Pour savoir comment effectuer et gérer un dépôt de document, consultez le « Guide abrégé – Dépôt de documents » sur le site Web de la Bibliothèque. Pour toute question, écrivez à corpus@ulaval.ca.
 

Personne :
Bousquet, Marc-Antoine

En cours de chargement...
Photo de profil

Adresse électronique

Date de naissance

Projets de recherche

Structures organisationnelles

Fonction

Nom de famille

Bousquet

Prénom

Marc-Antoine

Affiliation

Université Laval. École de travail social et de criminologie

ISNI

ORCID

Identifiant Canadiana

ncf10646247

person.page.name

Résultats de recherche

Voici les éléments 1 - 1 sur 1
  • PublicationAccès libre
    How do practitioners and program managers working with male perpetrators view IPV? : a Quebec study
    (Springer New York, 2019-11-29) Bousquet, Marc-Antoine; Roy, Valérie; Labarre, Michel; Sanhueza Morales, Tatiana Andrea; Brodeur, Normand
    To document the viewpoints on intimate partner violence (IPV) of Québec practitioners working with violent partners and of program managers of batterer intervention programs (BIPs). Based on Loseke’s (2003) theory of the construction of social problems, a qualitative study was carried out with 25 practitioners working with violent partners and with18 program managers of BIPs so as to explore their conceptions of IPV and their representations of perpetrators and victims. Study participants primarily defined IPV as a way of taking control, while nonetheless noting other motivations. They also insisted on the diversity of contexts of IPV and its numerous manifestations. For them, IPV was a complex, multifactorial problem, involving individual risk factors for the most part, though also including contextual and social ones. Not only did they not see a single type of IPV, but they also saw no single perpetrator or victim profile. They saw both perpetrators and victims as accountable for their choices, even though they posed some limitations on this general principle of accountability. Complexity and diversity seemed to characterize their conceptions of IPV and their representations of perpetrators and victims. Findings are discussed in the light of current debates about IPV, of implications for BIPs, and of contexts that may influence IPV conceptions.