Minoritised Ethnic Women's Experiences of Domestic Abuse and Barriers to Help-Seeking: A Summary of the Evidence

Summary of the Evidence

Introduction

The research questions are addressed across the following themes, which were identified in the literature as common across the literature and relevant to the research aims:

• Extended Family Abuse
• So-called 'Honour-based' Abuse
• Immigration Status and Language Barriers
• Cultural Insensitivity and Institutional Racism
• Specialist 'By and For' Organisations

The research reviewed for this report suggests that minoritised ethnic women can experience distinct forms of domestic abuse (Gill et al., 2018) which are influenced and compounded by patriarchal systems and social inequality. This can include abuse perpetrated by family members and so-called 'honour based' abuse (HBA). The role that 'honour' plays in women's experiences of domestic abuse, and other forms of GBV in the domestic space, is complex and warrants further investigation. These distinct forms of abuse are not readily recognised in traditional understandings of domestic abuse or in legislation which is problematic as evidence suggests that it can lead to abuse being misunderstood and overlooked by the police and services, and prevent women from accessing support.

There is evidence that minoritised ethnic women can face multiple and additional barriers to seeking help, reporting abuse and leaving abusive relationships (Siddiqui, 2018; Hulley et al., 2023; Femi-Ajao et al., 2020). Evidence suggests that minoritised ethnic women may remain in abusive situations for longer before reporting (Femi-Ajao et al., 2020; Azad, 2021; Gill & Harrison, 2019). These barriers can be understood as the result of 'intersectional discrimination' whereby cultural and structural inequalities overlap and multiply to hinder women's ability to seek help (see Siddiqui, 2018).

The most commonly identified barriers were: immigration policies (e.g. fear of deportation), cultural issues (e.g. patriarchal social norms that facilitate abuse), monitoring and surveillance and lack of social networks; racism and cultural insensitivity which can lead to a lack of trust in the police and public services; and, a poor service response and/or understanding of minoritised ethnic women's experiences and needs. These barriers are intensified where women lack the financial means to support themselves (and their children), have a poor grasp of English and/or lack knowledge of the law and their rights. These findings are consistent with both UK and international systematic evidence reviews (see Femi-Ajao et al., 2018 & Hulley et al., 2022).

Extended Family Abuse

Summary of key findings:

• Some minoritised ethnic women experience abuse not only from their partner/spouse but also from members of their extended household.
• This type of extended family abuse is not currently captured by Scottish domestic abuse legislation which specifies the perpetrator as a partner or ex-partner.
• As well as physical abuse, women may be subject to a range of controlling and harmful behaviours from the extended family including surveillance of their day-to-day activities, excessive domestic labour, social isolation, and economic abuse.
• Abusive extended family households may adhere to intersecting power dynamics of age and gender, where the daughter-in-law holds the least power. In these circumstances, women can experience abuse from other family members, including the mother-in-law and/or sister-in-law.
• Compared with abuse perpetrated by the partner (only) or family (only), some evidence suggests that victims of partner and family abuse are more likely to experience more types and more severe forms of abuse and are more likely to have an insecure immigration status.
• Living in abusive extended family households can make seeking help and/or reporting abuse very difficult. Key barriers include dependency on households for money and housing and near constant surveillance by family members such as 'chaperoning'.
• There is some evidence that minoritised ethnic women experience abuse for longer than other ethnic groups before reporting.
• It is important to consider the influence of structural inequalities, such as poverty and gender inequality, alongside socio-cultural norms when seeking to understand GBV within minoritised ethnic communities.

An extended family household is typically the husband's family home which a woman may enter into after marriage and where they will live with their husband and his family – also known as someone's 'affinal kin' (or in-laws), with abuse in this setting sometimes called affinal kin abuse (Mirza, 2017).

In evaluating the evidence, it is important to consider the family structures within some minoritised ethnic communities and how patriarchal structures can facilitate domestic abuse and extended family abuse. South Asian households for example are often characterised by extended family structures comprising multiple generations. Family structures like this can create 'conducive contexts'^[19] for abuse and render women vulnerable to various forms of GBV from multiple perpetrators (Mirza, 2017). Sociocultural norms, such as a preference for sons, can cause tensions and hostility between mothers and daughters-in-law and create an environment which can lead to violence (Mirza, 2017).

These kinds of family structures and sociocultural norms are markedly different from the dominant concept of the nuclear household on which mainstream understandings of domestic abuse and associated policies and legislation tend to be based (Mirza, 2017).

Family abuse

Existing Scottish legislation on domestic abuse assumes that a nuclear family household (i.e. intimate partners and their children) constitutes the 'domestic'. Thus, there is no specific legislative provision for abuse that occurs in extended family households where there are multiple perpetrators including the partner and family members. A Scottish study by Mirza (2017) which involved 11 Pakistani-Muslim women found that many of the participants lived in extended family households, which exacerbated their abuse not only from their intimate partners/spouses, but also from other family members. A study by Anitha and Gill (2023), which comprised of interviews with 26 frontline practitioners providing specialist domestic abuse services for (as described) black and minority ethnic women in England and Wales during the COVID-19 pandemic, describes the existence and exacerbation of forced domestic labour and policing of women living within extended family households.

Bates (2021), in her analysis of victim-perpetrator relationships, which involved the analysis of 1474 police case files of HBA^[20] and eight interviews with caseworkers, proposes a typology of HBA based on three types of relationships: Type 1 (partner abuse), Type 2 (family abuse) and Type 3 (partner plus family abuse). The research found that 40% of the HBA cases involved abuse by the intimate partner (Type 1), 29% involved abuse by the family (Type 2) and 31% of cases involved both family and partner (Type 3). For Type 2 cases (family only) the perpetrators were typically the victim's natal family or (less commonly) their in-laws, and had higher rates of female perpetrators than the other types^[21]. Type 3 cases (partner and family abuse) tended to involve in-laws and often the mother-in-law. These cases were highlighted as the group most likely to experience multiple forms of abuse, more threats to kill, and sexual abuse. The profile of victims in this group were more likely than the other types to be migrants with insecure immigration status and deemed to be higher risk.

Bates (2021) describes Type 3 (family and partner abuse) as "characterized as an extension of intimate partner domestic abuse, where in-laws join partners in abusing and controlling the victim". Bates argues that this type of abuse should be seen as specific form of "BME domestic intimate partner abuse". Whilst this study was exploratory and does not make claims about generalizability, the findings raise useful questions about what this kind of typology might mean for how abuse conducted by different perpetrators is defined in law and the implications for policy and practice.

In extended families, social hierarchies are typically described as being organised along gender and generational divides (Bates, 2018). These hierarchies can manifest in ways that lead the husband's mother – the mother-in-law - to command more power in the household than the wife (Mirza, 2017 & 2016). A number of studies have explored the role of women in perpetrating abuse (Bates, 2018; Aplin, 2017). The Bates (2018) study (which involved the same data as the 2021 study) found that females were more likely to be involved in HBA than other types of domestic abuse. Men were the primary perpetrators in most cases however. Abuse from female perpetrators involved things like "controlling behaviour and emotional manipulation, including threats to harm to kill themselves or crying/pleading with victims not to shame them" and "trapping victims at home, physically preventing them from leaving, domestic servitude and carrying out physical abuse – including slapping, pushing, beating." (p297)

A similar study by Aplin (2017), which also involved the analysis of cases of HBA police reports (n=100) and interviews with police officers (n=15)^[22], explored how female perpetrators were assessed in police investigations. The findings highlighted a tendency by the police to overlook women, especially mother-in-laws, in abusing (or aiding and abetting the abuse of) other women, such as daughters or daughters-in-laws. Whilst drawing attention to abuse perpetrated by females, Aplin (2017) notes that mothers may be secondary victims acting under duress. Similarly, Bates (2018) reports that female perpetration tends to occur within a patriarchal structure. A number of articles refer to Kandiyoti's theory of the 'patriarchal bargain' which posits that whilst female in-laws may derive some social or familial benefits by engaging in abusive behaviours, the practice ultimately benefits men by using older women to control younger women in the family (Kandiyoti, 1998 cited in Anitha, 2019). It is also the case that HBA is predominantly targeted at women and girls (see next chapter) and is therefore a form of GBV, regardless of the gender of the perpetrator.

Some of the evidence highlights the risk of 'everyday' forms of domestic abuse being ignored by services because of an over-emphasis on culture (e.g. Chantler, 2018). This may occur where extended family abuse, for example, is seen as normalized within some cultures, whilst specific forms of abuse such as HBA are pathologized (this is covered in the next chapter). However, the role of cultural and religious norms and how they can be used to legitimise abusive practices is still a key factor to consider (Kanyeredzi, 2018)^[23]. Such evidence underscores the importance of employing an intersectional perspective to explore how gender, immigration status, and race/ethnicity can help inform our understanding of these forms of domestic abuse and GBV.

Poverty and economic abuse

Evidence shows that abuse from extended family members does not only occur within South Asian communities. Kanyeredzi (2018)'s study of nine Black British women in England reveals experiences of abuse from extended family members including uncles, grandparents, and the mother's intimate (male) partner. The study found that poverty can play a role in the creation of extended family households. The study reported that participants with parents with precarious employment lived in multigenerational or extended family households, which it is argued increased women's vulnerability to abuse from extended families and parents' intimate partners. The study also found that close ties between the perpetrator and others in the household can make it very difficult for victim-survivors to report abuse^[24].

Whilst the links between poverty and domestic abuse are fairly well established (Fahmy et al, 2016; Skafida et al., 2022)^[25], the role ethnicity plays in this and how experiences of family abuse vary by the intersection of these factors needs explored further. It is also important to recognise that poverty is a barrier to reporting/disclosure where domestic abuse "is very far down the list of survivors' [sic] priorities if they are facing other issues like insecure housing or poverty" (Love et al, 2017) (p170). This is discussed further in the Immigration Status and Language Barriers chapter.

Entrenched patriarchal norms can impact on the types of abuse that women are subjected to, including financial and economic abuse which operate in the context of power and control and can take specific forms for migrant women (Anitha, 2019). Financial abuse can include financial control, exploitation and sabotage (Postmus et al. (2012) in Anitha, 2019). In a research study with 41 South Asian female survivors of domestic abuse from the UK and India, Anitha (2019) reported women experiencing all three types of abuse. Financial control involved control over access to money, for example the family bank account which the wife had no claim over. Examples of financial exploitation included coercive debts, the sale or taking of women's belongings (e.g. from their dowry) and appropriation of women's benefit payments. Lastly, financial sabotage, though not a common feature of abuse in this study, can involve the sabotaging of women's education and employment opportunities.

Economic abuse is concerned with a victim-survivor's paid and unpaid work. It can involve the control and exploitation of paid work (e.g. appropriation of wages) and forced and/or excessive domestic labour and servitude (e.g. childcare and housework). Anitha (2019) describes women who, despite doing paid work, only had enough money for the most basic of necessities. Mirza (2017) describes how patriarchal systems in which women are seen as in charge of domestic work can lead to domestic servitude, something which Mirza terms as 'domestic despotism'. The role of the mother-in-law is highlighted in some of the (South Asian) research where they are reported as facilitating and participating in financial and economic abuse. Mirza (2017) for example, reported that women in her research were prevented by their mother-in-laws from "having economic autonomy by not being allowed to be employed for money; being forced to work unpaid in the family business; or having their income taken away from them" (p405).

Social isolation and control

Social isolation, another common feature of domestic abuse, occurs where family members constantly police women and monitor their whereabouts. Social isolation can be associated with financial abuse in extended family households. Mirza (2017) found that financial dependency affected women's ability to form and retain protective social networks. For example, one of the study participants, who depended on her husband's family for money, was not able to phone her mother in her home country as the family refused to provide her with a phone card.

Mirza (2017) also described how women in her study experienced isolation in the home and reported not being allowed to leave the home without a chaperone (for example, the husband's mother or sister). Gill et al (2018)'s research with South Asian victim-survivors of HBA^[26] and multi-agency practitioners working with them illustrates the difficulties that women experience when disclosing abuse due to family 'chaperoning'. There is also some evidence that minoritised ethnic (described as BME) women experience abuse for longer periods than other ethnic groups prior to seeking help (Femi-Ajao et al., 2020; Azad, 2021; Gill & Harrison, 2019), perhaps because of barriers such as this.^[27]

Questions for consideration

• How is extended family abuse (particularly where it co-occurs with partner abuse) currently addressed in Scottish law, policy and practice? Where are the gaps or shortfalls and what are the implications for victim/survivors and services?
• What can be done to enable minoritised ethnic victim/survivors to seek support and report partner/family abuse, and to ensure that, where they do, the support they receive is safe, accessible and helpful?

So-called 'Honour-based' Abuse

Summary of key findings:

• So-called 'honour-based' abuse (HBA) was a common theme across the literature on minoritised ethnic women's experiences of domestic abuse.
• HBA can be defined as abuse perpetrated against individuals, most commonly women, who are perceived to have acted contrary to values or norms identified by a community as consistent with 'honour' and to have brought shame to an individual, family or community.
• HBA can manifest in various forms – physical and sexual abuse, coercive control, financial/economic abuse, social isolation, blackmail, forced marriage, female genital mutilation (FGM), and in extreme cases, forced suicide and murder.
• HBA can be considered as both an umbrella term that cuts across domestic and sexual violence and a distinct form of GBV. Whilst some manifestations of HBA such as coercive and controlling behaviour are synonymous with domestic abuse, distinguishing features of HBA are identified in the literature in relation to the motivation for the abuse (to uphold codes of honour) and who the perpetrator(s) are (partner, family, community).
• Cultural stereotypes and poor understanding of HBA can hamper measures to prevent and address HBA and related GBV.
• The framing of HBA as a 'cultural' issue, particularly amongst Muslim communities, can lead to negative stereotyping and render services reluctant to address HBA for fear of being labelled as racist.
• Islamophobia and racism can impact on how HBA is perceived within some communities, which may serve to perpetuate the practice and deter women from reporting abuse.
• Lack of understanding of the complexity and nuances of HBA can lead to HBA and 'everyday' forms of domestic abuse reported by minoritised ethnic women being overlooked by the Police and other services.
• The use of euphemisms to describe sexual abuse in different languages (e.g. Hindi and Urdu) can act as a barrier for some women when understanding rape and reporting sexual abuse.

Despite the literature search focusing on domestic abuse^[28] HBA was a common theme across the evidence. However, it should be noted that this section does not represent a full or exhaustive summary of the UK literature on HBA. More investigation of the literature is needed to explore the complex nature of HBA and domestic abuse further.

Concepts and experiences of so-called 'honour-based' abuse

So-called 'honour-based' abuse (HBA) relates to abuse perpetrated against individuals, mostly commonly women, who are perceived to have acted contrary to values or norms identified by a community as consistent with 'honour'. By doing so, individuals are deemed to bring 'dishonour' or 'shame' to their family and community (Mulvihill et al, 2019). HBA is a gendered form of violence which disproportionately impacts women (Bates, 2021). In its recently refreshed Equally Safe strategy, the Scottish Government includes HBA within its definition of violence against women and girls (VAWG) which it describes as:

"honour-based abuse, including forced marriages, female genital mutilation (FGM), dowry abuse and 'honour based' coercive control and killings." (Scottish Government, 2023b, p11)

Whilst there is no statutory definition of HBA in Scotland, the joint domestic abuse protocol between Police Scotland and the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) states that:

"Officers should also be mindful that domestic abuse can be perpetrated as a form of so called 'honour' based abuse and may be committed with the knowledge or approval of other family or community members who might consider any disclosure of abuse by the victim to break a perceived 'honour' code." ^[29]

Bates (2021) proposes a more complete definition of HBA than is currently used in England and Wales which she argues captures the pattern of behaviour and multiple types of abuse and perpetrators that can be involved:

"Honor-based abuse is any incident, or pattern of incidents, of controlling, coercive, intimidating, or threatening behavior or abuse (which may include psychological, emotional, physical or sexual abuse, isolation, abandonment, forcing someone to marry, threats to kill, murder, kidnap, or other acts of domestic abuse) carried out by one or more family members and/or a (current or former) intimate partner, to protect or defend the honor of an individual, family and/or community against perceived or anticipated breaches of their code of behavior, regardless of the age, ethnicity, sexual orientation, religion, or gender of the victim. It is a form of (primarily male) violence towards (primarily) women." (Bates, 2021)

Hague et al (2013)'s comparative study of HBA in the Iraqi Kurdistan Region and among Kurdish diaspora in the UK (which involved 166 interviews^[30]) describes how behaviours interpreted as dishonourable tended to focus on women's contact with other (non-relation) men. Other research emphasises the gendered nature of HBA in which women are seen as an extension of men's honour (Idriss, 2017).

HBA can be considered as both an umbrella term that cuts across domestic and sexual violence and a distinct form of gender-based violence. As Bates (2021) states:

"HBA is frequently identified as taking place within intimate partner relationships, with or without the involvement of other family members. Much of the abuse profile is similar to other domestic and intimate partner abuse cases, in particular experiences of jealous and controlling behaviors, emotional, physical, and sexual abuse. And, as with domestic abuse, HBA is gendered, with the majority of cases involving a primary male perpetrator and a primary female victim, and with abuse frequently driven by patriarchal ideas about gender roles and the control of female sexuality or autonomy." (Bates, 2021)

A number of academics describe HBA as a broader form of GBV which can involve abuse traditionally associated with domestic abuse (e.g. coercive control) (Aplin, 2017) but also as something that has specificities that require a specific response (Gill et al., 2018). Key distinguishing features are the perpetrators involved which, as described in the previous chapter, can involve multiple perpetrators including partners and family members; and, the motive for the abuse which is to retain or restore a family's honour.

Further, it is argued that HBA not only gives rise to specific types of abuse but that it also shapes the context of abuse (Gill et al, 2017). Distinguishing HBA from other forms of GBV would, for some, enable more reporting and provide more accurate data on the prevalence of HBA in the UK which is said to be hidden due to a lack of reporting, and accurate data and statistics^[31].

Another distinguishing feature of HBA is the role of female family members, as described in the previous chapter. Both Aplin (2017) and Bates (2018)'s analysis of police case files (and interviews with police officers) in England and Wales, involving mostly South Asian victim-survivors, found that mothers and mother-in-laws, sometimes acting alone or in collusion with other family members, can play a significant role in perpetuating HBA against their daughters/daughters-in-law.

In legal terms there is no set definition or specific offence of HBA in Scottish legislation and it is not covered by the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Act 2018. Perpetrators of HBA will be prosecuted using existing legislation, for example threatening or abusive behaviour (section 38 of Criminal Justice & Licensing (Scotland) Act 2010) or assault (Safe Lives, 2023) or other legislation that may apply^[32]. There is legislation in Scotland which covers female genital mutilation and forced marriage. It is not within the scope of this review to consider the law in any great depth, however, a recent review undertaken by the Scottish Universities Insight Institute (SUII) considers whether the Scottish legal definition of domestic abuse protects victims of HBA and whether action is required to improve the law (McLaughlin et al, 2023). The findings of the SUII review chime with those of this report, particularly in relation to minoritised ethnic women's experiences of abuse by extended family members.

Data on prevalence and types of HBA – a brief summary

An examination of UK statistics on HBA-related offences recorded by the police in England and Wales shows that for the year ending March 2023^[33], the most common types of HBA fell into the 'other HBA-related tagged offences' category which made up 91% of HBA-related offences.^[34] Within this category the most common type of abuse was controlling and coercive behaviour (19%); assault with injury (16%) and assault without injury (12%). There are currently no equivalent published statistics available in Scotland^[35]. Police Scotland records HBA incidents where there is a concern for an individual (either a protection or wellbeing concern). Based on a FOI published on the Police Scotland website in 2022^[36], in the five years between 2017 and 2021 there were 701 HBA-related concerns recorded (an average of 140 per annum). However, this data is provisional and is subject to a range of limitations and should be treated as management information.

One English study involving the examination of police data in one area (Hertfordshire) found that 77% of HBA incidents or crimes were flagged by the police as linked to domestic abuse, and just 4% were flagged as forced marriage. However, the research found discrepancies in the recording of data, with not all incidences of HBA being recorded as such (but instead as general domestic abuse) and, not all incidences of HBA being additionally flagged as domestic abuse (Gill et al., 2018). As described previously, Bates (2021)'s analysis of nearly 1500 HBA cases provides a helpful typology based on the victim-perpetrator relationship. The research suggests that the majority of HBA cases involved domestic abuse (71%)^[37], whilst family (only) abuse (Type 2) (e.g. younger victims at risk of forced marriage) which is most typically associated with HBA made up less than a third of cases (29%).

Bates (2021) discusses how Type 1 (partner abuse) is essentially domestic abuse involving minoritised ethnic victims/perpetrators, which may be misinterpreted as HBA. Type 3 (partner and family abuse), despite making up a significant proportion of cases analysed, is highlighted as more likely to be hidden from the police and other statutory services due in part to issues concerning immigration which are discussed in the next chapter. What this evidence suggests is that how HBA is conceptualized and defined determines how it is responded to and recorded. The limited research that was reviewed^[38] suggests that traditional concepts of HBA, such as forced marriage, may in fact make up the minority of HBA-offences. Domestic abuse on the other hand appears to be a common feature of HBA.

Challenges in reporting HBA

Fears of bringing shame to a family can prevent women from reporting abuse. Begum et al (2020) conducted a study with 12 South-Asian victim-survivors of HBA and two support workers. Their findings reported that victim-survivors experienced multiple layers of guilt and shame about their abuse and that fears of dishonoring or shaming the family can prevent women seeking help or reporting abuse. Other research has reported similar barriers, especially when speaking to 'the authorities' is itself considered 'dishonourable' or a breach of social or community norms (Hester et al, 2015; Gill et al, 2017)^[39].

The role of language and perceptions of sexual abuse is highlighted in the literature as relevant to women's experiences of HBA. Gill and Harrison (2019) raise the issue of linguistic contexts, describing how Hindi speaking women may find it difficult to talk about rape because of the different social meanings attached to the term in their language. Often understandings of rape are embedded within concepts of a woman's honour, where rape is described as a woman's honour being taken away. Within these socio-linguistic contexts, women's sexual agency is framed in a way that normalises or averts attention away from violence against women. These findings corroborate with Pande (2013)'s exploratory study of translator/practitioners working with Hindi-speaking women in the UK which described the different ways in which women allude to sexual violence based on how sexuality is articulated in Hindi in which participants described rape alongside conceptualisations of honour and shame as described above ^[40].

Cowburn et al (2015) raise the issue of culture and linguistic contexts that make it difficult for women from South Asian communities to report sexual abuse. Their study, consisting of interviews with women from South Asian communities in England and Wales^[41], reported that ideas of 'modesty' (or haya in Urdu) can prevent people in South Asia talking about anything related to sex. One of the participants cited the notion of 'modesty', alongside shame and honour, as affecting her decision to report abuse. She described her experience as a woman as one where, "you have to look after your own body; it would come down to that you are doing something to encourage that man to do something or to see you in that way"(p8). Such experiences shift the responsibility of sexual abuse from the perpetrator to the victim. These research studies suggest that the use of euphemisms can act as a barrier for some Hindi and Urdu speaking women to report sexual abuse.

Cultural stereotypes and poor understanding can hamper measures to prevent andaddress HBA. Chantler et al (2019)'s discussion of Islamophobia in the UK describes how since the late 1990s, forced marriage and HBA have been conceptualised as a largely Muslim issue. Gill and Brah (2014)'s analysis of 1414 news articles surrounding Shafilea Ahmed's murder – a high-profile case of 'honour-based' murder – describes the framing often used by British media on the motivations of the case and other instances of HBA:

"the British media has sought to render ['honour' killings] intelligible through references to the 'Muslim-ness' of [HBA], notions of Asian 'backwardness' and 'barbarism, the prevalence of human rights atrocities against women in Pakistan, and discourses about primitive manifestations of masculinity based on notions of honour and shame". (p82)

It is argued that such conflations or associations of HBA with specific minoritised ethnic communities can lead to the justice system, statutory and third sector organisations misinterpreting reports of domestic abuse from minoritised ethnic women. Indeed, Chantler (2018) states that this type of association "runs the risk of making invisible 'ordinary' or everyday forms of domestic abuse such as physical, sexual, emotional, financial abuse and coercive control" (p262). Similarly, Chantler et al. (2019) warn against separating specific types of violence associated with Muslim communities from wider GBV. Evidence suggests that confusion in terminology can lead to inaccurate data, which then makes policy making problematic, particularly where the data obscures the experiences of minoritised ethnic women, such as their experiences of domestic abuse (Chantler, 2018). Similarly, Mirza (2016) describes how 'cultural relativism' leads to domestic abuse being seen as part of harmful cultural practices that are inherent to a particular culture that should be dealt with by the community^[42],[43].

Concerns over racism and Islamophobia can impact on the recognition and practice of HBA within minoritised ethnic communities. Hague et al's (2013) comparative research on Iraqi Kurdish communities in Kurdistan and the UK found that although there were similarities between the forms of HBA in both contexts, the study's findings illustrate how the racism faced by many in the UK's Kurdish community served to encourage the practice of HBA. The authors argue that it is important to consider the impact of factors like immigration policies, discrimination and racism on individual and community responses to HBA.

Concerns over Islamophobia can lead to community leaders not wanting to draw attention to GBV for fear of further stigma against the community^[44]. Idriss (2020) in his research which involved interviews with 30 'key agents'^[45] and eight South Asian (mostly Muslim) domestic abuse and HBA victim-survivors in the UK, describes how the patriarchal structure within mosques and the exclusion of women from positions of power, alongside a reluctance in some mosques to discuss/recognise GBV, makes seeking help that much more difficult for Muslim women. Other research suggests that such associations can also negatively stereotype minoritised ethnic men (Idriss, 2017).

The evidence suggests, therefore, that it is important to consider HBA without resorting to cultural or moral relativism or essentialism. Siddiqui and Thiara (2018) suggest that taking a 'mature multiculturalism' stance would respect different communities' rights to cultural practices while calling out behaviours that harm certain groups within communities such as women and girls.

Finally, it is crucial to note that, minoritised ethnic communities are heterogeneous. Gill & Brah (2014) state that South Asian communities, like other communities, are "differentiated according to class, caste, lineage, religion, language and region, among other factors"(p74). Not all minoritised ethnic communities experience HBA, and, where they do, not all women experience it in the same way. As Gill & Brah (2014) state: "while some members of the many social groups that value the notion of honour engage in acts of violence, many more do not." (p74) The authors also posit that even within South Asia, matters surrounding honour and shame are not limited to the Muslim community or in Pakistan, but extend to Hindus and Sikhs as well as other South Asian countries and India.

There is also some evidence of socio-cultural norms relating to shame and honour existing outwith South Asian communities^[46]. Hague et al's study (2013) of HBA victim-survivors among the Kurdish community in the UK identifies similar concepts of 'shame' and 'honour'. Further, research by Thiara (2013) and Kanyeredzi (2018) reported fears among British African women of perpetuating stereotypes of African families or African men as abusive, and fears of bringing shame to 'the race' by reporting abuse. Their research illustrates how patriarchy within a community can intersect with racism from outwith that community, which may create conditions that make it difficult for British African women to report abuse. Even though this is articulated differently than in studies of South Asian women's experiences of HBA, the idea that one's membership of a community or family is important and needs to be protected is not unique to one community.

Questions for consideration

• Is HBA and its relationship with domestic abuse clearly understood in Scotland? What does this mean for victim-survivors' own perceptions of abuse, the perceptions of their families and communities, and how the justice system and services respond?
• What can be done to address the lack of robust and accurate data on HBA in Scotland?
• To what extent is HBA seen as a cultural issue in Scotland? Does this impact on how the justice system and services respond?

Immigration Status and Language Barriers

Summary of key findings:

• Inequalities associated with migrant women's culture, gender, class and race intersect with immigration policy which can give rise to intensified and specific forms of abuse.
• Immigration policies can increase migrant women's vulnerability to abuse whilst at the same time providing a system open to exploitation by perpetrators.
• Dependency on spouses for the right to remain in the UK can fuel coercive and controlling behaviour, with perpetrators exploiting the situation to further the abuse. This is exacerbated when children are involved, as women fear being deported and separated from their children.
• Women may feel they have no choice but to remain in abusive marriages to avoid risking homelessness or deportation, especially if they do not have support networks outside of the household or community.
• This can be the case even with the Migrant Victims of Domestic Abuse Concession (MVDAC), which entitles victim-survivors to three months leave to remain and access to benefits. Migrant women may be unaware of the concession or unable to disclose abuse whilst still living with their abuser(s).
• Language barriers can create dependency on perpetrators who exploit this by way of misinformation - controlling what information women are given and what information is provided to services (e.g. a doctor), thereby limiting victim-survivors' ability to seek help.
• A poor grasp of English can be a significant barrier for some women both in understanding their rights, such as the MVDAC, and reporting abuse. Perpetrators again may exploit this by providing misinformation and preventing women from seeking help.
• Other barriers to reporting included lengthy spousal visas (five years) and the 'No Recourse to Public Funds' (NRPF) condition; reluctance to report abuse to the police due to fear of deportation/negative impact on visa application; and a lack of understanding or knowledge of legal entitlements and support available.

Migrant women are particularly vulnerable to abuse (see Bates, 2021). Women may arrive in their 'host' country with little English, leaving behind their family and social support networks and with limited or no access to finance. Immigration policy then renders them dependent on their spouses for their welfare and leave to remain in the UK for up to five years. This provides fertile ground for abuse to flourish and creates significant barriers to leaving abusive relationships, which are exploited by perpetrators in order to further their abuse (Hulley et al., 2023). For migrant women, the way in which inequalities created by gender, race, class and migration status converge to shape their experiences of domestic abuse is crucial to understanding their distinct experiences and barriers to help-seeking.

Immigration policy – a brief introduction

By way of a brief overview, women (from outside the EU) who come to the UK to marry a UK citizen are subject to a five year 'probationary' period. If their marriage breaks down during that time they will no longer have the right to remain in the UK, may face deportation and could be separated from their children (Mirza, 2016). They are also not entitled to refuge provision or welfare benefits because of a condition attached to their immigration visa called 'no recourse to public funds' (NRPF).^[47] This condition is particularly problematic for migrant women experiencing domestic abuse as they are potentially trapped in an abusive situation for years unless they apply for a Migrant Victims of Domestic Abuse Concession (MVDAC)^[48].

The MVDAC enables eligible people to gain access to benefits and housing assistance for a short, defined period. It is only available to people "who have leave to enter or remain as a partner to gain access to public funds following a relationship breakdown with their partner due to domestic abuse" (NRPF Website). MVDAC grants eligible people to three months access to employment, benefits and local authority housing during which time they must submit another immigration application (e.g. indefinite leave to remain or ILR) or leave the UK. However, research has found that women on spousal visas are often not aware of domestic violence concessions, or the laws or policies relating to immigration or the criminal justice process (as cited in Chantler, 2018). These barriers to help seeking are discussed further in this section.

Conducive contexts for abuse

A common theme that emerges from the research on minoritised ethnic women and domestic abuse is immigration policy, specifically spousal visas and the NRPF condition. In the same way that extended families create 'conducive contexts' for domestic abuse to thrive (Chantler & McCarry, 2019), so to – it is argued – does immigration policy in the UK (Voolma, 2018; Femi-Ajao, 2018; Ajayi et al., 2022; Mirza, 2016, Chantler, 2018). For example, one study drawing on findings from interviews with nine Pakistani Muslim women in Scotland, found that perpetrators exploited immigration policies to threaten women and coerce them into staying in abusive relationships (Mirza, 2016). Especially for the Pakistan-born interviewees, immigration status was integral to their experiences of abuse, such as their husbands' refusal to renew their visas, which could lead to women becoming illegal migrants.

Similarly, Anitha (2011)'s research, which involved interviews with 30 South Asian women with insecure immigration status in England, found that inequalities associated with women's culture, gender, class and race intersect with immigration policy which give rise to intensified and specific forms of abuse. For example, the research reported how perpetrators used threats of deportation to prevent women from leaving. This type of threatening and coercive behaviour is exacerbated when children are involved, as women fear being separated from their children if they are deported to their home country (Mirza, 2016).

Evidence also shows that women may feel they have no choice but to remain in abusive marriages to avoid risking homelessness, especially if they do not have support networks outside of their household or within the wider community (e.g. see Voolma, 2018). As noted earlier in the report, family members in the household and/or community may not always be supportive but rather they too can be a source of abuse. There is evidence of family members' involvement in controlling and coercive behaviour related to issues around immigration. For example, Hague et al. (2006) provide examples of family members (the husband's family) hiding women's passports to exert control. Anitha (2011) reported that in only three cases (out of 30 South Asian women with insecure immigration status) was the perpetrator solely the husband. Anitha argues that immigrant women living in extended families, or close to their husband's family, can be at increased risk of abuse, and that this aspect of domestic abuse is not always recognised by service providers.

A women's visa status can also impact on their social status within the community. Gangoli et al (2019) found that the migrant 'BME' women in their study^[49] (who were married to UK-born/UK-based men) perceived their lack of acceptance by the community as related to their insecure visa status. Similarly, Mirza (2017) reported in her study that some women felt that having a visa increased their social status in their home countries. This also made it difficult to leave abusive relationships due to the perceived value of having a UK visa.

Immigration policy as a barrier to help-seeking

As noted above, there are state provided safeguards such as the Migrant Victims of Domestic Abuse Concession (MVDAC), that allow women on spousal visas to leave their spouses and apply for 'Indefinite Leave to Remain' (ILR) within three months. However, this provision relies on victim-survivors disclosing abuse through service providers. This can be problematic for migrant women who do not disclose abuse or access support services until after they have left the abusive relationship or household (Mirza, 2016). Further, this policy has been criticised for putting victim-survivors at risk by placing the onus on them to gather evidence and contact services before they leave the relationship (Anitha, 2008 cited in Hulley et al., 2023). Mirza (2016) also critiques the onus of responsibility within the 'right to exit' approach, which puts the onus on victim-survivors to leave an abusive household rather than the perpetrators being removed.

As described earlier, it can be very difficult for some minoritised ethnic women to disclose abuse due to near-constant surveillance by other family members, among other factors. Women in these circumstances may not therefore be able to access the MVDA concession. Further, Dudley (2017)'s research critiques the way in which the DDV concession (as it was then called) was implemented. Findings from interview data (with practitioners)^[50] reports inconsistencies in knowledge and application of the law, including the DDV concession. Moreover, evidence describes how the concession is only available to women on spousal visas and excludes those on other precarious visa statuses, such as dependents and students (see also Voolma, 2018). Other evidence reports that women who apply for ILR under the concession have to wait long periods for a result on their application, which may exceed the three months temporary leave to remain (Voolma, 2018 and Mirza, 2016), although it appears that some changes have been introduced since this research was undertaken^[51].

The five-year probationary period for spousal visas and the documentary evidence required to apply for a MVDAC can create a significant barrier to women wishing to exit abusive relationships. Mirza (2016)'s study found that women chose to stay in abusive relationships as they did not have the financial means to leave, which was exacerbated by the NRPF policy. Similarly, Gill and Virdee (2021)'s review of the Women and Girls Network case files, provides an example of a woman on a spousal visa who could not access refuge accommodation after leaving her abusive spouse due to the NRPF clause accompanying her visa status (see also Carline & Easteal, 2014). This was a common theme in the research on migrant minoritised ethnic women and domestic abuse, with victim-survivors reporting that they had no choice but to remain with abusive spouses as they could not access welfare benefits and refuge accommodation. Without access to benefits, many of these women risk either further abuse or homelessness (Gill and Virdee, 2021).

Gangoli et al (2019) found in their study that migrant 'BME' women felt that making police reports or obtaining legal justice through the courts as difficult or impossible, especially where they were awaiting results for visa applications or asylum claims. Many cited fears of police reports or criminal court cases influencing their visa status applications. Day and Gill (2020)'s findings from a study of multi-agency partnerships found that the police's 'pro-arrest and prosecution' immigration policies led to increasing numbers of migrant women victim-survivors being arrested on immigration accounts when reporting domestic abuse. Reports of these types of incidents can discourage women with insecure immigration status from reporting abuse to the police for fear of detention and deportation.

Gangoli (2019) reported instances of women being moved into temporary accommodation and a lack of communication from the police about whether to pursue criminal charges (Gangoli, 2019). The study found examples of reports of abuse to the police not proceeding to prosecution, in some cases due to misinformation from the perpetrators such as misinforming the police that victim-survivors were returning to their home countries.^[52] This kind of manipulation and exploitation of the system by perpetrators was a common theme across the research.

Language barriers

Language can impact on women's experiences of abuse and be a significant barrier in reporting abuse. Along with the challenges and dependency created by a spousal visa, not understanding English can further increase the risk of abuse for migrant women. Perpetrators can exploit language barriers by providing misinformation, for example about visas, the law and the police, and by exerting control over social and service interactions (Gangoli et al, 2019; see also Husain, 2019).

Migrant women who become minoritised after migrating to the UK may find it especially difficult to leave abusive relationships if they are not fluent in English, particularly where this means that they lack knowledge about structures, systems (including immigration and welfare) and support organisations, and where women have to rely on their spouse and his family for information and translators when making a police report (Gangoli, 2019). Reliance on interpreters or translators can have impacts on migrant minoritised women's experience of the criminal justice system. For example, some of the women (described as BME women) in Gill and Virdee (2021)'s research were required to make new police statements due to misinterpretation, which caused them anxiety when interpreters were then also used in court proceedings.

Not understanding English, or having a 'heavy foreign-sounding' accent, can impact on opportunities for employment and financial independence which can be vital for victim-survivors' ability to leave an abusive partner or household and move on. For example, Femi-Ajao (2018)'s research with first generation Nigerian women in the UK who had experienced domestic abuse found that even though they were educated in their home countries and could speak English, they were unable to gain employment due to heavily accented English.

Questions for consideration

• What can be done to ensure that migrant women in Scotland have access to information about immigration policy and domestic abuse services/support and, that they can access it safely and in a way that makes sense to them?
• What needs to happen to enable migrant women to safely report and/or leave abusive relationships and households without fear of deportation or other harmful consequences to them or their children?

Cultural Insensitivity and Institutional Racism

Summary of key findings:

• UK evidence suggests that direct and indirect experiences of institutional racism and cultural insensitivity in dealings with the police and other organisations can lead to minoritised women's lack of trust in the police (and other services) and a reluctance to report or disclose abuse.
• Evidence suggests that where minoritised women have reported domestic abuse to the police they are sometimes met with unresponsive, unsympathetic and/or culturally-insensitive responses.
• Police inaction and/or inappropriate responses to reports of abuse can further entrench a lack of trust in the police and the wider justice system.
• There is some evidence that a lack of understanding of the nature and severity of the kind of abuse minoritised women can experience, such as family abuse, may place victim-survivors at increased risk of harm e.g. reports of police and support organisations encouraging victim-survivors to return home.
• A fear of being seen to be culturally insensitive or racist ('race anxiety') can result in a lack of action from services.
• Similarly, professional understandings of GBV in minoritised communities as a predominantly cultural or private issue can result in abuse being overlooked and/or a lack of service response.
• There are also reports of a reluctance by some practitioners in support organisations to work with minoritised women due to a lack of understanding about the racial/ethnic/cultural differences and the needs of minoritised ethnic women particularly in relation to immigration matters.

There is already a consistent evidence base in Scotland that highlights the under-reporting, and often negative experiences of (mostly white) victim-survivors of GBV when interacting with the justice system (e.g. Lombard et al., 2022; Houghton et al., 2023; Brooks-Hay et al., 2019; Forbes, 2021; Scottish Crime & Justice Survey, 2019-20^[53]). Given the multiple inequalities that minoritised ethnic women may experience, such as racism, poverty, immigration and misogyny, and media reports of institutional racism in organisations like the police^[54], it is not surprising that the under-reporting of GBV is even more pronounced within minoritised ethnic communities (Gillespie et al. 2011 Femi-Ajao et al., 2020; Azad, 2021; Gill & Harrison, 2019).

This section sheds further light on minoritised ethnic victim-survivors' reasons for not reporting domestic abuse, which can be driven by direct and indirect experiences of racism and cultural insensitivity^[55] within the police, service providers and society at large. Three themes arose from the evidence which are considered in turn: how the police are perceived by minoritised ethnic women; how this in turn impacts on reporting of abuse; and, how the police and services/organisations respond to reports of abuse.

Perceptions of the police

Recent analysis by the Scottish Government of quantitative data relating to ethnicity in the justice system: Ethnicity in the justice system: evidence review (Scottish Government, 2023d), explores themes like perceptions of crime and the justice system, experiences of crime, and people's interactions with the justice system^[56]. However, as the analysis is not disaggregated by gender, and did not include data from the partner abuse, stalking and sexual violence self-completion modules, it is not possible at this stage to determine whether the findings reflect the views of minoritised ethnic women in Scotland who have experienced GBV.

In terms of experiences and fear of crime, the review found that:

• People who identify as Asian, African, Caribbean or Black and 'other'^[57] have a higher rate of fear of sexual assault than national average (20-23% compared to 14%);
• People who identify as Asian have a higher rate of fear that they will be sexually assaulted (in the next 12 months) than the national average (2% compared to 1%).
• People who identify as African, Caribbean or Black have a higher rate of victimisation (property and violent crime) than the national average^[58];
• Issues with housing and immigration are more prevalent amongst some minority ethnic groups;

When it comes to perceptions of the justice system, the ethnicity review reported that people from all minoritised ethnic groups are more likely to hold positive views of the police than the national average, and that satisfaction with how the police handled a situation did not vary by ethnicity. The review also reported that there is no variation by ethnicity in whether or not someone reports a crime to the police. Further intersectional analysis of this data, if feasible, would provide useful insight into minoritised ethnic women's perceptions and experiences with the police and wider justice system.

The wider evidence reviewed for this report suggests that some minoritised ethnic women are reluctant to report abuse due to a lack of trust in the police. Gill and Harrison (2016)'s research findings drawn from interviews with approximately 85 women from South Asian communities in England reported perceptions of the police as institutionally racist. Below is an account from one of the participants in the study:

"It's all, the more patriarchal society is, the more abusive it is, but you know, that's not something about [the] South Asian community; you're [the police] saying our men are violent, because they're not. You know, our men are no more violent than any man in the West is and it's about putting that in context. They think South Asian[s] are monsters who are going out there trying to rape innocent white girls. I mean it's really difficult because it's, like, the police actually do hold these attitudes; as much as they say they don't, they do. They need to challenge their own behaviour; they need to challenge their own stereotypes. It's so engrained in their institution. I mean, the more I hear about the police, you know, more and more comes out about that institutional racism; they need to challenge that; they need to sort of believe in women and girls; they need to have, you know, more specially trained officers, who are adequately trained." (p449-450)

The women in the Gill and Harrison (2016) study perceived the police as a predominantly male organisation which they assumed would side with the perpetrators and not take reports of abuse seriously^[59]. There is some, albeit limited, evidence that having female police officers or police officers from the same ethnicity may not necessarily increase trust in the police or encourage reporting however. Mulvihill et al (2019)'s study on HBA involving 36 South Asian women across England considers this dimension. For example, one of the study's participants described their interaction with a police officer from the same ethnic background (South Asian) who they said echoed patriarchal sentiments about bringing shame and dishonour to the community. This led to the participant not pursuing the case further. Another participant reported that she felt reluctant to continue with her case following an interaction with a very unsympathetic female police officer, but then changed her mind after a male police officer, who was very empathic and demonstrated knowledge and experience of dealing with domestic abuse among South Asian women, took up her case. This highlights how important the quality of those early interactions are when victim-survivors report abuse.

How direct and indirect experiences of racism influence reporting

The impact of societal racism on reporting domestic abuse is explored in the literature. For example, Chantler et al (2019) suggests that communities which are experiencing violence and abuse from outwith the community can feel 'under siege', and that this may result in victims being reluctant to seek help from 'outsiders' due to concerns about how they will be perceived by their community. This is not dissimilar to previously referenced research on the impact of racism and Islamophobia on the retaining of practices of HBA within Kurdish communities in the UK (Hague et al, 2013). Similarly, Love et al (2017) argue that past experiences of racism and stereotyping serve as barriers to reporting and disclosing abuse, especially to mainstream support services. Perceptions of racism can also impact upon reporting; UK research suggests that some minoritised ethnic women perceive the police and other statutory organisations as racist and as unable or unwilling to meet their specific needs (e.g. see Gill and Harrison, 2019).

Experiences of reporting abuse

Where victim-survivors do report abuse, there is evidence of minoritised ethnic women sometimes being met with unresponsive, unsympathetic and sometimes racist service responses (Azad, 2021; Aplin, 2019 & 2018). In a research project commissioned by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC), Hester et al (2015) interviewed 50 victim-survivors^[60] of HBA and found that police responses to reports of abuse did not take into consideration the complexity and power dynamics within families and households.

Similarly, research participants in Idriss (2017)'s study, which included 30 practitioners and eight South-Asian victim-survivors in the UK, spoke of instances where the police were insensitive to family dynamics in domestic abuse cases and misinterpreted the home / family as safe. One of the participants, a South-Asian female support worker, recounted such an instance:

"first of all, [the police] have interpretive issues (…) they've actually used the husbands, the perpetrators themselves [laughs] [the police] actually go into a house, even in this day and age, and talk to a perpetrator who says: 'Oh no, she's got mental health problems (…) I'm just trying to calm her down, and during that, she thought I was violent, that's why she's rang the police.' And because [the victim-survivor] does not know the language, she doesn't know what's going on at all, she's just nodding away, and has more batterings afterwards."(Idriss, 2017 p329)

As noted earlier, other research has reported police inaction in response to abuse by female perpetrators such as the mother-in-law (Aplin, 2017).

Concerns about safety were raised by participants in Mulvihill et al (2019)'s study which involved interviews with 36 South-Asian victims of HBA in England who had reported to the police. Despite most participants being satisfied with the initial response from the police, the article cites examples of victim-survivors being taken by the police to hotels, where some were left with no money (even to pay for another night's accommodation) or food. Some victim-survivors reported being too fearful to leave the room (e.g. to get breakfast) and a lack of contact from the police for days. The study also refers to administrative mistakes being made which put victim-survivors at increased risk of being found at their new addresses by the perpetrator(s). Idriss (2017) also reported safety concerns in their research study. For example, one of the participants, a South-Asian victim-survivor who left her home to escape a forced marriage, was told by a support worker that the police had told her family her whereabouts when they reported her as missing. This was in spite of the victim-survivor informing the police why she had left the home, and suggests a lack of understanding of forced marriage and HBA.

Gill & Khan (2022), in their review of police handling of sexual abuse involving Black and racially minoritised victim-survivors and perpetrators in England^[61], report instances of police inaction where police failed to recognise HBA as a safeguarding risk and to protect victims after they reported sexual abuse. Furthermore, the research reports that there was a 'disproportionate focus on community impact' (p187). For example, the research findings state that in one case, the police were worried about how pursuing the case would affect "community cohesion and more importantly (…) their institutional relationship with the Pakistani community."(p199). In another case, failure to act on reports of HBA, including death threats, following disclosure of historic child sexual abuse experienced by siblings perpetrated by male family members led to one of the victim-survivors later not reporting death threats that she received from her ex-husband. The authors posit that such instances of police inaction in response to reports of sexual abuse can lead to a general lack of confidence in the criminal justice system and also sends a signal to perpetrators that they can perpetrate abuse with impunity.

Wider research on 'race anxiety' (Chantler et al., 2001 cited in Chantler et al., 2022) describes the dangers of framing HBA, in this case forced marriage, as a cultural issue as this can prevent practitioners from taking action through fear of being seen as culturally insensitive or racist (Chantler et al., 2022). As they state in their research based on policy and professional perspectives of forced marriage in Scotland^[62] - "the implications for practice for those operating within a race anxiety/cultural privacy framework can mean an overlooking of abuse within minoritised ethnic communities and potentially practising in a discriminatory manner". ^[63] (p842)

Research has also found that some minoritised ethnic women who report abuse feel that they are not taken seriously because of their race, ethnicity, immigration status, and/or lack of English (e.g. Gangoli et al., 2019). As described above, Gill & Khan (2022)'s analysis of two cases of familial abuse involving British Pakistani women and men describes how the police involved in those cases did not take reports of abuse and threats by the victim-survivors seriously.

Moving beyond the police, there is also evidence of institutional racism and/or cultural insensitivity within other statutory and third sector organisations. Begum et al (2020)'s study of the lived experience of 12 victim-survivors of HBA^[64] found that victim-survivors were allocated refuge or accommodation in areas they were unfamiliar with and sometimes in areas where they faced racist abuse. Love et al (2017) in their research with 20 practitioners^[65] and 15 victim-survivors^[66] of sexual violence from LGBT and minoritised ethnic communities found that whilst there was limited evidence in the survey of explicit racial discrimination, the interview data revealed links between childhood experiences of racism from public services (e.g. social work) and mistrust of service professionals.

Idress (2017) highlights how cultural insensitivity and a lack of understanding of HBA can lead to inappropriate responses such as housing minoritised ethnic women in 'white refuges' which can lead to women returning to abusive relationships:

"One Arab woman went to a white refuge – the refuge had an open drinking policy and on the first night, she had lager spilt on her, so she decided to go back home to the violence. A lot of white refuges have not sorted themselves out yet when dealing with BME women." (p331)

Cancoro de Matos and McFeely (2019) interviewed eight frontline service providers from statutory and third sector organisations in Scotland providing support for female victim-survivors of abuse^[67]. The study participants observed colleagues who they felt were reluctant to support minoritised ethnic women. This was attributed to a perceived lack of knowledge about racial/ethnic/cultural differences. Sometimes, the "sense of difference may exacerbate the fear of being culturally insensitive, inhibiting or preventing attempts to engage [with minoritised ethnic women]" (p346). The study's findings also highlighted the lack of knowledge and training surrounding the specific needs of minoritised ethnic women, such as asylum seekers, whose immigration status may require legal expertise. Similarly, a lack of minoritised ethnic women's representation in promoting support organisations was reported as a barrier to minoritised ethnic women seeking help. One participant from the study said,

"I remember very clearly a woman said: 'I didn't think this service was for people like us.'" (Participant 2, Third Sector) (344).

Finally, though identifying service needs was not the focus of this review, some of the research highlights the importance of an empathic approach and the need for victim-survivors to receive regular information and communication as a case progresses through the justice system (Mulvihill et al, 2019). It may be helpful to think about 'candidacy' and 'structural competency' when considering how services respond to GBV (Chantler et al., 2022). Essentially, these concepts require services and practitioners to have a solid grasp of how structural, social and cultural factors and inequalities shape victim-survivors' and practitioners' understanding and response to GBV. By doing so, harms such as HBA are no longer seen as a cultural or private issue but as a specific form of GBV which warrants intervention. It also means that women are able to recognise their own abuse (self-identification) and services are able to respond effectively (abuse is given 'candidacy') (Chantler et al., 2022).

Questions for consideration

• What can be done to ensure that domestic abuse in minoritised ethnic communities is seen and not hidden, overlooked or dismissed as a cultural issue that is too complex or 'scary' to deal with?
• Is a lack of trust in the Police and the wider justice system a significant barrier to help-seeking for minoritised ethnic women in Scotland? And if so, what are the most effective ways to improve trust in different communities?

Specialist 'By and For' Organisations

Summary of key findings:

• 'A key barrier to help-seeking is a lack of service availability and/or services which are not tailored to the specific circumstances and needs of minoritised ethnic women.
• 'By and for' services are services provided by members of a (minoritised) community or social group for other members of those communities or groups.
• The research suggests that 'by and for' services are highly valued by victim-survivors. Such services have the relevant cultural knowledge, language, and collective experiences of intersectional forms of marginalisation and GBV to empathise with and support minoritised women effectively.
• However, a lack of consistent and sustainable funding for organisations that support minoritised ethnic women reduces organisations' capacity to meet the needs of minoritised women experiencing domestic abuse.
• Government policies that favour larger and mainstream 'one size fits all' support organisations can lead to resources being diverted away from smaller 'by and for' specialist services.
• The importance of embedding an intersectional approach into the funding and commissioning of services, as well as service design and delivery, is emphasised, particularly in relation to services for minoritised ethnic women who have experienced GBV.
• Further research, insights and engagement work is needed to identify the most effective ways to address the barriers identified in this review, including how statutory and mainstream services can better meet the needs of minoritised women.

Whilst the focus of this review was on the barriers to support rather than the enablers, a common theme across some of the literature was the importance of 'by and for' services for minoritised ethnic women. This is covered briefly below. However, this should not be interpreted as representative of the evidence on the facilitators of help-seeking. Further research, insights and engagement work is needed to identify the most effective ways to address the barriers identified in this review.

By way of example, a recent systematic review of international literature on domestic abuse and barriers to help-seeking among 'black, Asian, minority ethnic and immigrant women' (Hulley et al., 2023) included key themes in the literature on help-seeking facilitators i.e. what or who enabled women to leave abusive relationships. Informal support networks, especially other female family members and friends, were overwhelmingly the most common source of support for minoritised ethnic women. Whilst formal support (i.e. services) were not generally found to be influential in enabling women to leave, the role of refuges/shelters, informal advocacy, and mental health services were highlighted as important for helping women to move on. Similarly, the importance of kindness and the commitment of individual practitioners was a common theme e.g. those who went 'above and beyond' to support victim-survivors. The systematic review calls for more services which are run by women from a diverse range of identities and cultural backgrounds, and which are "bi-lingual, anti-racist and culturally sensitive" (Hulley et al., 2023). This aligns with the theme of 'by and for' organisations which was identified in the literature reviewed for this report.

'By and for' specialist services can be described as services that are "provided by members of a minoritised group (including ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, transgender identity, religion or age) for other members of that group. Such services are embedded in their communities and can therefore address victims/survivors intersecting needs more effectively" (Scottish Government, 2023e p11).

'By and for' services are reported as highly valued by minoritised ethnic women as they have the relevant cultural knowledge, language, and collective experiences of intersectional forms of marginalization and GBV. In her reflections, Kumar (2018)^[68] locates the importance of 'by and for' services in providing spaces for solidarity and community building among minoritised ethnic women. Larasi (2013)'s description of the history of minoritised ethnic women's organisations in the UK suggests that because many founders and workers at these organisations have also experienced and survived GBV, "the work was marked by a strong sense of collective experience and 'sisterhood'" (p351). Related to the previous section on institutional racism, academics such as Kumar (2018) and Larasi (2013) argue that it is imperative to highlight how "racism itself placed BME [sic] women at a disadvantage" (p352) in the first place, which they argue lends weight to the need for more 'by and for' specialist services for minoritised ethnic women. This is explained by Larasi (2013) as follows:

"For BME [sic] women, experiences of oppression occur at the intersections of 'race', class, gender and where relevant other areas such as sexuality and disability. Translated to a service delivery perspective, for many BME survivors, 'race' is relevant, in terms of experience, access and empowerment." (p347)

According to Larasi (2013) UK government policies that have prioritised mainstream services over specialist services, have led to funding being diverted away from services that provide support to minoritised ethnic women to larger mainstream service providers which are less able to meet minoritised ethnic women's needs.^[69] Poor service provision, it is argued, is further exacerbated by policies such as the no recourse to public funds, which can result in 'by and for' specialist service providers having to turn migrant women away (see Dudley, 2017). The lack of availability of services and/or services which are not tailored to individual needs of minoritised ethnic women is a key barrier to help-seeking.

In Scotland, a recent independent review of funding and commissioning of VAWG services (Scottish Government 2023e) echoes similar findings. The report states that current funding models favour larger well-established organisations and that organisations supporting minoritised ethnic women said that they found it difficult to secure funding, which they attributed to a wider context of systemic racism and lack of cultural understanding. It is reported that the funding criteria and an environment of competitive tendering, insecure funding and multiple funding streams places organisations supporting minoritised ethnic women at a disadvantage. This has resulted in, what the report describes as, inadequate specialist VAWG services for minoritised ethnic women, although it does reference two specialist Women's Aid groups and AMINA, the Muslim women's resource centre. The population distribution of minoritised ethnic groups in Scotland^[70] (in terms of volume, diversity and geographical dispersion) is also identified as a challenge in the delivery of specialist VAWG services.

In terms of the views of victim/survivors (the funding review undertook engagement work with women from a range of minoritised ethnic communities) the report states that older women often did not identify their experiences as GBV or they felt that services were not for them. Similarly, minoritised ethnic women were more likely to say that that they had not known where to go for help and very few would consider seeking help outwith their own communities. The reasons for not seeking help echo those found in the wider academic evidence and included:

• racism and lack of cultural sensitivity/understanding in mainstream services;
• concerns relating to insecure immigration status;
• social/cultural norms prohibiting help-seeking outwith the community;
• fear of not being believed or taken seriously e.g. when reporting abuse perpetrated by family members such as the mother-in-law or sister-in-law.

The report emphasises the importance of embedding intersectionality throughout the 'system' from policy making, to commissioning, funding, service delivery, and monitoring and evaluation. The report notes that organisations that responded to the review highlighted a range of complex intersecting factors that increased the risk of violence experienced by women, many of which resonate with the findings of this review. These included ethnicity, lack of recourse to public funds, immigrant status and poverty. However, the report states that:

"it is not clear how VAWG organisations understand and apply the concept of intersectionality. More importantly, it is difficult to assess the extent to which intersectionality is used as an approach and practice to provide VAWG services in ways that are 'by and for women' in all their circumstances and in particular in relation to minority ethnic women." (p14)

The report cites evidence on the importance of having legal and policy frameworks that are rooted in intersectionality (and feminist and anti-racist approaches) before services led 'by and for' minoritised ethnic women are fully established (Imkaan (2021) in Scottish Government, 2023e). Finally, the report emphasises the importance of staff having the relevant skills, experience and reflexivity to support women from different backgrounds; and, the need for services to be inclusive of all women recognising that some minoritised ethnic women may not wish to access a service targeted at a specific ethnic group.

Anitha and Gill's (2022) research on 'by and for' organisations in England during the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that with extra funding, specialist services can be flexible and adapt to meet increased demand from minoritised ethnic women. For example, it is reported that organisations that were given temporary funding through the Domestic Abuse Capacity Building Fund were able to meet increased demand for their services and adapt to new ways of supporting women during the pandemic, such as providing online support.

Questions for consideration

• What does the service landscape for minoritised ethnic victim-survivors of domestic abuse and other forms of GBV look like in Scotland? Where are the service gaps?
• What are the most effective ways to address the significant barriers to help-seeking that minoritised ethnic women can face when experiencing domestic abuse and other forms of GBV?