Archives

Doing co-analysis justice: Guiding principles

Our inspiration to create principles for co-analysis with those with lived experience of the criminal justice system stemmed from a previous participatory project which prompted conversation about the benefits and challenges of doing co-analysis ‘properly’. This project asked what does best practice look like and how can those with lived experience effectively take part?

Participatory or co-produced research is increasingly common. However, people with lived experience tend to be involved in the earlier and/or latter stages of research projects and less so in the nitty gritty middle stage. Therefore, VISION and Revolving Doors’ staff and lived experience team members collaborated to develop guidelines to inform the co-analysis process. These principles were created to support the flourishing landscape of research involving people with lived experience in the analysis and interpretation of results, equipping teams with guidance to facilitate meaningful and positive co-analysis.

The principles are organised into six themes:

Supporting diversity in co-analysis
Prioritise emotional safety and support
Address power, hierarchy and tokenism to ‘level the playing field’
Relationship building and team dynamics
Training and shared learning
Experiment with creative methods and outputs

Inspired by this last theme, accompanying the principles is a co-designed illustration that visually represents some of the ideas shared. The image is above and also available for download below.

This resource is for researchers, regardless of background and experience, and practitioners and managers who work with people with lived experience of the issues being studied. The principles will also be useful for those with an interest in teaching or training co-production methods, and anybody involved in the funding or ethical review of research projects embedding lived experience expertise.

We are keen to know how the principles work in practice. If you use them to guide your work, we warmly welcome feedback on how helpful you found them. Please let Annie know at annie.bunce@citystgeorges.ac.uk.

To read the guidance: Doing co-analysis justice: Guiding principles

To find out more about the project: Exploring guiding principles for ‘Doing Co-Analysis Justice’

To find out more about Revolving Doors’ work: Revolving Doors – Breaking the cycle of crisis and crime

With thanks to the following individuals and organisations who co-developed the principles:

Revolving Doors: Lauren, Anthony, Charlotte, Charlie, De’Qeon, Jeanette, Leigh, Lucy, Mark, Rimona, Tony and Warren.
Dr Annie Bunce, VISION consortium, City St George’s University of London
Dr Danica Darley, University of Sheffield
Dr Elizabeth (Lizzie) Cook, VISION consortium, City St George’s University of London
Dr Les Humphreys, VISION consortium, University of Lancashire
Professor Sian Oram, VISION consortium, Kings College London
Dr Polina Obolenskaya, VISION consortium, City St George’s University of London
Professor Sally McManus, VISION consortium, City St George’s University of London

Illustration from Jenny Leonard Art

5th VISION annual conference: Presentations and illustrations now available

The fifth VISION annual conference was held on 7 July at The Light Auditorium in Friends House. The theme was Violence prevention in dialogue: Research and Policy.

After five years of research looking at violence prevention and the resulting health inequalities and focusing on improved measurement, policy, and practice, and delivering through a strong cross-sector partnership, we showcased our research in partnership with stakeholders Refuge, High Trees, Migrants’ Rights Network, Gloucestershire police constabulary, and Revolving Doors. In addition, we invited those working in violence prevention to critically assess our contributions and identify where further research and prioritised focus are required.

Jo Todd of Respect and Professor Gene Feder, VISION Director, reflected on 25 years of working in violence prevention as frontline practitioners and researchers. Drawing on their extensive experience, they highlighted both the progress made and the challenges that remain. While collaboration between government, academia, and the third sector has improved, longstanding silos—particularly across the health and criminal justice sectors—persist. Overcoming these barriers requires sustained commitment to relationship-building and cross-sector working.

They noted that significant progress has been made in violence prevention policy, including the publication of the government’s Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) strategy last year. However, there remains considerable interest in how the incoming Prime Minister will take forward the Labour government’s commitment to halve violence against women and girls within a decade, and what this will mean for future policy, practice, and investment.

Professor Liz Kelly from London Metropolitan University was our 2nd keynote speaker and shared her thoughts on the language and naming of violence in the 21st century. Liz highlighted that language changes not just what we say but what we know and recognise. The words we use in the field as researchers, analysts, policymakers, officials, and practitioners matter and should be clear and grounded in victim / survivor agency and freedom.

VISION research was highlighted in three symposiums:

Insight: Key findings on definitions and measurement within violence prevention
- Dr Vishal Bhavsar (Kings College London) and Professor Miranda Horvath (University of Suffolk) presented on intimate partner violence perpetration.
- Dr Madeleine Janickyj (University College London) and Emma Pickering (Refuge) presented on technology facilitated abuse.
Inclusion: Violence prevention research with marginalised populations
- Dr Alexandria Innes (City St George’s UoL), Aya Khedairi (Migrants’ Rights Network) and Professor Gargi Bhattacharyya (University College London) presented on insecure migration status. Andri and Aya discussed their project, Understanding Violence: the risks for migrants with rising far-right fascism and the resulting output, Workbook: Migrant Community Insights on Building Safety. Gargi highlighted how the far right is misusing genuine work and research and that media discussion of VAWG frequently descends into racism and incitement.
- Dr Annie Bunce (City St George’s UoL) and Lauren Bennett and Anthony Donohoe from Revolving Doors presented their work on developing principles for co-analysis with Lived Experience.
Involve: A look at two ongoing, impactful pieces of VISION research with partners
- Dr Elizabeth Cook (City St George’s UoL) and Harry Jenkins (High Trees) presented their collaborative research developing Built on Trust, a report with youth from Lambeth in London on the role of youth spaces and trusted adults in reducing young people’s exposure to violence.
- Dr Ruth Weir (City St George’s UoL) and Sophie Jarrett (Gloucestershire Police) presented on their system-wide partnership with central and local government, police, education trusts, and the third sector to understand and prevent teenage relationship abuse (TRA). This work has resulted in the establishment of a national group on TRA and a local group wtihin Gloucestershire.

VISION co-Deputy Directors, Professor Sally McManus (City St George’s UoL) and Dr Estela Capelas Barbosa (University of Bristol) closed the conference by reflecting on the achievements of the VISION consortium and outlining priorities for the future of violence prevention research, policy, and practice. Sally highlighted the wide range of datasets, tools, resources, and publications developed by VISION over the past five years. Looking ahead, Estela emphasised the need for further research on violence affecting LGBTQI+ communities and minoritised women and children. She also stressed the importance of breaking down the persistent silos between the health and criminal justice sectors, noting that the impacts of violence extend across both systems. Effective prevention and support therefore require joined-up services, coordinated policies, and cross-sector collaboration.

Visual artists, Abigail and Chloe Baldwin, from Buttercrumble, beautifully captured the day in a series of illustrations which can be downloaded below along with the keynote and symposium presentations.

To download the presentations:

Insight Symposium: Insight Symposium_Perpetrators of IPV; Insight Symposium_Tech Abuse
Inclusion Symposium: Inclusion Symposium_Insecure migration status; Inclusion Symposium_Co-design of analysis principles
Involve Symposium: Involve Symposium_Partnering with young people; Involve Symposium_Teenage Relationship Abuse
Professor Liz Kelly, 2nd Keynote: Keynote 2_The language and naming of violence
Professor Sally McManus, VISION Achievements: VISION achievements

To download the illustrations:

We keep each other safe – a guide for migrants in the UK

A negative shift in how migrants, including refugees and people seeking asylum, are viewed in the UK has been documented in research, including VISION work, and media. Rhetoric about migration has become more aggressive and emboldened racist demonstrations and attacks on asylum accommodation.

VISION partnered with Migrants’ Rights Network (MRN) to co-develop a research project with migrants that maps experiences of harm and identifies community-led safety strategies. The research centred on two cities, London and Belfast, working with communities who have experience of the asylum system / no recourse to public funds. Through a series of focus groups and workshops, migrants shared their experiences of far-right violence, and how they are already keeping themselves and each other safe.

The project brings together MRN’s narrative work, which actively challenges disinformation about migration, while trying to better understand and document the impact of hostile language on people currently in the immigration system.

The key findings and themes of the research are:

Impact on mental health and change in behaviours
Role of the state in making migrants unsafe, and low trust in institutions
Everyone is experiencing it, but no one is talking about it
We keep each other safe – what are we already doing, and what else can we do together

These insights coalesced into a free workbook available for downloading on the MRN website. The practical guide is for migrants in the UK co-developed with migrants and migrant-led organisations. It features shared knowledge, scenarios, and messages of solidarity.

To download the free resource: We keep each other safe workbook: Migrant community insights on building safety

For further information on the VISION – MRN collaboration, please see the blog, Understanding Violence: The risks for migrants with rising far-right fascism, written by Aya Khedairi, MRN Community Engagement Manager.

AI photo from Adobe Stock subscription

VISION presenting at the Prevention Research 2026 conference

Nine VISION colleagues have had workshop, symposium and individual abstracts accepted at the upcoming Prevention Research 2026 conference in March. The Population Health Improvement UK and the National Institute for Health and Care Research, in partnership with VISION funder, the UK Prevention Research Partnership, organised the event to explore the latest research and collaborative strategies for preventing non-communicable diseases and reducing health inequalities across the UK. This year’s theme is Connecting Research, Policy, and Practice for Health Equity.

VISION research is interdisciplinary and as such, several colleagues collaborated on symposiums and the workshop. We are partnering with Groundswell, Kailo and PHI UK Population Mental Health as well as the Violence, Abuse and Mental Health Network, and High Trees Community Development Trust amongst others.

Individual presentation

Violence across the life course and physical and mental health trajectories in later life

Anastasia Fadeeva, VISION Research Fellow, City St George’s University of London

Symposiums

Lessons Learned from Lived Experience Engagement in Violence and Trauma Research

Sian Oram, Professor at Kings College London and VISION Co-Investigator
Kimberly Cullen, VISION Knowledge Exchange Manager, City St George’s UoL
Alicia Stillman, Violence, Abuse and Mental Health Network at Kings College London
Polina Obolenskaya, VISION Research Fellow, City St George’s UoL
Annie Bunce, VISION Research Fellow, City St George’s UoL

Policy insights from a population understanding of mental health inequalities: using England’s mental health survey series, the Adult Psychiatric Morbidity Surveys (APMS)

Presenters include:

Sally McManus, Professor at City St George’s UoL and VISION Co-Deputy Director
Elizabeth Cook, Senior Lecturer at City St George’s UoL and VISION Co-Investigator

Centring the voices of young people – Learning from four participatory, place-based approaches to violence prevention

Presenters include:

Elizabeth Cook, Senior Lecturer at City St George’s UoL and VISION Co-Investigator
Ruth Weir, VISION Senior Research Fellow at City St George’s UoL

Understudied Commercial Drivers of Health: Exploring Industry Practices & Developing a Prevention Research Agenda

Presenters include Sally McManus, Professor at City St George’s UoL and VISION Co-Deputy Director

Workshop

Using Systems Approaches to Connect Communities and Tackle Complexity in Prevention

Workshop leads include Olumide Adisa, VISION Co-Investigator at City St George’s UoL

Exploring survivor wellbeing after abuse: A joint VISION and VAMHN symposium

Professor Sian Oram

By Sian Oram

In November 2025, the VISION consortium and the Violence, Abuse and Mental Health Network (VAMHN) co-hosted a symposium at King’s College London’s Science Gallery. The event brought together 40 researchers, survivor advocates, providers, and policymakers to explore what meaningful support for survivor wellbeing looks like – and what it will take to deliver it.

The day was structured around two core sessions. The morning focused on VAMHN’s recently refreshed Theory of Change (ToC) and the network’s strategic priorities for the next phase. The afternoon featured a symposium of short talks and group discussions, including exploration of how survivor wellbeing is defined, supported, and measured across clinical, community, and policy contexts.

Across both sessions, a powerful theme emerged: that systems must be reshaped around the lives, needs, and priorities of survivors, not the other way around.

Reimagining the Pathways to Change

The morning roundtable discussions affirmed the relevance of the four pathways within VAMHN’s theory of change: improving understanding of recovery and wellbeing; strengthening psychological and support services; increasing survivor leadership and participation; and influencing policy and systems.

Attendees strongly welcomed a shift away from crisis-driven, risk-based models toward a more holistic, strengths-based approach to survivor wellbeing. There was broad support for launching a survivor-informed outcomes framework, co-designed to work across research, commissioning, and frontline services. Others emphasised the importance of cross-sector knowledge exchange, meaningful survivor leadership (not just consultation), and reducing fragmentation in how services respond.

There was widespread support for VAMHN’s ambition to launch an Evaluation Lab to support small and specialist services with participatory, trauma-informed evaluation, and an ask for the network to take a greater role in amplifying the voices of smaller NGOs in national policy spaces.

What Does Meaningful Support Look Like?

The afternoon symposium featured five speakers who reflected on evidence, practice, and lived experience. Across talks on psychological interventions, survivor voice, systems design, and clinicians as survivors, a call emerged for more responsive and humane systems. Key takeaways included:

Survivor wellbeing is relational and systemic, not only clinical or individual. Responses must hold space for complexity, intersectionality, and evolving needs over time.
Continuity, trust, and listening matter. Survivors spoke of exhausting experiences of re-telling their stories; a “passport” system or shared record was suggested to avoid re-traumatisation.
Support should be built around people – not service structures. Attendees reflected on the need to prioritise basic needs, reduce referral fatigue, and enable survivors to steer their own support journeys.
Frontline practitioners need care too. Recognising and supporting professionals with lived experience of abuse is vital.

Participants urged deeper collaboration across sectors and systems. There was strong appetite for developing shared approaches to wellbeing, meaningful evaluation, and ethical survivor involvement across VISION partners.

Looking Ahead

This event marked an important milestone in aligning survivor-centred priorities across the VISION Consortium and VAMHN. We are grateful to everyone who contributed their time, insights, and lived experience to this conversation.

For further information, please contact Sian at sian.oram@kcl.ac.uk

To access the resource: Supporting Survivor Wellbeing After Domestic Abuse Resources

Cover photo supplied via Adobe Stock subscription.

Confronting ‘Honour‘-Based Abuse: Reflections on IKWRO’s 2025 Conference

By Ladan Hashemi, Senior Lecturer in Sociology of Health and Health Policy at City St George’s University of London

VISION was proud to sponsor their second collaboration with IKWRO (Women’s Rights Organisation) and host their annual conference. This year’s theme was Confronting ‘Honour‘-Based Abuse (HBA) in Policy, Technology, and Collective Action and held at City St George’s, University of London on 22nd October 2025.

The event brought together around a hundred survivor advocates, academics, frontline practitioners, and policymakers to critically examine urgent responses to HBA in today’s rapidly evolving world.

The conference featured three panels examining the flagship “Crime, Not Culture” campaign, the growing role of technology and media in shaping harm, and the resilience and leadership of survivors and community advocates. Throughout the day, speakers and attendees returned to a central question: How do we ensure HBA is recognised and treated as a serious crime rather than dismissed or misunderstood as ‘culture’?

Narratives, Evidence, and the Power of Speaking Out

The day opened with powerful survivor testimonies – deeply personal accounts of control, coercion and systemic failures. These stories underscored the need for meaningful training across policing, healthcare and the family courts. As one panel chair reflected, “It’s not that the government lacks the budget. It’s about priorities. Women from ethnic minorities are not a priority.” The consequences of this neglect, she noted, echo across public services, placing a substantial and avoidable burden on institutions such as the NHS and the police.

Scholars challenged common assumptions about “culture” and emphasised the importance of evidence-informed policy. Their discussions invited the audience to interrogate the ways colonial narratives have shaped understandings of honour, family, and gender norms.

Technology, Media, and Emerging Threats

The second panel explored the fast-changing digital landscape. Speakers examined how technology-facilitated abuse, sextortion, online misogyny, and surveillance increasingly interact with HBA. The panel highlighted that marginalised women and girls often face compounded risks: gendered, racialised, and technologically amplified.

Two short animations produced by the Women’s Research Hub team in collaboration with VISION, on HBA and sextortion were screened during the session. These visual narratives helped ground the discussion in the lived realities of young people navigating online harms – showing not just the risks, but also how digital tools can be used to educate, empower, and support.

One speaker captured the spirit of the day: “It seems it wasn’t enough to be oppressed by patriarchal systems; now we also face the same inequalities reflected back at us through AI and social media.”

Collective Action and Pathways to Change

The final panel focused on resilience and community action. Speakers discussed the importance of survivor leadership, culturally informed practice, and training that centres real voices rather than “death by PowerPoint.” Their reflections highlighted that effective change relies on collaboration between organisations, communities, and those with lived experience.

The conference closed with remarks from Jess Phillips MP, who reinforced the urgent need to strengthen protections and ensure survivors are heard and believed. Her contribution was a fitting conclusion to a day centred on solidarity, listening, and the collective responsibility to challenge harmful practices and support those affected.

One of the quilts created by survivors of ‘honour’-based abuse and IKWRO

A Day of Reflection and Resolve

The event showcased what happens when survivors, activists, academics, and practitioners come together with a shared purpose. Across panels, one message was clear: understanding and preventing ‘Honour‘-Based Abuse requires research, policy attention, resources, and above all, a commitment to centring the voices of those most affected.

VISION was proud to support this important gathering for a second time sparking further conversations about how evidence and collaboration can drive meaningful, long-lasting change.

Key to the event was the organisation and support of VISION’s Knowledge Exchange Manager, Kimberly Cullen and the IKWRO conference organising committee.

For further information, please contact Ladan at ladan.hashemi@citystgeorges.ac.uk

Photography supplied by IKWRO

Understanding Violence: The risks for migrants with rising far-right fascism

VISION is pleased to announce the funding for an exciting new project from the Migrants’ Research Network (MRN). The funding will extend and disseminate MRN’s existing work to:

understand the nature of far-right violence against migrants in the UK focusing on sites where MRN is currently engaged,
provide migrants with resources to recognize and understand when significant risk of violence is present, and
catalogue migrant experiences of violence to feed forward to better understanding and future resourcing of violence prevention.

MRN has worked extensively to support migrants, to build a basis for political participation and advocacy of migrant interests, and to recognize and combat violence and discrimination. In an existing piece of work, MRN created a draft of an ‘explainer’ document for migrants living in temporary accommodations, detailing the nature of racism in the UK, and the rise of far-right violence against migrants, what risks migrants may face, how to recognize potentially violent situations, and what support and resources are available to migrants with insecure status who have experienced or fear experiencing violence.

Given the resurgence of far-right activity, this document can provide a crucial resource to support migrants, providing information to help mitigate fear. However, there is also a significant gap in knowledge regarding the types of violence migrants experience, how these experiences integrate across the life course in the context of previous experiences of violence, and how they affect a sense of safety in place.

This project seeks to fill that gap by integrating lived experience perspectives, and knowledge of those who work closely with migrants experiencing violence, such as caseworkers. Those with lived experience would iteratively revise the current explainer document, to be rolled out via various digital outlets, for broader reach.

While the motivation for this project is the basis of longstanding advocacy work, and academic-practitioner knowledge exchange, the objectives will fully integrate lived experience. The final outputs will be a series of social media posts for circulation and an ‘explainer’ leaflet, co-designed for migrants in insecure accommodation regarding far-right violence. Quantitative data in the form of a survey, and qualitative data collected in the course of discussions regarding the types of violence experienced by migrants and the fear of far-right violence, will generate a report to fill a gap in knowledge regarding violence experienced by people with insecure migration status.

For further information, please contact Andri at andri.innes@citystgeorges.ac.uk

Exploring guiding principles for ‘Doing Co-Analysis Justice’

Blog by Dr Annie Bunce, VISION Research Fellow

How can researchers meaningfully and ethically involve people with lived experience of the criminal justice system in data analysis?

This is the question myself, a group of VISION colleagues (Lizzie Cook, Polina Obolenskaya, Sian Oram, Les Humphreys and Sally McManus), Dani Darley (University of Sheffield) and a group of Revolving Doors’ (Home – Revolving Doors) lived experience members, explored via a face-to-face workshop in May and online feedback session in July, funded by City’s Participatory Research Fund.

Co-production, lived experience engagement, participatory research and patient and public involvement (PPI), amongst others, are increasingly common terms in academia and the wider research landscape. Guidelines and toolkits are popping up for doing participatory research with, for example, children and young people (Participation toolkit | Children and families affected by domestic abuse); survivors of domestic abuse (Review Resources on Survivor Involvement – VAMHN); children and young people in conflict with the law (Golden-Rules-young-people.pdf), and involving those with lived experience in criminal justice reform (PRI_10-point-plan_Lived-experience.pdf).

These broad principles on doing participatory research are useful and have guided my approach to multiple recent projects. But something I noticed is that there is generally less guidance on involving people from marginalised groups, particularly those with lived experience of the criminal justice system, in the data analysis stage of research projects specifically. Despite the analysis being at the heart of the research process. Essentially, activating the “co” in co-analysis is still somewhat of a mystery. And whilst a definitive “how-to” guide to collaborative data analysis alongside stakeholders would be at odds with the flexibility and relational grounding that are the beauty of co-analysis, a little guidance could make the process smoother and more enjoyable for everybody involved. Without this, quite a lot of angst can be caused repeatedly asking yourselves: Are we trying to do too much? Are we doing enough? How much can we afford to do? How much do people actually want to be involved? How can we make this happen?

Ironically, a fair bit of time in our workshop to co-produce some best practice principles for doing co-analysis was spent going round in circles tackling questions around how to do it. Ultimately, the best approach to co-analysis depends on various factors, including the type of data being analysed, people’s individual experiences and preferences and access to resources etc. Nevertheless, addressing these questions openly and collaboratively, welcoming and respecting everybody’s perspective and actively thinking about all the factors that need to be considered, made for an enlightening and productive discussion. From which themes have been identified and are currently being transformed into principles (watch this space).

A few spoilers:

Lots of ‘p’ words are involved, including planning, preferences, perfection, practicality and power
Transparency and avoiding tokenism are two of the most important principles for our participants in determining whether they found co-analysis enjoyable or not
Ethical standards and institutional processes need reframing if they are to authentically support participatory projects involving co-analysis
Co-analysis is messy, heavy and can’t just be squeezed in as an extra; the emotional labour that goes into both managing and participating in co-analysis must be valued
Co-analysis can also be fun. People with lived experience want to have fun with it, and it’s nice for them when academics can even have a bit of fun as well

For further information, please contact Annie at annie.bunce@citystgeorges.ac.uk

Photographs:

Top: Post-its from the VISION – Revolving Doors co-analysis workshop
Bottom: Annie Bunce, VISION Research Fellow

A Lived Experience perspective of the 2025 VISION annual conference

by Justin Coleman, Violence, Abuse and Mental Health Network

The UK Prevention Research Partnership VISION consortium’s 4th annual conference on violence prevention was a truly impactful day. As part of the Violence, Abuse and Mental Health Network Lived Experience Advisory Group (VAMHN LEAG), representing a lived experience perspective, I found the discussions both thought-provoking and essential. The event skilfully blended academic rigor, professional expertise, and, crucially, profound lived and learned experience, prompting vital questions about how we truly move forward in creating a more inclusive and effective violence prevention landscape.

The Imperative of Inclusive Practice: Who Are We Really Serving?

A key takeaway was the urgent need for radical inclusivity. While Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) was rightly highlighted and the clear and marked volume and % percentage numbers are stark, I question if we’re inadvertently creating gaps for other survivors. As a male survivor of abuse, as a child, I wonder if our messaging and funding focus heavily on one demographic, how do we ensure male survivors, LGBTQ+ individuals, and marginalised communities (young and older) feel seen and supported? True trauma-informed practice, to me, means moving beyond “what’s wrong with you?” to “what happened to you?” for everyone who is impacted by all forms of violence and abuse. No matter who you are, this simply shouldn’t happen to anyone.

Data, lived experience, and investment: Are we looking at the full picture?

The power of data in policy was clear, but it also raised concerns. Are investment strategies relying on outdated statistics? If resource allocation isn’t based on continuously updated, comprehensive data, are we truly capturing the evolving landscape of violence and the needs of all survivors today? Quantitative data alone can miss nuanced realities that lived experience and ethnographic insights provide. We need a dynamic balance where current lived realities inform and refresh our understanding, ensuring our leadership is deeply connected to ‘our’ diverse lived experiences.

Redefining safety and dignity: Beyond the checklist

The concept of “safety” in support spaces commented on at the conference resonated deeply. Can we ever guarantee “safety,” or should we strive for environments that are continually “safer” and more “supported”? This shift moves us beyond ticking a box to an ongoing commitment. The most impactful word was “dignity.” Shouldn’t ensuring dignity be a fundamental aim at every stage of a survivor’s journey, enabling genuine opportunity for healing and empowerment?

Breaking silos: The path to unified prevention

Effective violence prevention demands a cross-government, cross-sector approach. We need to collaborate beyond our immediate professional bubbles, integrating insights from areas like the criminal justice system to inform victim services. While “whole-family” approaches were discussed, I questioned if we can expand this to truly embrace “whole-community” approaches, ensuring LGBTQ+ individuals, isolated people, and every member of society has an equitable voice and space in prevention, responsibility, and repair.

Moving forward: A collective responsibility

This conference was a crucial step, bringing vital voices to the table. The co-produced animation with VAMHN and SafeLives, available on the City St George’s University of London YouTube channel, https://youtu.be/z6LbYDGfBZw?si=3-tJYXDqLfM16pE-, is an excellent resource for understanding lived experience engagement. To truly mobilise an effective cross-government response, we must continue to ask:

Are our investment decisions agile enough to respond to current data and the evolving needs of all survivors?
Does promoting the financial cost of crime and low conviction rates discourage reporting?
How can we ensure every violence prevention initiative is genuinely trauma-informed and inclusive, making all children, male, LGBTQ+, and all marginalised survivors feel equally seen, heard, and supported? What is the cost of not being inclusive?
Are we creating enough opportunities for genuine connection and partnership across diverse stakeholders at events like this, rather than just delivering information?
Are we bravely embracing “safer” and “dignity” as guiding principles, continuously improving how we support survivors?
Are we actively breaking down silos to build robust and equitable prevention and support systems?

The future of violence prevention depends on challenging existing paradigms, embracing inclusivity, advocating for trauma-informed practice and care, and working together from all perspectives with updated knowledge and a shared commitment to a safer journey towards dignity for all. This VISION conference stimulated valuable questions and directions, strengthening my determination to build connectivity, dignity, and safer spaces for survivors.

To read the latest Violence, Abuse and Mental Health Network newsletter: June VAMHN newsletter

Photograph licensed under Adobe Stock subscription

New infographic illustrating lived experience as essential knowledge

In February 2024, the Violence, Abuse, and Mental Health Network (VAMHN) Lived Experience Advisory Group members and several UKPRP VISION Consortium researchers explored together the role of lived experience as a form of knowledge and evidence. They addressed lived experience’s placement within the “evidence hierarchy” and the impact of language on engagement.

Key points included the significant influence of labels and power dynamics in determining which experiences are deemed valuable, the potential negative connotations of the term “lived experience,” and the necessity for lived experience to be integrated into research processes rather than being an afterthought.

Discussions underscored the evolving nature of lived experience, the challenges in showcasing expertise, the importance of ethical considerations, and the need for ongoing support and safe spaces for meaningful engagement. The workshop emphasised that lived experience should be a foundational element in research, akin to an integral ingredient, not merely an optional addition.

The discussions were summarised as a colourful and exciting infographic, illustrated by Jenny Leonard (www.jennyleonardart.com).

Illustration licensed by VAMHN and Jenny Leonard Art