Background: Autistic people are more likely to experience intimate partner violence (IPV) than non-autistic peers, but our knowledge about how they recognise and recover from abuse is sparse. We aimed to explore how autistic people recognise and make meaning after experiencing IPV, and to examine their support and recovery needs. Method: We recruited 21 autistic adults to take part in a semi-structured interview about the experience of IPV. We asked questions about how they had made sense of their experiences and the impact, their support seeking, and recommendations for future intervention. We analysed the data using reflexive thematic analysis. One author coded all data, engaging in reflexive discussion with the whole team. They organised codes into themes in collaboration with a second team member. Results: We identified six themes in the data. 1) 'Power' (power dynamics and sense-making). 2) 'Disruptions of self' (dehumanisation, objectification and stigmatisation). 3) 'Now, with hindsight' (struggles to recognise the violence, a sense that it could 'always be worse', and a need to understand of what 'red flags' look like in a relationship). 4) Recovery is a journey (recovery is non-linear, and involves multiple disclosures over time). 5) Building better systems (addressing systemic gaps in knowledge and practice, combatting under-resourcing), and 6) How do we stop this? (recognising potential individual risk factors and increasing relationship education). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that making sense of the experience of IPV among autistic adults is shaped by individual, interpersonal, and societal factors which normalise violence against autistic people, making it difficult to leave abusive relationships. Supporting autistic victim/survivors in recovery needs a nuanced, multi-pronged approach. Intervention should focus on relationship education ensuring access to appropriate therapies and support for individuals and ameliorating systemic issues such as a lack of professional understanding, and lack of practical support for survivors.Background: Autistic people are more likely to experience intimate partner violence (IPV) than non-autistic peers, but our knowledge about how they recognise and recover from abuse is sparse. We aimed to explore how autistic people recognise and make meaning after experiencing IPV, and to examine their support and recovery needs. Method: We recruited 21 autistic adults to take part in a semi-structured interview about the experience of IPV. We asked questions about how they had made sense of their experiences and the impact, their support seeking, and recommendations for future intervention. We analysed the data using reflexive thematic analysis. One author coded all data, engaging in reflexive discussion with the whole team. They organised codes into themes in collaboration with a second team member. Results: We identified six themes in the data. 1) 'Power' (power dynamics and sense-making). 2) 'Disruptions of self' (dehumanisation, objectification and stigmatisation). 3) 'Now, with hindsight' (struggles to recognise the violence, a sense that it could 'always be worse', and a need to understand of what 'red flags' look like in a relationship). 4) Recovery is a journey (recovery is non-linear, and involves multiple disclosures over time). 5) Building better systems (addressing systemic gaps in knowledge and practice, combatting under-resourcing), and 6) How do we stop this? (recognising potential individual risk factors and increasing relationship education). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that making sense of the experience of IPV among autistic adults is shaped by individual, interpersonal, and societal factors which normalise violence against autistic people, making it difficult to leave abusive relationships. Supporting autistic victim/survivors in recovery needs a nuanced, multi-pronged approach. Intervention should focus on relationship education ensuring access to appropriate therapies and support for individuals and ameliorating systemic issues such as a lack of professional understanding, and lack of practical support for survivors.

We used a semi-structured interview format, with the option to choose from written submission, or spoken submission.