From Resistance to Reflection: Using MI to Explore Ambivalence in DFSV Work

In the realm of domestic, family, and sexualised violence (DFSV) intervention, resistance is often treated as a hurdle, something to be pushed through, confronted, or managed. Those who use violence are frequently labelled as “non-compliant,” “minimising,” or “in denial.” While these labels are common, they can shut down the very doorway that leads forward: ambivalence.

What if resistance were understood not as opposition but as evidence of inner conflict? Rather than a wall blocking the way, resistance can signal a threshold waiting to be crossed.

This is where Motivational Interviewing (MI) offers a different path. Instead of asking, “How do I dismantle resistance?” MI shifts the focus to “How do I listen for ambivalence and support the person in working through it?” In DFSV contexts, where shame, fear, trauma, and rigid beliefs sit just beneath the surface, this shift in perspective matters greatly.

Ambivalence in DFSV

Ambivalence is often misunderstood. Far from weakness or avoidance, it reflects the natural tension between two competing impulses: one pulling toward change, the other toward staying the same. For people who use DFSV, it might sound like:

• “I don’t want to lose my family, but I’m not sure I did anything wrong.”
• “I know yelling scares my partner, but it’s the only way I get heard.”
• “I want to stop, but I’m not sure who I am without that control.”

These aren’t refusals to engage. They are glimpses into an inner struggle, and in MI, that struggle is precisely where meaningful work begins.

Resistance as a Signal

Rather than being an obstacle to defeat, resistance can be read as a signal. It reveals the places where someone feels threatened, misunderstood, or pushed too far. When a person pushes back, it may mean the pace is too fast, the assumptions too heavy, or the ground too uncertain.

Instead of responding with more pressure, MI encourages practitioners to slow down, reflect, and approach with curiosity:

“It sounds like part of you wants things to change, and another part feels unsure how to even start.”

This way of working doesn’t let people off the hook. Quite the opposite, it lays the foundation for genuine accountability. Real accountability grows when someone chooses to face their behaviour, not when they are cornered into compliance.

Turning Resistance Into Reflection

MI creates opportunities for reflection by:

• Affirming autonomy: “Ultimately, the way forward is your decision.”
• Exploring discrepancies: “On one hand, your family feels frightened by your behaviour. On the other hand, you’ve said you want them to feel safe. How do those fit together?”
• Evoking values: “When you think about the kind of father, partner, or man you want to be in five years, what comes to mind?”

These are powerful tools to help people hear themselves think and to connect the dots between their current actions and their hopes for the future.

Holding Steady

The temptation to push harder when someone resists is strong, especially in high-stakes DFSV work where safety is urgent. Yet MI reminds us that lasting change takes root when people feel heard, not coerced. The practitioner’s role isn’t to drag someone toward insight but to hold steady while they wrestle with it themselves.

This requires patience, skill, and the humility to accept that change happens on the person’s timeline, not ours.

When resistance is met with listening rather than combat, space opens for reflection. And through that reflection, people who use DFSV can begin to recognise their behaviour, its impact, and the possibility of a different future.

That movement, from resistance toward reflection, is often the moment where accountability, repair, and meaningful change truly begin.

Comments are closed.