When Home Is Not Safe: Domestic Violence as a Mass Care Consideration
By M.E. Avila
Every October, Domestic Violence Awareness Month creates space to talk about safety, survivors, and the systems people rely upon when home is no longer safe. For those working in disaster response and Mass Care, it also presents an opportunity to consider a question that may not immediately come to mind when we think about sheltering, feeding, emergency assistance, and recovery: What happens when the disaster is not the only danger someone is trying to survive?
Disasters disrupt nearly all structures people depend upon for stability. Families may be displaced, transportation becomes unreliable, workplaces and schools close, phones are lost or cannot be charged, and financial resources become strained. People may suddenly lose access to medications, identification documents, childcare, social networks, and community services. For someone experiencing domestic violence, these disruptions can carry an additional consequence because safety strategies developed over months or years may disappear overnight. Transportation, hidden documents, separate financial resources, trusted contacts, or a safe place to go may suddenly become unavailable. Domestic violence, therefore, is not only an issue for domestic violence organizations. It is also an important consideration for emergency management and Mass Care.
Research supports this connection. A 2024 systematic review by Boddy and colleagues examined 27 quantitative studies published between 1990 and 2023, with 24 identifying a relationship between natural disasters and increased intimate partner violence. Importantly, disasters should not simply be described as causing domestic violence.
Rather, disaster conditions can intensify existing vulnerabilities and introduce additional risks. Research by Thurston, Stöckl, and Ranganathan similarly identified housing insecurity, economic insecurity, trauma, and disruption of social systems as pathways that may increase vulnerability to violence following disasters. The implication for emergency management is significant: people do not enter disasters from the same starting point. Two people may experience the same storm, fire, flood, or evacuation while facing very different threats during response and recovery.
This becomes particularly important when we think about sheltering. In Mass Care, shelter represents protection from the immediate consequences of disaster. It provides a place to sleep, receive food and information, charge a phone, connect with resources, and begin determining what comes next. For someone experiencing domestic violence, however, shelter must also include consideration of safety from another person. A survivor could arrive while actively trying to avoid a partner who is searching for them.
Both individuals could independently arrive at the same shelter. A survivor may also hesitate to provide information that could reveal their location. A shelter can be physically safe from a disaster while still presenting a very different kind of safety concern.
These considerations extend beyond the shelter. Mass Care workers encounter people through feeding operations, emergency assistance, reunification, distribution sites, community outreach, and recovery services. A survivor may disclose abuse during an ordinary conversation with a volunteer rather than through a formal process. Someone may hesitate to provide an address or phone number, or they may explain that they cannot return home even when the residence itself is physically habitable. What initially appears to be a housing, transportation, or recovery problem may also involve personal safety.
Reunification provides another important example. Reconnecting families separated during disasters is an important humanitarian function, but domestic violence reminds us that separation is not always accidental and reunification is not always desired.
Someone seeking another person may identify themselves as a spouse, partner, or family member, but the existence of that relationship does not necessarily mean contact is safe or wanted. Similarly, a residence may be physically safe to occupy while returning there would place a survivor back in danger. Understanding this distinction does not require disaster workers to investigate domestic violence. It requires awareness that physical safety and personal safety are not always the same thing.
Recognizing domestic violence as a Mass Care consideration does not mean asking volunteer workers to become domestic violence advocates, counselors, or investigators. The opportunity is to ensure workers have enough awareness to recognize when an additional safety concern may exist, respond without judgment, protect information consistent with organizational policies, and connect the individual with appropriate resources. A survivor should not have to repeatedly tell the story of their abuse simply to have a safety concern taken seriously. Sometimes the most appropriate response is listening, respecting what the person says they need, understanding the limits of our role, and knowing who can help next.
This is where community partnerships and preparedness become especially important. Domestic violence programs, housing organizations, behavioral health providers, emergency management agencies, legal services, and other community partners possess expertise that complements Mass Care operations. These relationships are strongest when they are developed before a disaster. Domestic violence considerations can also be incorporated into exercises so teams have an opportunity to think through privacy, shelter safety, reunification, transportation, escalation, and referrals before encountering those circumstances during an actual response.
Domestic Violence Awareness Month provides an opportunity not only to recognize survivors but also to examine the systems surrounding them. Emergency management increasingly recognizes that disasters magnify existing community vulnerabilities, and domestic violence belongs within that conversation. Our responsibility in Mass Care is not to solve every challenge someone faced before the disaster or expect workers to become specialists in every issue affecting the people we serve. It is to recognize when the services we provide intersect with someone's safety and ensure our systems are prepared to respond appropriately.
A cot matters. A meal matters. A roof matters. But a roof does not automatically create safety. For some disaster survivors, the important question may not simply be whether they have somewhere to stay tonight, but whether they feel safe there. That shift in perspective can strengthen how we approach preparedness, sheltering, partnerships, and recovery.
Safety is not separate from Mass Care. Safety is part of Mass Care.
____________________
References
Boddy, J., et al. (2024). Intersections of intimate partner violence and natural disasters: A systematic review of the quantitative evidence. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 25(4), 3131–3148. https://doi.org/10.1177/15248380241249145
First, J. M., First, N. L., & Houston, J. B. (2017). Intimate partner violence and disasters: A framework for empowering women experiencing violence in disaster settings. Affilia, 32(3), 390–403. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109917706338
Rao, S. (2020). A natural disaster and intimate partner violence: Evidence over time. Social Science & Medicine, 247, 112804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.112804
Thurston, A. M., Stöckl, H., & Ranganathan, M. (2021). Natural hazards, disasters and violence against women and girls: A global mixed-methods systematic review. BMJ Global Health, 6(4), e004377. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2020-004377
Comments