Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities: A Multicultural Conceptualization of the Power and Control Wheel

Abstract

For the past three decades intimate partner abuse has received growing attention as a major social problem with its roots in socially structured systemic inequalities. However, much of the intimate partner abuse literature lacks adequate attention to issues of diversity, and more specifically fails to address how structural underpinnings beyond gender shape women's experiences of intimate partner abuse. The primary purpose of this paper is to highlight the importance of considering how various systems of oppression (e.g., heterosexism, agism, ableism, racism, spirituality/religion, classism, and sexism) shape the experiences of victims of intimate partner abuse. In particular, we address how these personal, cultural, and structural identities may individually or in combination influence women's experiences of intimate partner abuse. The literature on diverse identities and intimate partner abuse is reviewed, and a revised version of the commonly used Power and Control Wheel is presented, called the Multicultural Power and Control Wheel. Directions for future research and implications for practice are proposed with the hopes of initiating a dialogue among researchers and clinicians as to the most effective ways to serve victims of IPA.

Full text

WWAT #338622, VOL 32, ISS 1
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities:
A Multicultural Conceptualization of the
Power and Control Wheel
ALEXIS Z. CHAVIS AND MELANIE S. HILL
QUERY SHEET
This page lists questions we have about your paper. The numbers displayed at left can be
found in the text of the paper for reference. In addition, please review your paper as a whole
for correctness.
Q1: Au: Please add this source to the references.
Q2: Au: Websdale 2001 not listed in the references. Please add.
Q3: Au: From which version of the Bible?
Q4: Au: Brown and Root not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q5: Au: Please add page range of chapter.
Q6: Au: Calderbank Q7: Au: Civjan not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q8: Au: Comas-Diaz not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q9: Au: Greene not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q10 Au: Hyde and Rosenberg not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q11 Au: Jordan not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q12 Au: Kantor et al. not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q13 Au: Novak and Galaway not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q14 Au: Please provide authors’ initials.
Q15 Au: This source was incomplete before. I’ve found a place where readers can see/retrieve
the source and have updated the reference. My change okay?
Q16 Au: Did the CDC publish this? This reference does not provide any publication informa-
tion. Please add location and publisher; This source is not cited in the text. Please cite in
text or delete here.
Q17 Au: Sobsey not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
Q18 Au: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics not cited in the text. Please cite in text or delete here.
TABLE OF CONTENTS LISTING
The table of contents for the journal will list your paper exactly as it appears below:
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities: A Multicultural Conceptualization of the Power and Control
Wheel
Alexis Z. Chavis and Melanie S. Hill

Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities:
A Multicultural Conceptualization of the
Power and Control Wheel
ALEXIS Z. CHAVIS
5
Department of Counseling Psychology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin
MELANIE S. HILL
Department of Psychology, State University of New York at New Paltz
For the past three decades intimate partner abuse has received
growing attention as a major social problem with its roots in
10
socially structured systemic inequalities. However, much of the
intimate partner abuse literature lacks adequate attention to
issues of diversity, and more specifically fails to address how
structural underpinnings beyond gender shape women’s experi-
ences of intimate partner abuse. The primary purpose of this
15
paper is to highlight the importance of considering how various
systems of oppression (e.g., heterosexism, agism, ableism, racism,
spirituality=religion, classism, and sexism) shape the experiences
of victims of intimate partner abuse. In particular, we address
how these personal, cultural, and structural identities may indi-
20
vidually or in combination influence women’s experiences of
intimate partner abuse. The literature on diverse identities
and intimate partner abuse is reviewed, and a revised version
of the commonly used Power and Control Wheel is presented,
called the Multicultural Power and Control Wheel. Directions
25
for future research and implications for practice are proposed
with the hopes of initiating a dialogue among researchers
and clinicians as to the most effective ways to serve victims
of IPA.
The authors would like to thank Christa Gutenberger for her expertise in graphic design.
We would also like to express our gratitude to Stephen Quintana, John Harvey, and Jeff Hird
for their valuable feedback. In addition, we would like to acknowledge the strength, courage,
and spirit of victims and survivors of intimate partner violence.
Address correspondence to Alexis Z. Chavis, 305½ West Johnson Street #5, Madison, WI
53703. E-mail: Afreud22@aol.com
Women & Therapy, 32:1–29, 2009
Copyright #Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1064-6175 print=1096-4649 online
DOI: 10.1080/02703140802384552
3b2 Version Number : 7.51c/W (Jun 11 2001)
File path : P:/Santype/Journals/TandF_Production/WWAT/v32n1/WWAT338622/WWAT338622.3d
Date and Time : 19/11/08 and 19:56
1

KEYWORDS Domestic violence, intimate partner violence,
30
multicultural, violence against women
Difference must be not merely tolerated, but seen as a fund of necessary
polarities between which our creativity can spark like a dialect.
35
—Audre Lorde (1984)
According to the American Psychological Association’s Presidential Task
Force on Violence and the Family (1996), ‘‘Nearly one in three women has
been physically or sexually assaulted by a romantic partner during her life-
time’’ (p. 10). Since the 1970s, intimate partner abuse (IPA) has been increas-
40
ingly recognized as a significant social problem. However, there continues to
be a lack of attention to issues of diversity in the IPA literature. In particular,
scholars argue that adequate attention has not been paid to the unique
experiences of immigrants and racial=ethnic minorities (Sharma, 2001; Zam-
brano, 1985), elderly victims (Anetzberger, 2001; Tomita, 1990), those with
45
low incomes (O’Campo, McDonell, Gielen, Burke, & Chen, 2002; Tolman
& Raphael, 2000), victims with disabilities (Gilson, DePoy, & Cramer, 2001;
Hassouneh-Phillips & Curry, 2002), those in same-sex relationships (Giorgio,
2002; Miller, Bobner, & Zarski, 2000), or the role of religion=spirituality in
relationships where IPA is present (Cunradi, Caetano, & Schafer, 2002;
50
Stotland, 2000).
Many theorists (e.g, Barnett, Miller-Perin, & Perin, 2005; Gelles & Straus,
1988; Worrell & Remer, 2003) assert that abuse is a by-product of a society
that condones (even at times glamorizes and sexualizes) the use of violence
as a normative form of expressive communication and a strategy employed
55
to maintain the domination of certain groups of people. In particular, femin-
ist theorists assert that gender inequality, or male dominance in society, is the
prime contributor to intimate partner abuse. For example, societal factors
such as cultural norms of violence, norms of inequality (e.g. economic, phy-
sical, and occupational) between women and men, and general institutiona-
60
lized sexism that promote the dominance and entitlement of men while
devaluing and subordinating women, reinforces and perpetuates the occur-
rence of IPA (American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on
Violence and the Family, 1996). However, recent research on battering in les-
bian relationships has poignantly challenged the idea that violence against
65
women is primarily or solely the result of gender inequality (e.g., Bridges,
Selvidge, & Matthews, 2003; Butler, 1999; Eaton, 1994; Girshick, 2002;
Ristock, 2002). Such research suggests that we need to attend to multiple sys-
tems of inequality and their intersections. Indeed, Felty (2001) asserts that
IPA is ‘‘culturally produced out of intersecting relations of gender, race, social
70
class, and sexuality’’ (p. 365).
2A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

Several authors (e.g., Almeida & Dolan-Delvecchio, 1999; Bograd, 1999)
argue that the impact of multiculturalism is too often minimized and=or dan-
gerously misunderstood by those who see the various cultural identities as
‘‘added-on’’ characteristics. ‘‘The presumption here is essentially that ‘those
75
people are just like us (Whites) except for certain idiosyncratic patterns that
one needs to keep in mind’ ’’ (Almeida & Dolan-Delvecchio, 1999, p. 654).
Sokolf and Dupont (2005) add, ‘‘although much pioneering work on domes-
tic violence approached intimate partner violence as a monolithic phenom-
enon that affected all women the same, this ‘universalizing’ approach
80
increasingly has been regarded as inadequate and inappropriate to explain
the experience or address the needs of battered women from diverse back-
grounds’’ (p. 2).
The intersections of the various identities of both women who are being
abused and their perpetrators result in unique social contexts that are further
85
shaped by systems of power and oppression (e.g., race, class, gender, sexual
orientation, age, religion=spirituality, and ability). These systems and con-
texts operate dynamically, sculpting how IPA may be enacted, experienced,
and addressed (Bograd, 1999). Almeida and Dolan-Delvecchio (1999) sug-
gest that we need to ask how race=ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, disabil-
90
ity, socioeconomic status, and spirituality, in addition to gender, affect what
choices victims feel they have and how service delivery systems (e.g., police)
might respond differentially to various groups. The intersections of these var-
ious identities radically shape the experiences of women who are abused,
‘‘whereby certain individuals are more entrapped within contexts of violence
95
than others’’ (Almedia & Durkin, 1999, p. 314). As Comas-Dı
´az (1991)
observes,
Women are a heterogeneous group, including, but not limited to, women
of color, lesbians, bisexuals, low socioeconomic and=or working class
women, religious minority group women, women who are physically
100
disabled, aged women and others. Within this heterogeneity, power dif-
ferentials express themselves in diverse forms. Feminism also entails an
examination of the environmental factors that oppress women (Dutton-
Douglas & Walker, 1988
Q1 ). It thus must recognize that women’s realities
are complex and carry diverse types of oppression. For instance, what
105
oppresses a physically disabled woman may not necessarily oppress a
lesbian. (p. 597)
The following is an elaboration of how various systems of oppression
and inequality beyond gender (e.g., heterosexism, agism, racism, ableism,
classism, and religion=spirituality), have the potential to shape women’s
110
experiences with IPA. This review is not exhaustive, but is intended to illus-
trate the critical need to identify the structural and cultural underpinnings of
IPA in addition to gender.
1
It is important for readers to keep in mind the vast
within-group variability that exists for each of the identities described, and
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 3

that these various identities may serve as mechanisms for women in achiev-
115
ing resilience, support, or improved coping. Many women who experience
IPA are remarkably resilient, and many of the identities mentioned can simul-
taneously be a source of oppression and support (e.g., religion and spiritual-
ity have been found to be an important form of social support especially for
women of color; Potter, 2007).
120
We will illustrate how consideration of these systems of oppression
could be integrated into clinical practice by using the Power and Control
Wheel (Pence & Paymer, 1993), a model commonly used with victims of
IPA. Individual attempts that have been made to integrate cultural identities
into the Power and Control Wheel will be reviewed, and a revised version of
125
the Power and Control Wheel—the Multicultural Power and Control Wheel—
will be presented. The Multicultural Power and Control Wheel graphically
incorporates the intersections of sexism, racism, classism, heterosexism,
ageism, ableism, and religion=spirituality in the context of IPA.
SEXUAL ORIENTATION=HETEROSEXISM
130
Unique Issues
Due to an early feminist focus on patriarchal power and male dominance as
the (only) source of the abuse inflicted on women and children, IPA in same-
sex, especially lesbian,
2
relationships has remained in the closet for many
years (Atkinson & Hackett, 2004). Only recently has the silence surrounding
135
the issue of IPA in lesbian relationships been broken (Ristock, 2002). While
research has found IPA in same-sex relationships to be virtually identical to
IPA in heterosexual relationships in terms of physical, psychological, and
sexual abuse (Miller et al., 2000; Morrow & Hawxhurst, 1989), victims in abu-
sive lesbian relationships face unique issues including but not limited to: the
140
denial of the existence of IPA in lesbian relationships; the complications of
living in a relatively small, close-knit community; and the existence of homo-
phobia and heterosexism in the community at large.
For various reasons, violence in lesbian couples is often overlooked. For
example, the myth that IPA is confined to heterosexual couples is supported
145
by using the heterosexual relationship as a template to analyze the dynamics
of abuse in same-sex partnerships (Girshick, 2002; Renzetti, 1997b). By
focusing solely on how sexism gives men access to tactics for maintaining
power and control in a relationship, models such as the Power and Control
Wheel (Pence & Paymer, 1993) reinforce the myth that violence does not
150
occur in lesbian relationships. As a result, other axes of socially sanctioned
power that could potentially give abusers power and control in a relationship
(e.g., class differences) are overlooked (Lockhart, White, Causby, & Issac,
1994; Sokoloff & Dupont, 2005). The myth that violence does not occur in
same-sex female relationships is further supported by the belief that women
4A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

155
are less aggressive than men and physically incapable of causing serious
harm (Morrow & Hawxhurst, 1989; Poorman, 2001; Ristock, 2002).
Issues related to being involved in or connected to a lesbian or gay com-
munity, which is often tight-knit, may also shape lesbian women’s experi-
ences of IPA. For example, a victim who leaves her abusive partner may
160
risk the loss of support from shared friends and acquaintances (Bergen,
1998), may fear she is betraying the gay community (Burstow, 1992), and
may risk further isolation from a community in which she has felt accepted
(Morrow & Hawxhurst, 1989).
Living in a homophobic society that fosters internalized homophobia,
165
and where the recognition of same-sex relationships as legitimate is often
resisted, an already abusive situation may be further complicated (Renzetti,
1997a). Violent partners may use ‘‘homophobic control’’ by threatening to
‘‘out’’ the victim (Morrow & Hawxhurst, 1989). Similarly, lesbians in violent
relationships may fear and=or experience homophobia among mental health
170
professionals and other service providers. For example, there is great varia-
bility across the country with regard to the availability and accessibility of
legal resources for women in same-sex relationships. In some states, legisla-
tion prohibiting IPA does not apply to individuals in same-sex relationships
since same-sex partners are not legally regarded as intimate partners (Barnett
175
et al., 2005). In addition, in some geographical regions, civil restraining
orders are not always available to victims in same-sex relationships (Bergen,
1998).
Intersections with Other Identities
It is important when considering the effect sexual orientation has on one’s
180
experience of IPA to also consider how sexual orientation intersects with
other identities. For example, research has found homophobia is more pre-
valent among (a) older and less educated individuals, (b) those who sub-
scribe to conservative religious ideology, and (c) Asian, Black American,
and Hispanic cultures (Chung & Katayama, 1999; Herek, 2000; Loiacano,
185
1993; Span & Vidal, 2003). Women from different racial=ethnic or religious
traditions, working class, or who are older and in same-sex relationships
may experience considerable challenges resulting from their multiple stigma-
tized statuses. Women from various religious=spiritual traditions may be
ostracized from their place of worship and=or religious=spiritual community
190
if their sexual orientation becomes public knowledge (Garnets & Kimmel,
1993). Additionally, working-class lesbian women may be more vulnerable
to threats of having their sexual orientation disclosed to coworkers, collea-
gues, or superiors (economic abuse). Research utilizing primarily heterosex-
ual samples has found social class to be inversely related to severity of
195
violence (Holtzworth-Munroe, Smutzler, & Bates, 1997). However, Turell
(2000) found higher income to be significantly associated with a greater
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 5

frequency of IPA among same-sex couples. These results suggest that
the relationship between level of income and IPA may be unique for lesbian
couples.
200
Several unique issues present themselves for battered lesbian women of
color. For example, threats to disclose a victim’s sexual orientation may be
more powerful, as coming out as a lesbian ‘‘may result in loss of primary
social and economic support as well as loss of community buffers against
racism’’ (Bridges et al., 2003, p. 114). Similarly, help-seeking may be more
205
difficult; ‘‘for many lesbians of color in violent relationships, the isolation
connected with racism in both the lesbian and women’s communities makes
it exceedingly difficulty to seek help’’ (Kanuha, 2005, p. 78). It is also impor-
tant to consider the existence of abuse in biracial lesbian relationships in
which racism or white privilege may be used as a tactic to perpetuate the
210
abuse in the relationship (Kanuha, 2005).
AGE=AGEISM
Unique Issues
Although researchers recognized IPA in the 1970s, it wasn’t until the early
1980s that researchers began to focus on the occurrence of IPA among the
215
elderly
3
(Myers & Shelton, 1987). The invisibility of abuse, along with a poor
definition of IPA among the elderly, has resulted in inadequate assessment
instruments, insufficient education for service providers, and much confusion
around locating and articulating suitable legislation and local services for
productive interventions (Anetzberger, 2001).
220
Some unique issues faced by elders in abusive relationships include
dependency (financial, physical, and emotional), feelings of isolation and
vulnerability, and the stigma of being elderly in a youth-oriented culture
(i.e., ageism). For example, elderly victims who are dependent (financially,
physically, or emotionally) on their abuser may risk losing their home, health
225
insurance, means of transportation, and their main source of social support if
they leave the abusive relationship (U.S. Department of Justice, 2000). Elderly
victims of IPA may also feel isolated and vulnerable. They may fear rejection
of friends=family and may be less likely to seek out help due to being socia-
lized not burden others with their problems (Kunkel & Williams, 1991). In
230
addition, elderly victims may be less likely to reach out to a shelter due to
inadequate accommodations for elderly victims in shelter settings, as well
as lack of an integrated effort from the various community resources serving
the aging population (Vinton, 1992). Furthermore, elderly victims risk having
their competence questioned and not being believed or trusted due to the
235
myth that IPA doesn’t occur among elderly couples (Atkinson & Hackett,
2004).
6A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

Intersections with Other Identities
For many elderly victims of IPA, issues such as poverty and disability status
further transform the tactics available to their abusers. A sizeable portion of
240
the elderly live at or below the poverty level (U.S. Census Bureau, 2003),
making the fear of losing an abusive partner’s financial resources a frighten-
ing reality for many victims of IPA. Additionally, according to the U.S. Census
Bureau (2003), 35%of the elderly population has one or more disabilities
that require some sort of assistance, making disabled elderly victims more
245
vulnerable to threats of isolation, coercion, and intimidation.
RACE=ETHNICITY–RACISM=ETHNOCENTRISM
Unique Issues
Although Caucasian women and women of color may articulate commonal-
ities in their experiences of IPA, they also undergo unique life experiences
250
that are likely to influence the manner in which they ‘‘process and interpret’’
their victimization (O’Keefe, 1994, p. 302). Living in a society in which White-
ness is viewed as the norm invariably shapes women of color’s experiences
of abuse. Two themes emerged from the IPA literature on women of color:
(a) lack of access to multiculturally sensitive and bilingual resources and
255
(b) the influence(s) of cultural values (e.g., beliefs about women’s roles, atti-
tudes about help seeking, sanctity of marriage).
While grouping African Americans, Latinas, Asian Americans, American
Indians, and immigrants=refugees into one monolithic minority group does a
great disservice to the cultural issues and characteristics that distinguish these
260
groups from one another, there are also considerable commonalities that
these women face in terms of discrimination and oppression. It is important
for practitioners and researchers to consider within-group variations due to
acculturation, assimilation, and racial=ethnic identity. It is beyond the scope
of this piece to explore all of the group variations. For a more comprehensive
265
review of the literature specific to individual groups and subgroups, readers
are encouraged to reference Zambrano (1985), West (1998), and Sokoloff
and Dupont (2005).
Sharma (2001) observed that ‘‘racist and discriminatory practices within
community services, such as police departments, government organizations,
270
and even shelter facilities also complicate matters’’ for women of color
(p. 1413). Many women of color may mistrust White agencies and service
providers due to the historically oppressive ways in which White society
has treated women of color. This mistrust may keep abused women from
reaching out for help. In many cases when women of color do pursue assis-
275
tance they may be confronted with service providers who are insensitive, ill
equipped, and uninformed in providing services to individuals of various
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 7

racial=ethnic identities. Women who don’t speak English or are nonnative
English-speakers may face additional barriers to accessing resources=services
rvices that are bilingual and multiculturally sensitive. For example, immigrant
280
and refugee women may fear seeking out resources for fear of deportation.
Cultural values and beliefs about women’s roles, the sanctity of mar-
riage, and help seeking behaviors can also alter the power and control
dynamics in an abusive relationship. For example, Latinas are often ‘‘rele-
gated to the less powerful roles of wife and mother, and are barred from
285
being decision-makers or leaders’’ (Zambrano, 1985, p. 226). The importance
of a father figure for children could also significantly factor into the decision
making processes for victims of certain races=ethnicities where the martial
relationship is expected to endure even under abusive conditions (Sharma,
2001). Similarly, because men of color often lack power in society their meth-
290
ods of power and control within intimate relationships may be unique in
comparison to those with more social power (Websdale, 2001
Q2 ).
In many collectivistic cultures, value is placed on keeping problems
within the home, the community, or, at the very least, within the culture
group. Collectivistic values that may prevent women from seeking outside
295
resources include: valuing and respecting authority and family dignity, defer-
ring to family unity and strength over indulging individual needs, and familial
and cultural pride and preservation in the face of discrimination. For exam-
ple, pursuing help outside of the Asian community and=or leaving one’s resi-
dence may bring ‘‘shame and loss of face for the entire family’’ and the larger
300
Asian community (Ho, 1990, p. 143). Last, the process of leaving one’s
country of origin may alter the power and control dynamics for immigrants
or refugee women in abusive relationships (Campbell, Masaki, & Torres,
1997).
Intersections with Other Identities
305
Women of color are disproportionately represented in poverty. For example,
24%of African Americans, 23%of American Indian=Alaskan Natives, 22%of
Latinos, and 11.8%of Asians currently live in poverty compared to 8.2%of
non-Hispanic White individuals (U.S. Census Bureau, 2004). Due to these
economic concerns, women of color may have limited access to key
310
resources (e.g., affordable medical care, transportation, child care, and
employment opportunities), potentially contributing to their vulnerability
to IPA. Economic barriers to accessing resources may be compounded for
immigrant and refugee women who may have had to give up their vocation
and adjust to lesser incomes and=or alternative professions when they emi-
315
grated from their home country (Sharma, 2001). Since cultural values asso-
ciated with one’s race=ethnicity are often confounded with values
associated with ones religion=spirituality (e.g., Buddhism and Asians, Hindus
and Indians) it is important for counselors to be aware of potential
8A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

distinctions and not assume a person holds certain religious=spiritual values
320
because of their race=ethnicity identification.
DISABILITIES=ABLEISM
Unique Issues
In a review of the research on abuse of women with disabilities, Hassouneh-
Phillips and Curry (2002) found there is a high incidence of abuse of women
325
with disabilities, which most often takes place in the home by a male partner.
Gilson and colleagues (2001) purport that
women with disabilities experience unique forms of abuse emerging
from the inherent vulnerability of living with a disability. This susceptibil-
ity can result from factors such as limitations in ability to perform
330
expected roles and age-normative activities [e.g., bathing, food prepara-
tion, and dressing] as well as experiences of dependency, devaluation,
and low self-esteem (p. 419).
According to Hassouneh-Phillips and Curry (2002) ‘‘in addition to emo-
tional, physical, and sexual abuse, women with disabilities also experienced
335
various forms of disability-specific abuse’’ (e.g., damage or removal of assis-
tive devices, unwanted sexual touching during dressing and bathing; p. 102).
Curry, Hassouneh-Phillips, and Johnston-Silverberg (2001) describe environ-
mental and societal factors (e.g., ableism, stigmatization, and marginalization
of women with disabilities, poverty and dependence on caregivers), as well
340
as characteristics of women with disabilities (e.g., dependence on others for
basic needs, limited options for problem-solving, and internalized devalua-
tion) that contribute to their vulnerability to abuse.
Women with disabilities experience oppression (ableism) in the forms
of social, educational, economic, and environmental discrimination (Perry,
345
Hendricks, & Broadbent, 2000), all of which contribute to a context where
IPA can flourish. Women with disabilities do not have access to many legal
resources available to those without disabilities (Stefan, 2001), are often
unemployed or employed in low-paying jobs (U.S. Census Bureau, 2005),
and live in a patriarchal and capitalist culture that renders people with dis-
350
abilities invisible, fragmented=broken, or of minimal importance (Burstow,
1992). Popular media, poorly trained and monitored service providers, and
various forms of systemic societal oppression serve to increase and sustain
the vulnerability of women with disabilities, particularly in the context of
IPA (Curry et. al., 2001). One way in which the trivialization of people with
355
disabilities is evidenced is through lack of access to resources that are
focused on the needs of those who have disabilities (both resources in
general and those specific to victims of IPA).
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 9

Additionally, women with disabilities may have fewer options for escap-
ing the abuse due to any impaired physical=mental faculties, therefore mak-
360
ing them more vulnerable to IPA. Women with cognitive, psychological, and
physical disabilities may be dependent on others for basic needs, may have
limited problem-solving skills, and feel disempowered. Women with disabil-
ities may also internalize this worthlessness (e.g., see themselves as unattrac-
tive, disfigured, and incompetent), which ultimately affects how they
365
negotiate relationships, especially conflict within important relationships
(Burstow, 1992).
Intersections with Other Identities
Individuals with disabilities face considerable economic discrimination.
According to recent census data, the employment rate for people with dis-
370
abilities is significantly less than for those who have don’t have a disability
(34.2%versus 80.7%; U.S. Census Bureau, 2005). There is further evidence
that even among those who are employed, individuals with disabilities make
significantly less than those who don’t have disabilities ($22,973 versus
$40,713; U.S. Census Bureau, 2002). Therefore, it is not surprising that people
375
with disabilities are more likely than people without disabilities to live in
poverty and are less likely to have private health insurance (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2005). The intersection between ability status and economic condi-
tions further transform these women’s experiences of abuse and the tactics
available to the abuser.
380
CLASS=CLASSISM
Unique Issues
There are multiple unique issues faced by victims of IPA who fall into the
category of low socioeconomic status, including lack of access to resources
(e.g., education, jobs, affordable housing, and legal services) and the stigma
385
of being poor in Western society. These concerns frequently serve as barriers
that keep women enmeshed in an abusive relationship (Barnett et al., 2005),
both for women who are already poor and for those who become indigent or
confront the loss of substantial financial=material resources as a result of
being abused and=or leaving an abusive relationship (e.g., a form of eco-
390
nomic abuse can include being forced to quit their jobs or an inability to pur-
sue educational opportunities). Working-class and impoverished women
often struggle to support themselves financially without the help of a partner
(Schechter, 2000). Additionally, impoverished victims have reported experi-
encing legal discrimination and have been denied other community services
395
due to the stigma associated with being poor in our society (Bergen,
1998). The stress experienced from the combination of abuse and low
10 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

socioeconomic status frequently leaves women with a decreased capacity to
cope with the emotional challenges these predicaments commonly produce
(Barnett et al., 2005).
400
Intersections with Other Identities
A significant percentage of the poor and working class in the United States
are women of color, those with disabilities, and the elderly (U.S. Census
Bureau, 2002). Therefore, many people who fall in the category of low socio-
economic status also face other intersecting barriers to financial indepen-
405
dence (e.g., discrimination in quality of education, employment, salary).
For example, the unemployment rate for African-American college students
is equivalent to the unemployment rate of White high school graduates
(‘‘Don’t Count on a College Diploma,’’ 1998). These additional barriers
further complicate poor women’s experiences of the power and control
410
tactics used in IPA.
RELIGION=SPIRITUALITY
Unique Issues
Another identity that can serve to shape the power and control tactics
proposed by Pence and Paymer (1993) pertains to how the victim identifies
415
spiritually=religiously. While grouping religious=spiritual groups into one
monolithic group does a disservice to the issues and characteristics that dis-
tinguish these groups from one another and the large variation even within a
particular group, there are also considerable commonalities that these
women face in terms of discrimination and oppression. Factors relevant
420
to these shared experiences of IPA are the focus of this article. Unfortunately,
it is beyond the scope of this piece to explore all of the group variations.
Readers are encouraged to see Ayyub (2000) and Horton and Williamson
(1988) for more information on how different spiritual=religious groups
intersect with IPA.
425
Very little attention has been paid to the role of religion in IPA (Horton
& Williamson, 1988). Consequently, religious=spiritual groups are overwhel-
mingly in denial and silent when it comes to IPA (Horton & Williamson,
1988), which poses additional barriers to religious=spiritual victims leaving
their abusive relationship. Many religious and spiritual groups share common
430
values and beliefs about relationships (e.g., the sanctity of marriage, role of
wife in the relationship, rehabilitation of abusers) and about the roles,
obligations, and responsibilities of religious versus secular communities in
attending to issues of mental health. These values and beliefs can serve to
potentially transform the dynamics of IPA and the tactics available to the
435
abuser.
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 11

For many people in the world, religious=spiritual beliefs profoundly
influence their worldview (Richards & Bergin, 2000). People’s beliefs about
the sanctity of marriage, the roles of a husband and a wife in a committed
relationship, and the potential for rehabilitation of the perpetrator are often
440
strongly influenced by the teachings and writings of their religious=spiritual
tradition. For example, some religious=spiritual traditions (e.g., certain Chris-
tian denominations) hold that even in the face of abuse, women must not
separate from or divorce their partners (Stotland, 2000). Women may be
encouraged to deny abuse because it goes against family values and is per-
445
ceived as bring disgrace to one’s community or cultural group (Spitzer, 1995).
Additionally, many religions=spiritualities have their roots in patriarchal
beliefs that prescribe the man’s role as the head of the household and the
women’s role as caretaker. For example, in some religions=spiritualities
women define themselves by their roles as a wife, mother, and peacekeeper,
450
even if it means shouldering the burden of abuse in order to keep the family
intact (e.g., Christianity, Islam, Judaism; Spitzer, 1995). Similarly, according to
the Koran, IPA may be seen as an appropriate response to a wife’s ‘‘misbe-
havior’’ (p. 167), suggesting that men who engage in IPA are following
‘‘God’s commandments’’ (p. 168) because
455
MenarethemaintainersofwomenbecauseAllahhasmadesomethemto
excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women
are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; as for the
women whoshow rebellion, you shall first enlighten them, then desert them
in beds, and you may beat them as a last resort. Once they obey you, do not
460
seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great. (Koran, IV, 34; as cited
in Douki, Nacef, Belhadj, Bouasker, & Ghachem, 2003, p. 168)
Additionally, some religious doctrines instruct that it is the victim’s duty
to forgive, and that an abuser should be prayed for. For example, consider
the following excerpt:
465
Let love be genuine; hate what is evil, hold fast of what is good. ...Bless
those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. ...Repay no one
evil for evil. ...Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the
wrath of God; for it is written, ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says
the Lord. (Romans 12:9, 14, 17, 19
Q3 ; Kilgore, 1995, pp. 147–148).
470
Consequently, abused women may feel powerless to set change into motion
and=or prefer to tolerate an abusive relationship rather than effect change
(reflecting a belief that attempts to create change are seen as ‘‘arrogance
before God’’; Zambrano, 1985, p. 288).
Overwhelmingly victims of IPA have received responses from clergy
475
reiterating the subordination of women in the familial context and the
sanctity of marriage (Horton & Williamson, 1988). Consequently, victims
12 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

are often reticent to bring abuse to the attention of spiritual=religious leaders.
In addition, many spiritual=religious leaders hesitate to refer members of
their congregation to mental health professionals out of fear that secular
480
therapists will question or undermine their clients’ religious=spiritual beliefs
(Richards & Bergin, 2000). Despite the movement in multicultural and femin-
ist psychology to take into account a client’s context, issues of religion and
spirituality have not been adequately addressed (Theodore, 1984). Mental
health professionals are often largely ill prepared to treat religious=spiritual
485
individuals, especially clients presenting with IPA (Bishop, 1992).
Intersections with Other Identities
Barriers to leaving the abusive relationship can be multiplied when one iden-
tifies with both a religion=spirituality and a racial=ethnic group that are stig-
matized (e.g., a Black Jewish woman). Additionally, being classified in a
490
socioeconomic strata that is not consistent with attributions and stereotypes
of your religious=spiritual affiliation(s) (e.g., impoverished Jewish victims)
can complicate leaving an abusive relationship because the few resources
that do exist are likely ill prepared to respond to within-group diversity.
Furthermore, in many religious=spiritual communities, a nonheterosexual
495
orientation can be problematic (Garnets & Kimmel, 1993). Typically there
is a pull to align oneself with only one of the identities (Bridges, Selvidge,
& Matthews, 2003). Consequently, this can lead to increased isolation in
the abusive relationship and fewer possible resources if one is to leave the
abusive relationship.
500
THE POWER AND CONTROL WHEEL
The Power and Control Wheel (Pence & Paymer, 1993), a commonly used
model with both victims and abusers of IPA, was developed based on the
experiences of more than 200 victims at a Duluth battered women’s shelter.
The Power and Control Wheel illustrates that IPA is made up of a series of
505
behaviors or actions that a perpetrator utilizes to maintain power and con-
trol over his romantic partner (see Figure 1). At the core of the Power and
Control Wheel is the perpetrator’s goal of acquiring and sustaining control
over his partner’s behaviors, cognitions, and emotions. Each segment of the
wheel illustrates one of the ‘‘tactics’’ that a perpetrator may use to control
510
his partner. The eight tactics presented in the Power and Control Wheel
include (a) using intimidation (e.g., making her afraid by using looks,
actions, gestures); (b) using emotional abuse (e.g., making her think she’s
crazy); (c) using isolation (e.g., controlling what she does, who she sees
and talks to, what she reads, where she goes); (d) minimizing, denying,
515
and blaming (e.g., making light of the abuse and not taking her concerns
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 13

about it seriously); (e) using children (e.g., making her feel guilty about the
children); (f) using male privilege (e.g., acting like the ‘‘master of the
castle’’); (g) using economic abuse (e.g., giving her an allowance); and
(h) using coercion and threats (e.g., making and=or carrying out threats
520
to do something to hurt her. Interestingly, not only have abused women
identified these tactics enacted against them, but perpetrators have also
acknowledged using the same tactics (Shepard, 1988). The outermost ring
of the wheel illustrates the function of physical and sexual violence in sup-
porting the power and control tactics. While physical abuse and=or sexual
525
abuse may be infrequent and sporadic, the looming threat of these forms of
abuse strengthens the power of the other tactics on the wheel. In other
words, the inability to predict these behaviors inevitably drives victims to
be hypervigilant about meeting the abuser’s needs, wants, whims, and
expectations (Pence & Paymer, 1993).
FIGURE 1 Power and Control Wheel
14 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

530
Variations of the Power and Control Wheel
Several individual attempts have been made to integrate issues of race=
ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, disability, and religion=spirituality into the
Power and Control Wheel. Tactics, as presented in the original Power and
Control Wheel, have been (a) reworded to make them more relevant to different
535
groups, (b) translated into different languages, and=or (c) added, subtracted, or
modified to address issues unique to specific populations. Variations of the
Power and Control Wheel specific to the various identities and their inherent
limitations are described in more detail in the following sections.
SEXUAL ORIENTATION
540
Multiple efforts have been made to modify the original Power and Control
Wheel to address how homophobia is employed as a form of power and con-
trol within the context of abusive intimate relationships. Roe and Jagodinsky
(1995) added examples to each of the original tactics exemplifying how
homophobia can be used to alter the tactics. For example, they added, ‘‘say-
545
ing no one will believe you because you are a lesbian or gay man’’ to the
‘‘Using Isolation’’ tactic. In addition, the tactic ‘‘Using Male Privilege’’ was
reworded to read ‘‘Using Privilege’’ or ‘‘Entitlement.’’ Almeida, Woods, Font,
& Messineo (1992) advocated for two additional tactics that they believed to
be relevant to lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) populations:
550
‘‘using physical abuse,’’ ‘‘spiritual=religious abuse.’’
AGE
Similarly, limited attempts have been made to address the unique issues
facing IPA victims later in life. The Wisconsin Coalition against Domestic
Violence (WCADV; 1998) developed a variation of the Power and Control
555
Wheel, Family Violence in Later Life. This variation places an increased
emphasis on the role of support and safety in later life by integrating exam-
ples that are relevant for older victims into existing tactics (e.g., abusing
dependencies, neglect). In addition to a variation of the Power and Control
Wheel for Elderly and Disabled individuals, the Minnesota Center for
560
Violence and Abuse has a variation for Teens and Children.
RACE=ETHNICITY
Variations to the Power and Control Wheel that address race=ethnicity do so
by either translating the same wheel into different languages (e.g., Spanish or
Hmong) or by altering the entire wheel to be applicable only to the commu-
565
nity for which it was developed. For example, the Creator Wheel (1990) was
developed by the Mending of the Sacred Hoop STOP Violence against Indian
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 15

Women Technical Assistance Project to address Native populations (Mending
the Sacred Hoop, n.d). The goal of this project was to utilize the traditions of
Native communities to address the unique context in which violence against
570
Native women occurs. The Creator Wheel incorporates Native values (e.g.,
economic partnership, fairness) and traditions (e.g., being kind to others)
by offering alternative tactics (e.g., ‘‘shared responsibility’’ and ‘‘responsible
parenting’’ as alternatives to ‘‘male privilege’’ and ‘‘using children’’). The Min-
nesota Center for Violence and Abuse developed a Power and Control Wheel
575
for Immigrants that includes the same tactics as the original Power and
Control Wheel but lists the ways in which each power and control tactic
can present as violent acts that are unique to immigrant women thus support-
ing the power and control structure (e.g., female genital mutilation, acid
throwing, torture, burning, and honor killing).
580
DISABILITIES
Limited attempts have been made to address the unique issues facing IPA vic-
tims who live with disabilities. The Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic
Violence (WCADV, n.d.) created a wheel titled Abuse of People with Devel-
opmental Disabilities by a Caregiver, which highlights how power and con-
585
trol tactics can be complicated by victims with disabilities by adding an
additional tactic titled ‘‘withholding, misusing, or delaying needed supports.’’
While this effort demonstrates a critical step in an important direction, current
models fail to acknowledge the entire range of disabilities (e.g., physical,
psychological=psychiatric, sensory, cognitive).
590
RELIGION=SPIRITUALITY
Only one variation of the Power and Control Wheel was found pertaining to
religion=spirituality. ‘‘Power and Control Tactics—Jewish Women Speak’’
(Gardsbane, 2002, pp. 14–15) was developed by a group of Jewish victims
who modified the Power and Control Wheel to address their experiences and
595
understandings of as well as the Jewish community’s response to IPA. The
model they created depicted how power and control tactics can be complicated
by Judaism. For example, they incorporated a section titled ‘‘community and
congregational response,’’ which highlights the bidirectional relationship
between the tactics and the Jewish community (e.g., no community education
600
about domestic violence, denies reality of abuse in Jewish households).
CLASS
Unlike the aforementioned identities, no variations of the Power and Control
Wheel were found that have focused entirely on tactics pertaining to class.
16 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

While socioeconomic issues have appeared in the context of other variations
605
and frequently do intersect with other identities within abusive relationships,
it is also important to look at class as its own construct given its power to
keep victims entrapped in abusive relationships.
MULTIPLE IDENTITIES
Of the variations of the power and control wheel developed to date, the
610
Cultural Context Model (Almeida et al., 1992; Almeida, Woods, Messineo,
& Font, 1998), which addressed both racism=colonization=imperialism and
heterosexism, was the only attempt we found to address multiple identities.
Almeida and colleagues (1992, 1998) addressed the misuse and abuse of
power toward women of color by including a ninth spoke to the wheel
615
called ‘‘white privilege’’ (e.g., inability to access schools and safe jobs). They
also highlight how power and control tactics are complicated for victims who
don’t identify as heterosexual by creating a separate wheel where ‘‘using
male privilege’’ was renamed ‘‘using heterosexual privilege.’’ Two additional
tactics, ‘‘spiritual=religious abuse’’ and ‘‘physical abuse’’ were also added.
620
While this attempt to address multiple identities is commendable, it fails to
acknowledge the full range of women’s experiences (e.g., women who are
oppressed due to disabilities, class, and age) and does not give adequate
attention to the intersectionality of multiple identities.
Limitations of Variations
625
While the variations of the Power and Control Wheel described introduce
conceptualizations that are intended to be more inclusive of issues of diver-
sity, there are several limitations inherent in these models. First, a number
of potentially important identities have either not been incorporated into a
wheel to date (e.g., socioeconomic status) or have received relatively little
630
attention (e.g., age, disability, and religion=spirituality). Second, the majority
of the efforts to develop a more diversity-inclusive conceptualization of IPA
have focused their efforts on only a single dimension of identity. In other
words, all but one of these wheels inadvertently suggest that one identity
can define a female victim’s entire experience of IPA. For example, by focus-
635
ing solely on sexual orientation while working with lesbian women we are
making the implicit assumption that the experience of a Caucasian lesbian
is going to be identical to that of a Black lesbian. In essence, the attempts
to diversify the Power and Control Wheel have simply replicated the same cri-
tique made of the original Power and Control Wheel, that is, focusing solely
640
on one form of oppression is too narrow in scope to fully explain victims’
experiences, which frequently encompass multiple oppressions. According
to Bograd (1999), ‘‘intersectionalities color the meaning and nature of
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 17

domestic violence, how it is experienced by self and responded to by others,
how personal and social consequences are represented, and how and
645
whether escape and safety can be obtained’’ (p. 276). As Kanuha (2005) states,
While battered lesbians share many of the same experiences that all
battered women face, it is the combination of being women, battered,
lesbians, and people of color that create significant barriers for lesbians
of color in the writing and telling of their IPA experiences. Because bat-
650
tered lesbians of color are women, they are victims of societal sexism that
pervades all women’s lives. Because they are battered, they struggle to
maintain a sense of their physical, emotional, and spiritual selves in the
midst of daily terrorization. Because they are lesbians, they are a stigma-
tized, invisible group that is often silenced due to the powerful influence
655
of homophobia. And finally, because they are women of color, they have
survived a centuries-old legacy that oppresses them based solely on the
color of their skin. (p. 72)
The unique combinations of individuals’ multiple identities (particularly
when they are associated with oppression) inevitably shape the experiences
660
of being a victim of IPA. By having separate wheels for each of the various
identities we continue to perpetuate the narrow lens through which IPA is
conceptualized, not to mention neglecting and invalidating the numerous
and variable realities of how women experience IPA. In essence, these mod-
els ignore the intersectionality of women’s multiple identities. It is imperative
665
to realize that the ways in which these identities combine within different
individuals makes for unique experiences. Similarly, while some of the tactics
(e.g., using children) proposed by the Power and Control Wheel (Pence &
Paymer, 1993) are generic and can cut across experiences, it is important
to intentionally and overtly acknowledge how they may be used differently
670
for different groups of women. For example, the threat of having a child
taken away may be experienced differently by a heterosexual and a lesbian
woman.
To summarize, lacking is a meta-description of how power and control
tactics, central to IPA, intersect with oppression in general and an exploration
675
of how the different forms of oppression function to add complexity to the
power and control tactics. One unified, integrated model is needed to reflect
the impact of multiple intersecting identities for victims of IPA.
MULTICULTURAL POWER AND CONTROL WHEEL
The Multicultural Power and Control Wheel
4
(Figure 2) builds on the original
680
structure of Pence and Paymer’s (1993) Power and Control Wheel. The origi-
nal eight tactics and the outermost ring (physical and sexual violence) were
maintained in keeping with Pence and Paymer’s conceptualization of IPA as
18 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

a ‘‘pattern of behaviors’’ (p. 2) or tactics that one person utilizes to maintain
power and control over another person within the context of an intimate
685
relationship.
Pence and Paymer (1993) suggest that ‘‘the tactics used by batterers reflect
the tactics used by many groups or individuals in positions of power. ...They
are tactics employed to sustain racism, ageism, classism, heterosexism,
anti-Semitism, and many other forms of group domination’’ (p. 3). To acknowl-
690
edge that there are multiple forms of oppression beyond sexism that have the
potential for complex interconnections, the Multicultural Power and Control
Wheel is comprised of seven distinct rings, with each ring representing one
of the following forms of oppression: racism=ethnocentrism, ageism, classism,
sexism, ableism, religious=spiritual oppression, and heterosexism. Unlike the
695
original Power and Control Wheel, where sexism is built into the eight tactics,
we made sexism a ring to highlight its importance as being equal to that of the
other identities. It should be noted that, in order to not rank oppressions, the
order in which the rings were placed relative to the center was random.
FIGURE 2 Multicultural Power and Control Wheel.
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 19

TABLE 1 Examples of Multicultural Power and Control Tactics
Tactic Sexism Heterosexism Ageism Racism Ableism Classism Spirituality=
Religion
Using
intimida-
tion
Instilling fear
with looks and
actions;
displaying
weapons
Using looks,
actions, gestures
to reinforce
heterosexist
control
Instilling fear
with greater
physical
strength
Capitalizing on
cultural image
of men of color
as violent
Mistreating
service animals
Using earning
power and
financial status
to intimidate
Destroying
religious=
spiritual
property (e.g.,
Christmas tree,
Menorah)
Emotional
abuse
Making her feel
bad about
herself or think
she is crazy
Telling her that
being a lesbian
is sick
Making her think
she is losing her
mind
Making her feel
like she is
betraying her
race
Ignoring requests
for assistance
Making her feel
guilty for
spending
money
Making her feel
bad about her
religious=
spiritual beliefs
Isolation Limiting her
outside
involvement;
using jealousy to
justify actions
Isolating her from
family or the
nonlesbian
community
Controlling where
victim goes
Capitalizing on
language
barriers;
reinforcing
racial mistrust
Discouraging
contact with the
case manager or
advocate
Using SES status
to justify
controlling what
victim does and
where she goes
Preventing victim
from being an
active
participant in a
religious=
spiritual place of
worship (e.g.,
synagogue,
church)
Minimizing,
denying,
blaming
Making light of
abuse; saying
she caused it
Convincing her
that abuse
doesn’t happen
in same-sex
relationships
Saying abuse
doesn’t happen
in older couples
Telling her she is
overreacting
like ‘‘White
people’’ do
Blaming the
disability for the
abuse
Saying that the
financial stress
caused the
abuse
Saying that her
religious=
spiritual beliefs
were the cause
of the abuse
20

Children Using children to
relay messages;
threatening to
take children
away
Threatening that
social services
will take her
children away if
they know she
is gay
Threatening to tell
children you
need to be in a
nursing home
Blaming her for
taking away
children’s father
figure
Using the
disability as an
excuse for
removing
parental custody
Using the victim’s
financial status
to justify
removing her
parental custody
Using religious=
spiritual
doctrine to
make the victim
feel guilty or
fearful of
leaving the
abuser and thus
breaking up the
family
Privilege Treating her like a
servant
Treating her like a
pervert
Treating her like a
child
Treating her like
an animal
Denying the
victim her right
to privacy
Using class
privilege to
access services
not available to
victim
Using religious=
spiritual
doctrine to
justify men’s and
women’s roles
within the
family
Economic
abuse
Preventing her
from getting a
job; making her
ask for money
Preventing her
from getting a
job by
disclosing her
sexual
orientation
Not letting her
have access to
family (fixed)
income
Threatening to
report victim if
she works
‘‘under the
table"
Stealing from the
victim
Controlling
money, access
to services, safe
living
environment
Preventing victim
from purchasing
religious=
spiritual items
(e.g., cross,
candles for the
Jewish Sabbath)
Coercion,
threats
Threatening to
hurt her or
commit suicide
Threatening to
disclose her
sexual
orientation
Threatening to
leave someone
who is
dependent
Threatening
deportation or
being ostracized
from community
Using
consequences
and punishment
to elicit
compliant
behavior
Coercing victim
with financial
stability and
housing
Threatening to
leave victim
based on
religious=
spiritual beliefs
21

‘‘Oppression and the intolerance of difference come in all shapes and sizes and
700
colors and sexualities; and that among those of us who share the goals of lib-
eration and a workable future for our children, there can be no hierarchies of
oppression’’ (Lorde, 2000, p. 89). Additionally, the ‘‘Male Privilege’’ tactic was
changed to read ‘‘Privilege’’ in an effort to reflect that privilege is a social
phenomenon that occurs not only in relation to gender but also relative to
705
the other identities presented. Similarly, it should be noted that privilege is
contextual; that is, a person may be granted privilege in one context but not
another depending on how that person’s identity is socially constructed from
context to context. (Due to space constraints, examples of the tactics were not
included in the Figure 2. See Table 1 for examples of what these tactics could
710
look like.)
In summary, it is the ultimate goal of the Multicultural Power and Con-
trol Wheel to (a) demonstrate how the intersection of multiple identities
including gender, race=ethnicity, socioeconomic status, religion=spirituality,
sexual orientation, disability, and age may ‘‘radically shape the experiences
715
of ...women who are battered, whereby certain women ...are more
entrapped within contexts of violence than others’’ (Almeida & Durkin,
1999, p. 314), and (b) highlight the infinite ways in which oppressed identi-
ties (e.g., race=ethnicity, age, ability, gender, religion=spirituality, class, and
sexual orientation) and their related oppressions could transpose the power
720
and control tactics identified in the Pence and Paymer (1993) Power and
Control Wheel.
FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR RESEARCH
Research is needed on the Power and Control Wheel (Pence & Paymer,
1993) and the revised Multicultural Power and Control Wheel, including
725
how accurately the wheel reflects and addresses the experiences of a
diverse range of women and whether the tactics are reflective of all
women’s experiences. Given the paucity of research on the Power and
Control Wheel, a good place to start would be conducting qualitative inter-
views with a diverse range of women who have experienced IPA. In parti-
730
cular, it would be interesting to see what forms of power and control
women identify as keeping them entrapped in contexts of violence. Addi-
tionally, this research area would greatly benefit from exploration into what
Gloria (2001) refers to as ‘‘construct salience’’: ‘‘the salience or importance
ascribed to each construct (oppressed identity) may change across
735
personal, social, political, and environmental contexts’’ (Gloria, 2001,
p. 9). Such research would allow for distinctions to arise within and
between groups. Researchers should also continue to explore potential
additional identities that might transform women’s experiences of IPA
(e.g., living in rural communities, fatism).
22 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

740
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE
Acknowledging that IPA has its roots in a patriarchal society has major impli-
cations for the work of mental health professionals working with women
who have been victimized in an abusive relationship, as it means a necessary
shifting of the label of pathology from the individual to external factors
745
adversely affecting these women (Worell & Remer, 2003). This reconceptua-
lization can empower the victim to realize that there is not something
innately wrong with her. Rather, she can view her reactions as understand-
able responses to a traumatic and oppressive environment (Worell & Remer,
2003).
750
In reviewing the previous literature, several themes become evident in
terms of how intersectionality shapes how IPA is perceived and experienced.
For example, the daily experience of various ‘‘microagressions’’ (e.g., racism,
classism, heterosexism, ageism, ableism) clearly have the potential to com-
pound the psychological consequences of IPA. Similarly, internalized beliefs
755
(e.g., that preserving the family is more important than disclosing abuse)
and=or external realities (e.g., LGBT individuals living in a small, often
tight-knit community; being dependent on others for mobility) often create
barriers to help seeking.
The Multicultural Power and Control Wheel was developed with the
760
goal of providing a broader lens with which to conceptualize IPA. It is our
hope that the Multicultural Power and Control Wheel will encourage and
inspire mental health professionals, in particular, to engage their clients on
a journey toward reaching a meaningful shared understanding of the ways
in which multiple intersecting identities play a central role in the experience
765
of IPA. However, due to the preliminary nature of the Multicultural Power
and Control Wheel, only tentative implications for counseling interventions
can be suggested.
Given the complex nature of multiple intersecting identities for victims of
IPA, there is no expectation that service providers will be able to anticipate
770
the virtually infinite ways in which multiple intersecting identities can shape
women’s experiences of IPA. However, mental health professionals should be
aware that multiple intersecting identities do shape victim’s experiences of
IPA, and they should maintain some general knowledge about the more com-
mon ways in which multiple intersecting identities can shape abuse tactics.
775
In order to truly reach a meaningful shared understanding of victims’
experiences, we most strongly encourage the prioritization of the victim’s
stories. To facilitate the storytelling or account-making process, as well as
building a strong therapeutic alliance, we envision that the Multicultural
Power and Control Wheel can serve as a springboard for therapist inquiries
780
into the nature of the IPA (e.g., Do you think your experiences of abuse have
been influenced by your identity as a ? If so, how? Has your identity as a
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 23

affected how you make sense of your relationship? Has your identity as a
affected how able you feel to leave the abusive relationship? If so, how?).
We believe that asking questions such as these will evoke a more accurate
785
assessment of the client’s experience, clarify the obstacles faced, and inform
which treatment(s) might be appropriate.
In the context of therapeutic interventions, safety planning, vocational
support, and other forms of advocacy commonly utilized by this population,
we predict that the Multicultural Power and Control Wheel can serve as a
790
visual aid to present to clients in order to validate their experiences of abuse
as well as provide (re)assurance(s) that they are not alone in their victimiza-
tion, even within their own cultural groups and subgroups. It is hoped that
this kind of (re)assurance may subsequently initiate a process whereby vic-
tims=survivors can (re)connect with their multiple intersecting identities in
795
a manner that fosters resilience, strength, and empowerment.
Gender does not operate in a vacuum. The development of new para-
digms that acknowledges the primacy of interactions of diverse variables
allows feminist psychology to be more inclusive.
—Comas D
az (1991)
800
NOTES
1. It is important to acknowledge that ‘‘gender’’ itself can be a complex term, and being transgen-
dered can further complicate the experience of intimate partner violence (Turell, 2000).
2. While there is great within-group diversity in how women in same-sex relationships self-identify,
for the sake of simplicity we use the term ‘‘lesbian’’ to refer to women in same-sex relationships.
805
3. While abuse among the elderly (65 years old and older) can include abuse by a wide range of care-
takers, and one in five high school girls report dating abuse (Greenfeld et al, 1998), for the purpose of this
paper (and in keeping with the original development of the Power and Control Wheel) we will highlight
abuse in adult romantic relationships.
4. Similar to Pedersen (1991), we are using the term ‘‘multicultural’’ broadly to refer to demographic
810
variables (e.g., age, sex), status variables (e.g., social, educational, economic), affiliations (formal and
informal), as well as ethnographic variables (e.g., nationality, ethnicity, language, religion).
REFERENCES
Almeida, R. & Dolan-Delvecchio, K. (1999). Addressing culture in batterers interven-
tion: The Asian Indian community as an illustrative example. Violence Against
815
Women,5(6), 654–683.
Almeida, R. & Durkin, T. (1999). The cultural context model: Therapy for
couples with domestic violence. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy,
25(3), 313–322.
Almeida, R., Woods, R., Font, R., & Messineo, T. (1992). Power and control wheels,
820
private context: The misuse and abuse of power within heterosexual
relationships. Somerset, NJ: Institute for Family Services.
24 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

Almeida, R., Woods, R., Messineo, T., & Font, R. (1998). The cultural context model:
An overview. In Monica McGoldrick (Ed.), Re-visioning family therapy: Race, cul-
ture, and gender in clinical practice (pp. 414–431). New York: Guilford Press.
825
American Psychological Association Presidential Task Force on Violence and the
Family (1996). Violence and the family: Report of the Presidential task force.
Washington, DC: Author.
Anetzberger, G. J. (2001). Elder abuse identification and referral: The importance of
screening tools and referral protocols. Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect,13(2),
830
3–22.
Atkinson, D., & Hackett, G. (2004). Counseling diverse populations (3rd ed.).
Columbus, OH: McGraw Hill.
Ayyub, R. (2000). Domestic violence in the South Asian Muslim immigrant population
in the United States. Journal of Social Distress and the Homeless,9(3), 237–248.
835
Barnett, O., Miller-Perrin, C., & Perrin, R. (2005). Family violence across the lifespan:
An introduction (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.
Bergen, R. K. (Ed.). (1998). Issues in intimate violence. London: Sage Publications.
Bishop, D. R. (1992). Religious values as cross-cultural issues in counseling. Counsel-
ing and Values,36, 179–191.
840
Bograd, M. (1999). Strengthening domestic violence theories: Intersections of race,
class, sexual orientation, and gender. Journal of Martial and Family Therapy,
25, 275–289.
Bridges, S. K., Selvidge, M. M. D., & Matthews, C. R. (2003). Lesbian women of color:
Therapeutic issues and challenges. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and
845
Development,31, 113–131.
Brown, L. & Root, M. P. P. (Eds.). (1990). Diversity and complexity in feminist
therapy. Binghamton, NY: The Haworth Press.
Q4
Burstow, B. (1992). Radical feminist therapy: Working in the context of violence.
London: Sage Publications.
850
Butler, L. (1999). African American lesbian women experiencing partner abuse. In J.
McClennan & J. Gunter (Eds.), A professional guide to understanding gay and
lesbian domestic violence (pp. &
Q5 ). Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen.
Calderbank, R. (2000). Abuse and disabled people: Vulnerability or social indiffer-
ence? Disability and Society,15, 521–534.
Q6
855
Campbell, D., Masaki, B., & Torres, S. (1997). Water on the rock: Changing domestic
violence perception in the African American, Asian American and Latino com-
munities. In E. Klein, J. Campbell, E. Soler, & M. Ghez (Eds.), Ending domestic
violence: Changing public perceptions=halting the epidemic (pp. 64–87).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
860
Chung, Y. B. & Katayama, M. (1999). Ethnic and sexual identity development of
Asian American lesbian and gay adolescents. In K. S. Ng (Ed.), Counseling Asian
families from a systems perspective (pp. 159–169). Alexandria, VA: American
Counseling Association.
Civjan, S. (2000). Making sexual assault and domestic violence services accessible.
865
Impact: Feature Issue on Violence against Women with Developmental or Other
Disabilities,13(3), 10–11.
Q7
Comas-Dı
´az, L. (1991). Feminism and diversity in psychology: The case of women of
color. Psychology of Women,15, 597–609.
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 25

Comas-Dı
´az, L. & Greene, B. (Eds.). (1994). Women of color: Integrating ethnic and
870
gender identities in psychotherapy. New York: The Guilford Press.
Q8
Cunradi, C., Caetano, R., & Schafer, J. (2002). Religious affiliation, denominational
homogeny, and intimate partner violence among U.S. couples. Journal for the
Study of Religion,41(1), 139–151.
Curry, M. A., Hassauneh-Phillips, D., & Johnston-Silverberg, A. (2001). Abuse of
875
women with disabilities: An ecological model and review. Violence against
women,7, 60–79.
Don’t count on a college diploma to reduce the Black-White unemployment gap.
(1998, Spring). Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 16–17.
Douki, S., Nacef, F., Belhadj, A., Bouasker, A., & Ghachem, R. (2003). Violence
880
against women in Arab and Islamic countries. Archives of Women’s Mental
Health,6, 165–171.
Eaton, M. (1994). Abuse by any other name: Feminism, difference, and intralesbian
violence. In M. A. Fineman & R. Mykitiuk (Eds.), The public nature of private
violence: The discovery of domestic abuse (pp. &
Q4 ). New York: Routledge.
885
Felty, K. (2001). Gender violence: Rape and sexual assault. In D. Vannoy (Ed.),
Gender mosaics (pp. &
Q4 ). Los Angeles: Roxbury.
Gardsbane, D. (2002). Healing & wholeness: A resource guide on domestic abuse in
the Jewish community. Washington, DC: Jewish Women International.
Garnets, L. & Kimmel, D. (Eds.). (1993). Psychological perspectives on lesbian and
890
gay experiences. New York: Columbia University Press.
Gelles, R. & Straus, M. (1988). Intimate violence: The causes and consequences of
abuse in the American family. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Gilson, S., DePoy, E., & Cramer, E. P. (2001). Linking the assessment of self-reported
functional capacity with abuse experiences of women with disabilities. Violence
895
Against Women,7(4), 418–431.
Giorgio, G. (2002). Speaking silence: Definitional dialogues in abusive lesbian
relationships. Violence Against Women,8(10), 1233–1259.
Girshick, L. (2002). No sugar, no spice: Reflections on research on woman-to-woman
sexual violence. Violence Against Women,8, 1500–1520.
900
Gloria, A. M. (2001). The cultural construction of Latinas: Practice implications of
multiple realities and identities. In D. B. Pope-Davis & H. L. K. Coleman
(Eds.), The intersection of race, class and gender in multicultural counseling
(pp. 3–24). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Greene, B. (1994). Lesbian women of color: Triple jeopardy. In L. Comas-Dı
´az &
905
B. Greene (Eds.), Women of color (pp. 389–427). New York: Guilford Press.
Q9
Greenfeld, L., Rand, M., Craven, D., Klaus, P., Perkins, C., Ringel, C., et al. (1998,
March). Bureau of Justice statistics fact book: Violence by intimates. Washington,
DC: U.S. Bureau of Justice.
Hassouneh-Phillips, D. & Curry, M. A. (2002). Abuse of women with disabilities:
910
State of the science. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin,45(2), 96–104.
Herek, G. (2000). The psychology of sexual prejudice. Current Directions in Psycho-
logical Science,9, 19–22.
Ho, C. K. (1990). An analysis of domestic violence in Asian American communities: A
multicultural approach to counseling. Women and Therapy,9, 129–150.
26 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

915
Holtzworth-Munroe, A., Smutzler, N., & Bates, L. (1997). A brief review of the
research on husband violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior,2, 285–307.
Horton, A. L., & Williamson, J. A. (Eds.). (1988). Abuse and religion: When praying
isn’t enough. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Hyde, J. & Rosenberg, B. (Ed.). (1975). Half the human experience: The psychology
920
of women. Oxford, England: DC. Health.
Q10
Jordan, J. V. (Ed.). (1997). Women’s growth in diversity: More writings from the Stone
Center. New York: The Guilford Press.
Q11
Kantor, G., Jasinski, J., & Aldarondo, E. (1994). Sociocultural status and incidence of
marital violence in Hispanic families. Violence and Victims,9(3), 207–222.
Q12
925
Kanuha, V. (2005). Compounding the triple jeopardy: Battering in lesbian of color
relationships. In N. J. Sokoloff and C. Pratt (Eds.), Domestic violence at the
margins: Readings on race, class, gender, and culture. (pp. 83–101). New
Brunswick NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Kilgore, N. (1995). The Christian abused woman. In Z. Brown & D. Charlsen (Eds.),
930
Family violence and religion: An interfaith resource guide (pp. 147–149).
United States: Volcano Press.
Kunkel, M. A. & Williams, C. (1991). Age and expectations about counseling:
Two methodological perspectives. Journal of Counseling and Development,
70, 314–320.
935
Lockhart, L., White, B., Causby, V., & Issac, A. (1994). Letting out the secret: Violence
in lesbian relationships. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,9, 469–492.
Loiacano, D. K. (1993). Gay identity issues among Black Americans: Racism,
homophobia, and the need for validation. In L. D. Garnets & D. C. Kimmel
(Eds.), Psychological perspectives on lesbian and gay male experiences
940
(pp. 364–375). New York: Columbia University Press.
Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider: Essays & speeches. Freedom, CA: The Crossing Press.
Lorde, A. (2000). There is no hierarchy of oppression. In N. Worcester & M. H.
Whatley (Eds.), Women’s health: Readings on social, economic and political
Issues (3rd edition). Dubuque, IA: Kendall=Hunt.
945
Mending the Sacred Hoop (n.d.). The creator wheel: STOP Violence against Indian
Women Technical Assistance Project. Retrieved from http://www.msh-ta.org/
Miller, A., Bobner, R., & Zarski, J. (2000). Sexual identity development: A base for
work with same-sex couple partner abuse. Contemporary Family Therapy,
2(2), 189–200.
950
Myers, J. E., & Shelton, B. (1987). Abuse and older persons: Issues and implications
for counselors. Journal of Counseling and Development,65, 376–380.
Morrow, S., & Hawxhurst, D. (1989). Lesbian partner abuse: Implications for
therapists. Journal of Counseling and Development,68, 58–62.
Novak, S., & Galaway, B. (1983). Domestic abuse intervention project final report.
955
Duluth, MN: Domestic Abuse Intervention Project.
Q13
O’Campo, P., McDonnell, K., Gielen, A., Burke, J., & Chen, Y. (2002). Surviving
physical and sexual abuse: What helps low-income women? Patient Education
and Counseling,46, 205–212.
O’Keefe, M. (1994). Racial=ethnic differences among battered women and their
960
children. Journal of Child and Family Studies,3(3), 283–305.
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 27

Pedersen, P. B. (1991). Multiculturalism as a generic approach to counseling. Journal
of Counseling & Development,70, 6–12.
Pence, E. & Paymer, M. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth
model. New York: Springer.
965
Perry, E. L., Hendricks, W., & Broadbent, E. (2000). An exploration of access and
treatment discrimination and job satisfaction among college graduates with
and without physical disabilities. Human Relations,53, 923–955.
Poorman, P. B. (2001). Forging community links to address abuse in lesbian relation-
ships. Women and Therapy,23(3), 7–24.
970
Potter, H. (2007). Battered Black women’s use of religious services and spirituality
for assistance and leaving abusive relationships. Violence Against Women,13,
262–284.
Renzetti, C. (1997a). Violence and abuse among same-sex couples. In A. P. Cardarelli
(Ed.), Violence between intimate partners: Patterns, causes, and effects (pp. 70–
975
89). Boston: University of Massachusetts.
Renzetti, C. (1997b). Violence in lesbian and gay relationships. In L. L. O’Toole &
J. R. Schiffman (Eds.), Gender violence (pp. 285–293). New York: New York
University Press.
Richards, P. S. & Bergin, A. (Eds.) (2000). Handbook of psychotherapy and religious
980
diversity. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ristock, J. (2002). No more secrets: Violence in lesbian relationships. New York:
Routledge.
Roe & Jagodinsky
Q14 (1995). Lesbian=gay power and control wheel. Austin, TX: National
Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence. Retrieved from http://
985
www.ncdsv.org/images/Lesbian-GayPCwheelNOSHADING.pdf.
Q15
Schechter, S. (2000). Expanding solutions for domestic violence and poverty: What
battered women with abused children need from their advocates: Building
comprehensive solutions to domestic violence. Publication #13, A Vision
Paper. St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Center Against Violence and Abuse. Retrieved
990
from http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/expandin/expandin.html.
Sharma, A. (2001). Healing the wounds of domestic abuse. Violence Against Women,
7(12), 1405–1428.
Shepard, M. (1988). Evaluation of the educational curriculum-power and control:
Tactics of men who batter. Duluth, MN: Domestic Intervention Project.
995
Shepard, M., Falk, D., & Raschick, M. (2000). Final report of the evaluation of the
Enhanced Domestic Abuse Intervention Project. Submitted to the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (U50=ccu11327).
Q16
Sobsey, D. (2000). Faces of violence against women with developmental disabilities.
Impact: Feature Issue on Violence against Women with Developmental or Other
1000
Disabilities,13(3), 2–3.
Q17
Sokolf, N. & Dupont, D. (2005). Domestic violence: Examining the intersections of
race, class, and gender—An introduction. In N. J. Sokoloff and C. Pratt (Eds.),
Domestic violence at the margins: Readings on race, class, gender, and culture
(pp. 1–13). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
1005
Span, S. A. & Vidal, L. (2003). Cross-cultural differences in female university students’
attitudes toward homosexuals: A preliminary study. Psychological Reports,92,
565–572.
28 A. Z. Chavis and M. S. Hill

Spitzer, J. (1995). When love is not enough: Spousal abuse in rabbinic and contem-
porary Judaism. In Z. Brown & D. Charlsen (Eds.), Family violence and religion:
1010
An interfaith resource guide (pp. 151–165). United States: Volcano Press.
Stefan, S. (2001). Unequal rights: Discrimination against people with mental disabil-
ities and the Americans with Disabilities Ace. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Stotland, N. L. (2000). Tug-of-war: Domestic abuse and the misuse of religion. The
1015
American Journal of Psychiatry,157, 696–702.
Theodore, R. M. (1984). Utilization of spiritual values in counseling: An ignored
dimension. Counseling and Values,28, 162–168.
Tolman, R. M. & Raphael, J. (2000). A review of research on welfare and domestic
violence. Journal of Social Issues,56(4), 655–682.
1020
Tomita, S. K. (1990). The denial of elder mistreatment by victims and abusers: The
application of neutralization theory. Violence and Victims,5(3), 171–184.
Turell, S. C. (2000). A descriptive analysis of same-sex relationship violence for a
diverse sample. Journal of Family Violence,15, 281–293.
U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (1994, November). Selected findings: Violence
1025
between intimates (NCJ-149259). Washington, DC: Author.
Q18
U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). Disability—Work experience and mean earnings in
2000—Work disability status of civilians 16 to 74 years old, by educational
attainment and sex: 2000. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from: http://
www.census.gov/hhes/www/diable/cps/cps302.html
1030
U.S. Census Bureau. (2003). The older population in the United States: March 2002.
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/
2003pubs/p20–546.pdf.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2004). Income stable, poverty up, number of Americans with and
without health insurance rise. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.
1035
census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/income_wealth/002484.html.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2005). Disability and American Families: 2000. Washington, DC:
Author. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/censr-23.pdf
U.S. Department of Justice. (2000). Our aging population: Promoting empowerment,
preventing victimization, and implementing coordinated interventions.
1040
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gove/ovc/pub-
lications/infores/firstrep/2001/eldvic.html
Vinton, L. (1992). Battered women’s shelters and older women: The Florida experi-
ence. Journal of Family Violence,7, 63–72.
West, C. M. (1998). Lifting the political gag order: Breaking the silence around part-
1045
ner violence in ethnic minority families. In J. L. Jasinski & L. M. Williams (Eds.),
Partner Violence (pp. 184–209). London: Sage Publications.
Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence (n.d.). Abuse of people with
developmental disabilities by a caregiver. Madison, WI: Author.
Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence. (1998). Family violence in later life.
1050
Madison, WI: Author.
Worell, J. & Remer, P. (2003). Feminist perspectives in therapy: Empowering diverse
women (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Zambrano, M. M. (1985). For the Latina in an abusive relationship. Berkeley,
CA: Seal Press.
Integrating Multiple Intersecting Identities 29