Emotional Credibility as Institutional Practice: Migrant Women Survivors in Germany’s Domestic Violence Protection Landscape

This article analyzes how survivors of domestic violence navigate and negotiate emotional norms when seeking protection and support in Germany, and how these norms expose persistent gaps in the implementation of the Istanbul Convention. Based on in-depth interviews with migrant women who survived domestic violence, the study examines emotions as institutionally regulated and spatially situated, shaping survivors’ encounters with police, courts, shelters, and counseling services. Findings show that institutional responses are governed by implicit “feeling rules” that reward calmness, coherence, and easily legible trauma. Emotional expressions such as anger, fear, confusion, or distress—common reactions to domestic violence—are often viewed as disruptive or unreliable. These norms create risks of misinterpretation, particularly for migrant and racialized survivors, whose emotional expressions may be filtered through stereotypes of excess, irrationality, or cultural incompatibility. As a result, survivors must frequently engage in emotional self-editing to remain intelligible and credible to authorities. Such emotional expectations directly conflict with several obligations of the Istanbul Convention, including survivor-centered approaches, non-discriminatory access to services, and culturally competent support. When emotional credibility becomes a condition for institutional trust, survivors face unequal access to protection orders, emergency accommodation, legal recognition, and long-term support. The article argues that emotional governance functions as an infrastructural barrier, contributing to fragmented service provision and limiting survivors’ ability to benefit from rights the Convention formally seeks to guarantee.