulation. Patton (2002) argued that an audit trial is a significant

strategy with regard to establishing the confirmability of the study‘s findings.

As previously mentioned, triangulation is about using numerous sources so that

the data can be validated through cross verification (Patton, 2002). Polit and Beck (2012)

alleged that through triangulation, the researcher can apprehend a more complete, and

contextualized picture of an essential event. Beside the collected data, I used member

checking and reflective so that I could get a comprehensive understanding of the lived

experiences of Latina victims of domestic violence in seeking help from antidomestic

violence agencies.

Confirmability