Table 2 Key characteristics of the centre
Type of centre | Service providers available ‘in house’ | Availability of protocol to address violence | GBV / Torture referral pathway | Commonly used GBV / Torture interventions | Key challenges |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Centre 1 | Yes | No | Reports to doctor/ Social assistant, reviewed and then referred to psychologist | Referral to psychologist, transfer to another centre, to separate the perpetrator from the survivor in cases of domestic violence/ interpersonal violence | No defined protocol for addressing gender-based violence or torture. Clear pathways and action plans not defined. Made harmonization of practices and responses difficult across different service providers |
Centre 2 | No | No | Discuss with the social assistant and then refer to a psychologist if needed/requested | Referral to specialists, transfer survivor to a quieter centre, if survivor has symptoms of PTSD or other mental health problems | Disclosure was difficult and rare, especially as this centre had mostly males, stigma around gender-based violence and PTSD in males, made help seeking behaviour rare. No defined protocol and pathway of care was available |
Centre 3 | Yes | Yes | Refer to the doctor for physical bruises and then to the psychologist or an external organization for psychosocial support | Refer to psychologist, discuss experience of violence in a multidisciplinary team, transfer the survivor to another centre in the cases of domestic violence | Rates of disclosure was very low. Language translations served as a barrier as well during consultation, though efforts were made to employ translators and use on-line translation services. Consultation hours were specific and few service providers, and not all patients could see a doctor when needed Before the end of the observations, they had employed a psychologist ‘in-house’ that saw survivors of violence during consultation hours. It was hoped this would improve access to psychosocial counselling. |