Qualitative interview study reveals stakeholder views on child participation in domestic violence research, highlighting the need for trauma-informed and rights-based engagement frameworks.
Purpose Children’s voices about their experiences of domestic violence are underreported in the scholarship and in service reforms. This article presents gatekeepers’ views on the obstacles and enablers for children’s participation in domestic violence research and based on research findings outlines a model for enabling children’s participation in domestic violence research. Methods Qualitative exploratory research conducted in Australia on the obstacles and enablers to conducting domestic violence research with children led to the development of STARR (SAFE, Trauma-Safe, Activity-based, Relational and Rights-based), an enabling model of trauma-safe participation. The theoretical underpinnings included constructivist grounded theory, childhood studies, child rights and a trauma-informed approach. Results Forty-nine participants from five cohorts participated in semi-structured interviews: mothers with experiences of domestic violence, domestic violence service providers, child clinicians, Human Research Ethics Committee members and domestic violence researchers. Participants’ concerns about conducting domestic violence research with children included physical, emotional, psychological and cultural safety issues, and the potential for retraumatization. Equally, participants had many ideas on enabling children’s inclusion. Conclusions To enable children’s participation, research participants recommended that engagement must ensure the highest level of safeguarding, be attuned, trauma-safe, child-friendly and rights-based. This paper presents research on the obstacles and enablers to children’s participation in domestic violence research and the STARR model, informed by the participants’ views about the enablers to children’s participation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mackey et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: