Why women stay: A theoretical examination of rational choice and moral reasoning in the context of intimate partner violence

Public attitudes towards intimate partner violence (IPV) have shifted from viewing IPV as a tolerable, private matter to viewing it as a matter of public concern that should be dealt with as a crime. Despite this major shift in social attitudes towards IPV over the last three decades, there seems to be a lack of understanding of why many women stay, at least initially, when facing severe forms of IPV. Using data from face-to-face interviews conducted with 29 women in Southeast Queensland who experienced severe forms of IPV over an extended period of time, this paper explores the rationale behind the (initial) decision to stay with an abusive partner. While rational decision making has predominantly been seen as a male trait, this paper criticizes this underlying assumption, using a feminist framework of moral reasoning. Findings presented in this paper identify the rationale behind victims' decisions to stay and offer an advanced understanding of moral reasoning through a gendered lens in the context of IPV. Understanding why women stay, at least initially, is the first crucial step in ensuring adequate support for women on their journey towards the ultimate goal of a violence-free life.