Development of multidisciplinary sexual assault centres in the Netherlands

Abstract

Background: The professional approach of sexual assault victims has changed since the 1970s: from a fragmented model to a centralised ‘gate management model’, where multiple disciplines offer collaborative services at one central location. Like other countries across the globe, the Netherlands took steps towards an integrated, multi-agency support framework for victims of sexual assault.Objective: The objective of this paper was threefold: (1) to describe the development of the multidisciplinary Sexual Assault Centres (SAC) in the Netherlands, (2) to assess the characteristics of victims who attended the SAC, and the services they used (3) to analyse Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats of the current framework (SWOT).Method: The development of the national network of SAC was described. Data on victims presenting at the SACs were routinely collected between 1st January 2016 and 31st December 2020. This data from the sixteen sites was combined and analysed. Also, a SWOT analysis of the SAC was performed.Results: The SAC was established between 2012 and 2018. From 2016 through 2020 almost 16,000 victims of sexual assault contacted one of the 16 SACs. The data show a steady increase in yearly cases, with a consistently high use of medical and psychological services. The SAC has several strengths, such as its accessibility, and opportunities, such as increasing media attention, that underline its quality and relevance. However, the SAC's inability to reach certain minority groups and the current financial structure are its main weakness and threat.Conclusions: Despite the growing number of victims attending the SAC and the increasing awareness of the benefits of an immediate multidisciplinary response to sexual assault, there are still deficiencies in the SAC. The SAC continues to work on these deficiencies in order to optimise efficient and effective care for all victims of sexual assault.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.