Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byWilliam Randall Modified over 6 years ago
3
Benjamin Roebuck, Ph.D. Professor of Victimology, Algonquin College
Resilience & Victims of Violence Understanding strengths to enhance victim assistance training Benjamin Roebuck, Ph.D. Professor of Victimology, Algonquin College
4
Positive Victimology Focus on strengths, resilience, restorative justice [1] Strengths are ‘developed competencies and characteristics’ [2] Alternative to deficit-based approaches [3] Positive Victimology [4] [1] (Ronel & Elisha, 2010) [2] (Rawana & Brownlee, 2009) [3] (Nissen, 2006; Roebuck, Roebuck, & Roebuck, 2011) [4] (Ronel & Ya’ara Toren, 2012)
6
Discourse on Resilience
Ability to bounce back [1] A process, an outcome, an attribute [2] Risk and protective factors [3] Return to baseline functioning [4] Competent functioning [5] Absence of psychopathology [6] Ecological perspective [7] [1] (Joseph, 1994; Wolins, 1993) [2] (Roebuck & Roebuck, 2016; Wright, Perez & Johnson, 2010 ) [3] (Garmezy, 1993; Masten 2001) [4] (Ungar, 2004; 2004a; 2005; 2008) [5] (Cicchetti, 2003; Masten & Coatsworth, 1995) [6] (Almedom & Glandon, 2007) [7] (Brofenbrenner,1989; Cicchetti & Lynch, 1993; Garabino, 1995)
7
Constructionist Discourse on Resilience
Who defines resilience? A subjective human experience [1] Resilience is a process of resolving tensions [2] Navigation and Negotiation What tensions do victims and survivors experience? How do internal and external strengths influence responses to victimization? [1] (Crann & Barata, 2016; Massey, Cameron, Oullette, & Fine, 1998) [2] (Ungar, 2004; 2004a; 2005; 2008)
8
Resilience: Navigation & Negotiation
Victim of Crime Criminal Justice System Victim Assistance Services Informal Support Networks
10
Posttraumatic Growth (PTG)
Trauma can lead to personal growth [1] Positive change beyond baseline levels [2] Rumination and shifts in thinking [3] Does not negate posttraumatic stress [4] Growth domains may include: [5] relating to others, new possibilities, personal strength, spiritual change, and appreciation for life [1] (Calhoun & Tedeschi, 2014; Roebuck 2014) [2] (Joseph, 2011; Roebuck & Roebuck, 2016; Tedeschi & Calhoun, 2003) [3] (Berger, 2015; Crann & Barata, 2016; Calhoun & Tedeschi, 2014) [4] (Joseph, 2011; Berger, 2015) [5] (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996)
11
Research Methodology Violence Not in court 18+ Violence Against Women
Inclusion Criteria Identified Subgroups Violence Not in court 18+ Violence Against Women Family Survivors of Homicide Male Survivors
12
Research Methodology Mixed methods
Online survey (n=414)* [closes at the end of June] Includes: Posttraumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI) Satisfaction with Criminal Justice System Helpful Unhelpful Advice Change Labels
13
Research Methodology Mixed methods
Qualitative narrative interviews (n=65) Homicide Sexual Assault Violence Intimate Partner Violence Other Violence Child Childhood Home Invasion Terrorism Partner Adulthood Physical attack Control Impaired driving Murder-Suicide Trafficking Attempted murder Female / Male Survivors Disabilities*
15
[Q37] What was the relationship to you of the family member who was murdered? My...
Response Chart Percentage Count Child 20.9% 19 Father 6.6% 6 Mother 4.4% 4 Spouse or partner 9.9% 9 Sibling 22.0% 20 Grandparent 1.1% 1 Uncle Niece 2.2% 2 Other, please specify: 23.1% 21 Prefer not to answer 8.8% 8 Total Responses 91
16
[Q17] What kind of partner violence or abuse was it?
Response Chart Percentage Count Threats of violence ( to you, your loved ones, or pets) 60.3% 85 Physical violence 82.3% 116 Sexual violence 43.3% 61 Emotional or psychological abuse 78.0% 110 Harassment 44.0% 62 Stalking 31.2% 44 Destruction or damage of property 45.4% 64 Financial or economic abuse 48.9% 69 Human trafficking 2.8% 4 Other (please specify) 11.3% 16 Prefer not to answer 0.7% 1 Total Responses 141
17
[Q40] Following the experience of violence or abuse, did you interact with any of the following? [mark all that apply] Response Chart Percentage Count Police 62.2% 245 Criminal Court 39.1% 154 Family Court 11.7% 46 Civil Court 5.1% 20 Criminal Injuries Compensation 16.5% 65 Provincial Review Board (where the accused was found unfit to stand trial or not criminally responsible) 1.3% 5 Parole Board 10.4% 41 I did not interact with any of the above 34.5% 136 Prefer not to answer 1.0% 4 Total Responses 394
18
Experiences as a Researcher
Comparison Language Advocacy Men Labels Politics Learning nuances:
19
[Q56] With which of the following terms do you most closely identify?
Response Chart Percentage Count Victim 14.5% 53 Survivor 38.6% 141 Other, please specify: 18.1% 66 I try not to use these labels 27.7% 101 Prefer not to answer 1.1% 4 Total Responses 365
20
Implications for Victimology & Victim Assistance
Defining the field of victimology Human agency and perception Learning nuances from lived experience Supporting the ‘ordinary magic’ of resilience [1] Adopting a growth mindset [1] (Masten, 2001)
21
Benjamin Roebuck, Ph.D. Professor of Victimology, Algonquin College THANK YOU!!
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.