08 May 2025

Understanding Barriers to Seeking Support for Victims of Domestic Violence

People experiencing domestic abuse remain, by and large, invisible to the state institutions responsible for supporting them. The latest EU wide survey on Gender-based violence (physical, sexual or threats thereof) shows that only 13.9 % of all women experiencing abuse seek support from the police, while 20.5 % do so from health and social services. Dedicated national surveys on domestic abuse likewise highlight a gap between reporting and victimisation. In Austria, close to 17 % of women facing intimate partner violence contact the police, 20 % the medical sector and 12 % social sector support. Even when support services are increasingly advertised and support networks are extending to additional sectors, support-seeking rates seemingly fall behind.

What causes this gap? Answers to and reasons for this question are numerous and complex. As part of IMPROVE, we sought to ask victim-survivors about their rationale and experiences when considering or proceeding to seek support. This blog article will give a short introduction into our findings, focusing on the barriers victim-survivors experienced, perceived or feared. The underlying report is a thematic analysis of 108 interviews across Austria, Finland, France, Germany and Spain. The goal is to show that seeking support is by no means an easy feat. Instead, pathways to support are littered with barriers, from personal and social to structural.

The landscape of barriers

Barriers are complex. Factors that impede and discourage support-seeking are often inherently linked to the same reasons that encourage victim-survivors to seek support. For example, the presence of children who need protection and care can complicate seeking official support, as children might be taken away or shelter space might not be available to all. At the same time, children might embolden those affected to escape the abuse. Likewise, seemingly separate obstacles are often connected to each other. As such, language barriers can be a reason why information on support services is not available, just as much as they hamper communication to service personnel. Additionally, obstacles are affected by the individual vulnerabilities of victim-survivors. For instance, a disability requiring care will define the support-seeking process, as accessibility, care provision and dependency will affect individual barriers.

Consequently, the problems victim-survivors face rarely present themselves as individual hurdles. Instead, they are exposed to a multitude of problems that intersect with each other and interfere during various phases of the support-seeking process. Nonetheless, for an easier understanding, obstacles can be separated and situated at different levels. This blog post does so in three levels. The first are personal barriers, which are positioned within the immediate surroundings of the victim survivor. The second are obstacles situated in the social environment of the victim, i.e. social barriers. Lastly, there are structural barriers. They consist of hurdles located at the formal support services.

The social barriers to seeking help are embedded in the social environment, which includes friends, family, community members, co-workers, the abuser, and the abuser’s family. All of these individuals can either empower or hinder the process of seeking help. In particular, friends and family can serve as an informal network of support, which is especially important when formal support options are inadequate. For example, if police questioning is abrasive, a supportive friend might provide comfort.

However, the absence of a supportive social environment outside the abuse can complicate matters. Many victims first seek help from people they trust before turning to formal support services. Without anyone to turn to, this becomes a significant barrier. If the social environment fails to support the victim or, worse, enables the abuse, seeking aid becomes even more difficult. For instance, family and friends may pressure the victim to stay in the relationship for various reasons, such as the potential loss of caregiving from the abuser. Additionally, prevailing community norms that emphasise the importance of maintaining relationships or strong ties can further complicate the decision to leave the abuser.

The relationship between the perpetrator and the victim can also create obstacles to seeking support. Abuse, particularly controlling behaviour, can severely limit the victim’s access to support services. Abusers might isolate their victims from friends and family, control their movements via phone apps, or restrict access to transportation. Furthermore, abusers can use misinformation and threats to influence how the victim perceives support services. For example, they might lie about the consequences of reporting abuse or threaten to take away child custody. If the abuser holds a position of power, such as holding a position in politics or within support services, their ability to misinform the victim can become even more problematic. Dependencies, such as needing the abuser for care, financial support, or a residence permit, can also make disclosing the abuse more difficult, victims might face grave consequences for disclosing violence.

Lastly, victim-survivors often report a desire to protect others, such as their children, family members, or friends, from the consequences of seeking help. Especially children are often at the heart of their concerns. The risks for them are varied. For one, family unity is often seen as beneficial to children, whereas separation is often understood as detrimental. Additionally, the process of seeking help and reporting abuse can introduce its own set of risks. Victim-survivors may fear retaliation from the abuser, or they may worry that the uncertainty of the support process will place their children in danger. The potential loss of housing, financial stability, and social standing may not only affect the victim-survivor but also their children or other loved ones. Another concern is the possibility of being separated from their children. The willingness to protect others also extends to the abuser. The desire to protect others can also extend to the abuser. The abuser may still be someone the victim loves or feels obligated to care for, which complicates the decision to seek help, especially when the abuser requires care or has mental health issues.

Structural barriers to seeking help when affected by domestic violence

Structural barriers are rooted in issues within the support service setup. One significant barrier is the general lack of support, which can result from inadequate infrastructure or strict requirements to receive help. A common example of this is the limited availability of shelter space. This may be due to a shortage of housing in a region or country, or it could stem from eligibility criteria. These criteria can be formal, such as requiring individuals to be residents of a specific area, restrict substance use, or exclude people based on gender. For example, trans, non-binary or male victim-survivors might not be aligable for shelter space, depending on shelter stipulations. Informal barriers can also arise, such as shelters being inaccessible, lacking staff, or placing limits on the number of children or requiring payments, making the services impractical  or even inaccessible for victim-survivors. These barriers are not limited to shelter space; they apply to many other support services as well.

Moreover, some support services cater only to specific victim groups, failing to meet the needs of marginalised or vulnerable individuals. For instance, language barriers can prevent some victims from accessing the help they need. Geographical limitations can also be an issue, particularly in rural areas, where there may be few or no local shelters or support services, especially for marginalised or smaller victim groups.

Even when services are available, the quality of support provided can be a major issue. Several problems can arise here. First, support services might neglect their responsibilities, such as failing to secure evidence, asking victims about their abuse, or showing empathy. Second, staff may not be trained to handle the specific needs of victim-survivors – especially from marginalised communities. For example, support-seekers may encounter harmful stereotypes, which can result in being ridiculed or blamed for their situation due to their sexuality or ethnic background. A lack of expertise can leave service providers ill-equipped to handle critical tasks such as filing reports or directing victims to appropriate resources. Third, many institutions suffer from understaffing and limited resources, further compromising the quality of care available.

At a more fundamental level, some structural problems are deeply ingrained in national support systems. In some cases, the legal frameworks themselves undermine the provision of support. As mentioned earlier, a common issue are limitations and eligibility criteria due to legal stipulations. These can go beyond just individual services, preventing access to support for some victims, such as undocumented migrants. Legal requirements usually ask for legal documentation, (EU-) citizenship, residence (the place where one lives) and residency (the legal right to live there). Additionally, restrictions on the type or amount of support available can make seeking help prohibitively costly. Gaps in responsibility can also lead to lapses in service provision, such as unclear responsibilities in cross-border cases or when dealing with victims who face multiple issues, like substance abuse and domestic violence. Finally, the absence of national standards ensuring adequate resources and legal rights for service providers can hinder their effectiveness and undermine the quality of support provided.

Understanding barriers and improving access to domestic violence

Seeing the many barriers that victim-survivors might face during their support seeking procedure, the gap in report rates becomes more understandable. Escaping a violent relationship and looking for aid is difficult. How can this be addressed? This question was at the heart of the IMPROVE research project. Avenues to do so are varied.

For those providing services, it is important to understand that seeking support is hard. Starting with the need to not just accept ones on victimisation, but to also identify accessible and adequate support – where present. The latter is not always a given. Funding shortages, gaps in support structures and services, lengthy and unclear processes, amongst many other issues make support seeking a risky endeavour. As such, organisations working with victim-survivors must show empathy to interrupted and repeated support seeking attempts. They should also take steps to ensure that their services adequately address their clients’ needs and worries. There are also additional steps that can be taken.

As part of the project, one attempt was the development and implementation of the AinoAid™ Chatbot by We Encourage with help from the consortium. The chatbot seeks to bridge gaps in knowledge by providing a low-threshold, anonymous and curated information database for victim-survivors at the start of their support seeking journey. Readers can try the chatbot themselves, as well as provide invaluable feedback to further improve it right here.

Seeing as many issues are related to the quality of support services, improvements can help reduce some obstacles. To this end, the free IMPRODOVA-IMPROVE-VIPROM training platform has a collection of 9 training modules for four different sectors (police, justice, social and medical) to help those working with victim-survivors to identify violence, communicate and provide effective aid. . 

Should you be interested in reading more about barriers to reporting domestic violence, IMPROVE has finished to reports on this matter. The first report summarises scientific literature of barriers with the title “Factors Leading to Low Reporting of Domestic Violence and Restricting Access to Service”. A second report describes the research findings of the interview data analysed, titled “Victims’ mental maps of institutional response to DV and needs regarding AI Chatbot”.

Personal barriers for persons in domestic violence situations

For someone to ask for help, two things are required: they must recognise the abuse as such, and they must come to terms with their victimhood. This process is complicated by the various ways we can rationalise or legitimise abuse.

Societal and community norms regarding partnerships, gender, and privacy—as well as personal views and experiences—can all contribute to making abuse seem “normal”. Those affected might interpret excessive control as a sign of affection or downplay emotional abuse as mere banter. Furthermore, victims may minimise their own experiences or overestimate their ability to deal with the abuser.

Different forms of abuse are also perceived and understood differently. Not all forms of abuse are recognised as violence. Most commonly, victims do not identify non-physical abuse as domestic violence. Even when experiencing physical abuse, those affected might downplay its severity. In interviews, some individuals recalled thinking that the frequency or intensity of the abuse wasn’t enough for it to be reported or categorised as “real abuse.”

The abused may downplay their experience, believing it to be less severe or not worthy of attention—especially when comparing their situation to public discourse. Public narratives often imply that violence is mostly random and committed by strangers, which shifts the focus away from (ex-)partners. Likewise, focusing on the most violent or lethal cases of abuse can give the wrong impression of what abuse typically looks like. Victims who do not fit the stereotypical image of a victim might disregard their own experiences. This can include victim-survivors with higher education, jobs related to domestic violence support, or higher incomes. They may see themselves as too well-off or informed to be abused, or they could feel ashamed of being affected, thinking they “shouldn’t” be.

Even when victim-survivors recognise the abuse and their victimisation, they may lack information on support services or their rights. This is particularly relevant for victim-survivors from vulnerable groups. For example, someone who requires frequent medical care might not be aware of the support structures in place for victims of abuse—if such structures are even in place. Similarly, negative perceptions of or experiences with support institutions can discourage reporting, especially for victim-survivors from marginalised communities. Past negative interactions with institutions, such as the border police, can affect how they view related or linked organisations. This includes negative experiences encountered directly by the victim-survivor or by their community.

Furthermore, risks to personal well-being are an important consideration when thinking about seeking help. The process can be risky. Risks might include threats to one's safety and the safety of family or loved ones. These risks can also be material in nature, such as the loss of housing, savings, or employment. However, risks should be understood more broadly, as they can also involve social repercussions. This is often worsened by stigma, shame, and guilt—either attached to the abuse itself or as a result of disclosing it. For some, discussing the abusive relationship may feel like admitting a personal failure. Finally, shame, guilt, and trauma can negatively affect the mental health of victim-survivors, further impacting their ability to seek support.

All of these personal obstacles are influenced by personal vulnerabilities and experiences of marginalisation. Likewise, the abuser, as well as those close to them, can impact the barriers that victim-survivors face. Personal vulnerabilities intersect with social and structural barriers.

Social barriers to seeking help in cases of domestic violence

Sources

About the author

Emanuel Tananau Blumenschein is a researcher at VICESSE Research GmbH.

He and his colleagues at VICESSE were responsible for Task 1.2 “Victims’ mental maps of institutional response to DV and needs regarding AI Chatbot”. Furthermore, VICESSE Research GmbH is involved in other research and training activities taking part during the IMPROVE project. Emanuel’s research focus has been on security and gender related topics, such as domestic violence, incarceration and fatherhood. He has a background in political science and China studies, where he worked on protest and participation in authoritarian regimes.

For more information on Emanuel, see his short interview on the IMPROVE website available here.