How They Recover: A Qualitative Study of Female Adult Clergy Sexual Abuse Survivors Using AI

Abstract

Adult Clergy Sexual Abuse (ACSA) is a profound betrayal of trust and power that produces complex psychological, spiritual, and relational injuries for survivors. While much of the literature has focused on the abuse itself and its consequences, less attention has been given to recovery and resilience. This qualitative study draws on in-depth interviews with 27 female survivors of ACSA to explore how they heal and recover. Using artificial intelligence to support thematic analysis, nine key recovery processes were identified: 1. therapy, 2. supportive relationships and community, 3. faith and spirituality, 4. survivor organizations, 5. education and understanding, 6. justice and accountability, 7. sharing their stories, 8. time and patience, and 9. practical support and advocacy. Across experiences, the most potent factor undergirding recovery was being believed and validated, which addressed survivors’ core wounds of self-blame and isolation. Findings highlight survivors’ capacity for healing and underscore the critical role of supportive, informed communities.

1. Introduction

Adult Clergy Sexual Abuse (ACSA) happens when a person with religious authority leverages the trust of someone they are supporting, and then uses the power inherent in their position to sexually harass, exploit, and abuse that person. ACSA is primarily about heterosexual married men abusing women (Garland 2006) which is in contrast to clergy sexual abuse of children in which the perpetrators are mostly unmarried men (priests) and the preponderance of victims are male (Tallon and Terry 2008). ACSA involves grooming, coercive control, and long-term sexual exploitation. ACSA lasts 4 years on average (Pooler and Barros-Lane 2022). Additionally, in both of these types of abuse, most institutional responses from congregations and denominations are inadequate and unhelpful (Christl et al. 2024). Survivors are often met with skepticism and disbelief, and the perpetrator is defended and/or protected by institutional leaders and other members of the community (de Weger and Death 2017; de Weger 2022). One reason for the poor response to ACSA is that a victim can be viewed as a consenting adult and it is labeled an “affair”, rather than an egregious abuse of power by a religious authority that bypassed meaningful consent and significantly wounded someone. Because of these factors and the chronic nature of this abuse, the psychological and spiritual injuries to survivors are complex and profound. The nature and magnitude of these injuries are beginning to be explored and understood (Garland and Argueta 2010; Moncrief-Stuart and Pooler 2025; Pooler and Droesch 2025).

Less understood, however, and arguably more salient is the fact that survivors are recovering and make meaningful lives in the aftermath of this abuse. In my clinical practice I have worked with several survivors of Adult Clergy Sexual Abuse and have observed the ways that they heal and reconstruct their lives. I have also been acquainted with survivors who struggle to move beyond cycles of grief, helplessness, and anger. The purpose of this paper is to explore recovery and resilience through the stories and experiences of survivors of adult clergy sexual abuse.

2. Review of the Literature

Resilience in the aftermath of sexual assault is about the ability of the survivor to adapt and thrive after the abuse. Experiencing a sexual assault, especially by a religious authority, can profoundly disrupt a person’s life. The extent to which a person can maintain psychological and physical health in the aftermath of such trauma is a way of framing resilience (Söylemez and Dursun 2019). Resilience is also about how a person accesses resources like social support to cultivate meaningful interactions that help them remain stable after the abuse. Resilience can also be viewed through a neurobiological lens and is a measure of how the body responds to stress, with a better stress response correlating positively with resilience (Feder et al. 2011).

Bonano (2004) made a distinction between recovery and resilience after a traumatic event. Resilience is when functioning is mildly disrupted, but the overall trajectory and functioning of the person remain stable. Recovery, on the other hand, is the process by which someone heals from a significant loss of functioning as result of trauma. In recovery there is an understanding that functioning is impaired because of the trauma, loss, or grief, and then over time, through a variety of strategies and processes, their functioning and their stress response notably improve back to levels before the trauma. To state this simply, recovery is about healing an injury and resilience is a major adaptation in the face of the event and continued healthy functioning in spite of the disruptive event.

For the purpose of this paper, I am interested both of these constructs, but most of the extant research on ACSA is focused on how people heal, rather than on what characteristics make survivors resilient. Additionally, in my clinical practice experience, ACSA survivors face major disruptions in functioning, due in part, to the complex nature of this type of abuse which affects multiple domains of life including the social and interpersonal, cognitive, spiritual, and existential. While there may be ACSA survivors who are resilient in Bonano’s definition (e.g., their overall functioning remains stable after the trauma) no study has examined how their functioning remained stable in the aftermath. Therefore, I am most interested in the recovery process from the profound injuries that occur.

Moncrief-Stuart and Pooler (2025) found among a sample of ACSA survivors that 39% screened positive for PTSD. In comparison with other subpopulation samples on PTSD, only women who are incarcerated (44%) and female survivors of Military Sexual Trauma (60%) have higher levels (Harner et al. 2015; Yaeger et al. 2006). A commonality of these three groups is that they are in environments where the trauma occurs in closed systems with high structure and control, there is pressure to conform to rules, there are consequences for non-conformity, and members of the community have limits on their autonomy. Trauma survivors in these environments may experience high levels of powerlessness prior to and after trauma which may impact their symptom severity. But survivors are moving forward and healing.

Cognitive resilience of ACSA survivors was studied by looking at the beliefs of survivors after the trauma. A resilience index was created by Pooler and Barros-Lane (2022) to measure beliefs about their resilience and included “I am healing”, “I am bouncing back”, “I am stronger after the abuse”, “I have recovered from the abuse”, and “I will never get better (reverse scored)”. In a multiple regression model, the two factors that had the most impact on resilience beliefs were “faith in God” and “finding someone who heard and believed me”. The amount of time that passed since the abuse also positively impacted resilience but was the least potent factor. Having previous unprocessed trauma had a negative relationship with positive beliefs after ACSA, affirming that prior trauma is a risk factor and would need to be faced and integrated in the recovery process.

When trying to better understand what happens to sexual assault survivors after their abuse, the literature identifies several factors that impact the trajectory of how a survivor recovers. These factors can be categorized into four areas: (1) individual characteristics, (2) social support, (3) coping strategies, and (4). the socio-cultural environment. Each of these factors are not categorically distinct from one another and likely have reciprocal interactions.

The individual characteristics that may support resilience and recovery among sexual assault survivors include engaging in self-compassion and self-forgiveness (Kaye-Tzadok and Davidson-Arad 2017; Strickland et al. 2022), having optimism, gratitude, and hope (Kumar et al. 2022), and perceiving that they have control over their own recovery process (de la Cruz et al. 2015). Social and emotional support from spouses, family, and friends, and positive responses to disclosure of sexual assault reduce distress and help recovery (Frazier et al. 2004; Pooler and Barros-Lane 2022). Survivors who engage in active coping strategies and who are intentional about seeking support from others have the best outcomes and are most resilient (Starzynski et al. 2017). Even among survivors who were not abused in a religious setting, many identified religious and spiritual beliefs as a source of meaning and strength that helped them recover (Fayaz et al. 2025).

Being intentionally mindful of, and actively engaging the socio-cultural environment is an important factor in promoting recovery and resilience. For example, the more survivors resist and externalize victim blaming narratives, myths, and stereotypes about the sexual assault being their fault, the better outcomes they have (Strickland et al. 2022). Survivors also reported that learning about sexual assault, trauma, and recovery and how people heal was instrumental in having realistic expectations about their own journey (Domhardt et al. 2015).

ACSA survivors are resilient, but much of the small and growing body of literature about their experiences focuses less on resilience and more on how it happened and how it impacted the survivor. And it is clear that the injuries are profound and revolve around betrayal trauma at the individual and institutional level. This manuscript is an attempt to broaden the story and expand our understanding of ACSA survivors by integrating findings about what factors, resources, and processes they use to heal and recover.

3. Methods

Interviews of 27 ACSA survivors were obtained as part of a mixed-methods study to describe ACSA survivors. To participate in the study, a person had to be a survivor of clergy sexual abuse in a Christian context, female, older than 18 at the time of the survey, and 16 or older when the abuse started. The study was approved by the Baylor University Institutional Review Board. For the qualitative study, an interview protocol was developed to elicit a robust understanding of abuse, the context in which the abuse occurred, and to learn how survivors were healing. A purposive sample of ACSA survivors was obtained by focusing on two survivor networks where ACSA survivors could find information and support. Each of these networks were faith affiliated, but did not require any doctrinal or faith commitment to belong. A Qualtrics survey was developed and a link was sent to each network. There was support of the study from leaders of each network and one support network sent the link through its email list-serve, the other allowed posting of the link on their Facebook page. Reminders were sent at two-week intervals over a six-week period. A question was asked in the survey about where the respondents received the link and about 80% of respondents received the link from the list-serve.

Almost 300 survivors responded to the survey and completed some items (n = 283) and 57% completed all of the 80 items (n = 160). As respondents neared the end of the survey, information was provided about an option to participate in an in-depth interview about their experiences, including what has been most helpful and healing in their recovery. Survivors were asked to contact the primary investigator via email if they wanted to participate. There were 27 women who emailed the primary investigator expressed interest and all of them were interviewed. An informed consent document was emailed to each participant prior to the interview and then a phone call was organized. The PI answered any questions and then verbal consent was obtained prior to data collection.

The interview protocol asked survivors to first describe what happened to them (the story of the abuse) and then asked them to recount what had been most healing and helpful in their recovery. The interview protocol included other prompts to aid the interviewer and elicit information. The interviews were conducted by the Primary Investigator and two graduate student research assistants. Each person interviewed 9 survivors. The interviews lasted between 60 and 90 min, were conducted by speaker phone and audio recorded, and then sent to a transcription service. The PI read through each transcript to become familiar with the content and then listened to the audio recording while reading each transcript several times.

For this project, the investigator decided to explore the benefits of using AI in qualitative data analysis. Hitch (2023) describes that the use of AI in qualitative research is in its infancy and suggests that AI is a promising tool for coding and thematic analysis. A clear benefit of using AI for theme development is efficiency, as AI is able to process large amounts of data quickly. Hitch (2023) also notes that AI may identify patterns and themes not obvious to a human researcher. One current concern is that AI agents may have challenges with the “context” of the data and therefore will, at least in the short term, require a human to ensure that themes developed by AI fit the source material. In other words, a researcher may need to pivot back and forth between the AI generated output and source material in an iterative process to enhance clarity, meaning, and rigor.

The 27 transcripts were uploaded into Box (See https://www.box.com/home) and then into a Box Hub, where Box AI was used to analyze the data. Box AI is integrated into the Box platform which is available to faculty, staff, and students at Baylor University. It is secure and protected using dual authentication. Box AI can be used as a tool to analyze stored data including qualitative data like long transcripts. When using Box AI to analyze transcripts a user can choose between 11 different AI agents which are associated with the best AI models available in 2025—OpenAI, Anthropic (Amazon), Google, IBM, Meta, and xAI. Box AI uses Optical Character Recognition (OCR) and Natural Language Processing (NLP) to search, analyze and create themes from documents that include human conversation, like an interview. The AI agent only has access to the data in the Box Hub.

Rather than traditional inductive qualitative methods using open coding, axial coding, and theme development in the data analysis process, the Box AI user (the researcher) creates prompts and questions for the selected AI agent. The AI agent generates the major themes by answering the prompt. Using AI in this way is both deductive and inductive (or abductive). I did not ask AI to examine all the transcripts and “allow the data to speak”. Rather, I asked questions about recovery, an a priori idea, which is explicitly directing AI to look for themes around resilience, coping, healing and adaptation. AI then surfaced the themes, which is inductive.

For the analysis and results, I identify the prompts I asked Box AI and then describe the results that were generated. Because I am familiar with the interviews and the phenomenon of ACSA, the goal of analysis was to create an amalgamation of AI output and human insights. Simply, the results are AI generated output that are examined, vetted, and organized by a researcher who had a high level of familiarity with the subjects.

4. Results

Box AI was asked “show demographics: including average age, denominational affiliation, marital status, and length of abuse”. Eighteen of the 27 interviews had complete demographic data on these variables. At the time of the interview the average age of the survivor was 48 ranging from 26 to 65. Their denominational affiliation where the abuse occurred included 6 Southern Baptist, 3 Seventh Day Adventists, 2 Episcopal, 2 American Baptist, 1 Lutheran (ELCA), 1 Eastern Orthodox, 1 Presbyterian, 1 Assemblies of God, and 1 non-denominational. Eleven were married, 4 divorced, 1 currently separated, and 2 single. The length of abuse ranged from 6 months to 15 years with an average of 3.5 years. Of the 12 cases with clear time frames, they fell into the following ranges (6 months to 1 year: 2 cases; 2–3 years: 4 cases; 4–6 years: 4 cases; 8+ years: 2 cases). AI did note that some survivors had some difficulty pinpointing the exact length because of extended grooming periods prior to explicit sexual activity. After the initial query on demographics, I realized I overlooked race and asked the AI agent to report on the transcripts that had information about race.

This was a mostly white sample (85%). Of the 20 transcripts in which race was reported, 17 were White, 2 Latinx, and 1 biracial. As a reminder all of the respondents were women. My last demographic inquiry was the marital status of the abuser and the AI agent responded that between 80 and 90% of survivors report the abuser was married. AI offered a reason for the range and identified that there were two transcripts in which the abuser’s family or children were mentioned (meaning likely married), but no explicit mention of marriage.

The primary research question was asked to two AI agents: Box Advanced (enhanced AI features) and AWS Claude 4 Opus (by Anthropic). The question was “In what ways are these survivors recovering?”. Both AI agents generated 10 themes that were virtually indistinguishable from each other. I did ask the AI agents to then “provide 5 example quotes for each theme”. After examining the output, I collapsed two similar and overlapping themes into one, for a total of 9 themes. Next, I describe and organize these themes and provide examples and quotes. To keep the data from feeling sterile, I used a pseudonym to go with survivor quotes. Each transcript was given a number and when a particular theme or quote is associated with a transcript the number is provided. The following themes are how survivors are recovering.

4.1. Theme One: Therapy

Almost 1 out of 3 survivors (n = 8) reported that professional therapy was a key factor in recovery, especially noting that trauma informed clinicians who understood power dynamics and adult clergy sexual abuse were essential to their recovery (respondents 2, 3, 6, 7, 10, 11, 25, 27). Jill said “The counseling, itself, I think began to help me get my voice back. As I processed through everything, in a safe place” (#3). Survivors reported utilizing individual, couples, and group counseling modalities. Specialized retreats and workshops led by professionals that focus on trauma and adult clergy sexual abuse were also noted as being therapeutic (respondents 2, 25).

4.2. Theme Two: Supportive Relationships and Community

Having social support including friends, spouses, and family members is necessary in recovery (respondents 2, 4, 5, 6, 11, 16, 18, 20, 25). Danielle reported “People can help support us. I think I know that healing is for anyone, but my husband’s support is number one” (#20). This small circle includes people who believe them and provide emotional support. These are people who do not turn away and who can “hold their story”. Danielle described how people supported her “They’ve just come to me with kindness, and compassion, instead of judgment and distance, and that’s made all the difference” (#20). Peer support from other survivors helped validate their experiences and even “saved lives” as one person noted. Validation reduces self-blame and affirms their experience as “real abuse”. Intentionally being kept in community (e.g., life groups, congregations) by others aided in recovery and reduced isolation, while exclusion was noted as re-traumatizing (respondents 5, 20, 24). This theme collapsed (a) social support and (b) community support, two themes generated by AI, after the researcher decided that combining them was reasonable.

4.3. Theme Three: Faith and Spirituality

Having a deepened or re-oriented faith with a greater sense of being known and loved by God helped in recovery (respondents 5, 11, 13, 20, 24). As Gloria noted “God is the ultimate healer. Oh my gosh, I couldn’t have … No. I would never be able to get this to how it is without his healing. Cause he’s the only one who can heal a broken heart” (#24). Survivors described separating the abuser from their faith. Forgiveness of self and others and healing through their relationship with God by engaging in prayer and other practices was identified. Bianca named the hope she found with God and with people,

You’ve got to keep holding on to hope um, because it’s, there’s so much, ah, devastation around that… God will always make a way out, and the days, it’s like you know… the days are eternal, but like with the passage of a week or two weeks, or the next conversation with somebody who understands… healing comes

(#13)

Two survivors noted that they had encountered safe pastors who listened, prayed with them, and affirmed them without blame or judgment (respondents 11, 16) and one noted that they needed time away from church before re-engaging safely (respondent 27).

4.4. Theme Four: Specialized Survivor Organizations

Based on frequency this is the most identified theme. Almost one half of survivors (n = 12, 44%) identified the importance of specialized groups for survivors because they provide critical education, community connection, and hope, as well as validation that “this is a real thing” because it is happening to others (respondents 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 16, 18, 19, 23, 28). Emma said connecting with a survivor support organization

was the best thing that ever happened to me. I mean she talked to me hour after hour and kind of explained to me that there was an unbalance of power between a pastor and a parishioner or even an employee… But just calling her and talking made all the difference in the world because I realized that, I realized… what it was instead of what I felt it was, what I felt the community thought it was.

(#13)

4.5. Theme Five: Education and Understanding

Naming what happened as abuse, recognizing it as abuse, and receiving clear validation from informed people (researchers, pastors, and friends) reduced self-blame (respondents 3, 6, 9, 20, 21). Survivors also reported needing access to credible information and research data; specifically noting that information about grooming, misuse of power, and consent were essential. Several concrete examples of authors and research were identified by survivors including Baylor Research and Diana Garland, Marie Fortune, Dan Allender, and Diane Langberg. This information and education help survivors “get their voice back”. Seeing research helped Lydia know “that what happened to me was real … Seeing documented research. Uh, you know, not even just women’s stories, that was helpful, but Diana Garland … Um, Diana Garland’s work, I mean, that was just life-giving” (#3)

4.6. Theme Six: Justice and Accountability

Seeing an abuser lose their ministerial credentials or be removed from ministry was important because it signaled that the abuse was taken seriously and that they were believed. Survivors noted that when they were included in any process of justice or accountability for the abuser that it was very helpful and healing to them (Respondents 3, 6, 7, 16, 18, 24). Being included helps restore voice and agency as Julia identified “what was critical in my healing was being given my voice back, being given ownership back, being given some sense of control of the situation, knowing that I could inform the justice process, that I could speak into it.” Some noted that justice was not always done.

4.7. Theme Seven: Sharing Their Story

It is necessary to share about their experiences openly and in safe spaces, whether in therapy, with trusted individuals, or publicly in blogs or social media, or support groups (Respondents 2, 3, 6, 8, 15, 18). Some described writing out their story in a journal. Sharing of story was therapeutic because it felt like a place that trauma could be processed and this included being able to participate in research on ACSA. As Sofia said “Every time I get to tell my story, it is part of that healing. Um, you know, it’s a little bit of that validation” (#8).

4.8. Theme Eight: Time and Patience

Survivors note that healing is non-linear and comes in waves. It is recognized as a long, layered process requiring time and ongoing effort. Kimberly noted that it is “Longer than you imagine. Much longer than you imagine… like, for every year of abuse, you should expect, you know, a year to recover” (#3). Survivors also named that being patient with oneself in the process, managing triggers, and creating new positive memories were necessary (Respondents 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 15).

4.9. Theme Nine: Practical Support and Advocacy

After the abuse, having a care team at the church to help navigate systems and stand with survivors was helpful. Some survivors said they needed an advocate. Survivors said that help accessing therapy and financial assistance for therapy as well as assistance with daily needs during times of crisis (meals, childcare, transportation) were practical needs they had during the recovery process (Respondents 7, 9, 10, 16, 20). For example, Grace said they

spoke to woman in the church and asked if I could stay with her if I needed a place to stay… and they paid for me to go to a, um, therapist for a time, or a Christian psychologist, I think it was? A counselor. A Christian counselor. They paid for me.

Summary of Results

I concluded the analysis by focusing on and highlighting the factor that was most potent in the recovery process, and I asked both AI agents “is there one factor in all of the transcripts that seems to have helped them recover the most”? I admit I expected an elucidation of one of the nine themes already identified, but what both agents identified as the “single most critical factor” instead, was “being believed and validated” which was discussed in 24 of the 27 transcripts (89%).

The AI agents noted that belief and validation came through multiple sources; therapist, other survivors, supportive church members, survivor support organizations, and educational resources. The fact that this shows up across factors may explain why it is so potent. It appears that validation is a key to healing because it addresses the core wound of clergy sexual abuse; confusion about what happened, self-blame, and isolation from others because of keeping the abuse a secret.

Genuine understanding and support that includes a response of belief and validation set the stage for healing and growth. For example, Charlotte said “I think first it was actually being able to say it… and having someone respond with being supportive and not blaming me… Having someone believe you”. Similarly, Jolia said “being heard and believed by people who I really respect, who heard me and believed me and affirmed me, and not only said, ‘I believe you,’ but said, ‘You’re doing something important. Your voice is important.’”

To aid the reader, a diagram was created to display how the nine themes relate to each other (see Figure 1). Sharing their Story, Faith and Spirituality, and Time and Patience were identified as the survivor’s individual processes. These three themes relate to choices about how they are going talk about what happened and with whom, as well as how faith will be a part of the journey, and how they will view and hold the journey vis a vis gentleness and patience with self.

Supportive Relationships and Community and Education and Understanding are themes that inform and undergird specific transformative activities such as being in Therapy, participating in Specialized Support Networks and receiving Practical Support and Advocacy. For example, data from research informs survivors and deepens understanding of what happened to them, so that it can be processed in a supportive community. Practical Support and Advocacy is the one factor most dependent on a courageous and helpful response from the church system were the abuse happened which is discussed more in depth later in the paper.

Lastly, survivors do want Justice and Accountability for their abuser and they want to be included in the process of what that will look like. The desired outcome for survivors is for their injuries to be acknowledged by the system in which it occurred and the abuser held to account. The diagram shows that both the survivor’s own process and the process of being involved in specific therapeutic activities are the paths that create the opportunity for a survivor’s involvement in justice and accountability. Their involvement in justice and accountability could include sharing what happened (with church leaders or on social media), participating in an investigation or testifying in court, working with a legislator to bring a new criminal statute, or bringing a civil lawsuit against a perpetrator.

5. Discussion

Survivors are recovering and this research found nine processes or factors that one sample of ACSA survivors identified as keys to their growth and healing. It appears that ACSA survivors heal along the same lines as survivors of sexual assault broadly and almost every recovery factor this sample identified, is found in the literature on sexual assault recovery. Therapy (Theme 1) and Supportive Relationships and Community (Theme 2) are about how survivors need social support, validation, belonging, and connection from professionals and friends, in one-on-one relationships and in community (Starzynski et al. 2017). Survivors talked about how these factors help reduce self-blame and aid in self-forgiveness. But curiously, no survivor discussed self-compassion, which may be exceptionally difficult for ACSA survivors to cultivate and develop but has been identified in the literature as helpful (Kaye-Tzadok and Davidson-Arad 2017; Strickland et al. 2022).

Having hope (Kumar et al. 2022) was discussed by survivors and is found especially in Specialized Survivor Organizations (Theme 4) and Education and Understanding (Theme 5). Both themes reflect how perception and understanding of ACSA shifted in helpful ways (e.g., I didn’t do something wrong, I was actually abused, this isn’t my fault). One pathway of healing is through a community of people who have experienced the same thing (ACSA) and another pathway is through obtaining accurate information from social scientists and other experts. Domhardt et al. (2015) discuss how important it is for sexual assault survivors to learn about trauma and the ACSA survivors in this study affirm how necessary learning about the trauma associated with ACSA is for them. Having accurate information and a safe supportive community in which to make sense of that information are keys to recovery.

Autonomy and agency and having control in recovery are noted as important in the literature (de la Cruz et al. 2015) and is discussed by survivors in Justice and Accountability (Theme Six). Including survivors in the process of doing justice and holding an abuser accountable seems to be an important mediator of healing and is a primary desired outcome. This is where religious systems can help or hinder the process through how they manage their response. Jennifer Freyd has been focusing on Institutional Courage through her work at The Center for Institutional Courage by calling on institutions to resist the status quo (indifference and self-protection) and do the hard work of engaging in right moral action (supporting a victim, holding abusers accountable), despite how unpleasant or difficult it might be (https://www.institutionalcourage.org/ (accessed on 3 August 2025)). Religious institutions are often held back by the inertia of inaction, complacency, and widespread weaponized ignorance (pretending to be unaware in the face of clear information and evidence of a problem).

Sexual assault survivors describe religious and spiritual beliefs as important in healing (Fayaz et al. 2025). In Faith and Spirituality (Theme 3) ACSA survivors discussed how their faith was important in giving them hope and religious practices like prayer kept them grounded. Many survivors discussed that faith was more complex now, some no longer had faith in institutions, people had periods of not being able to pray or believe, but none of the 27 survivors reported permanently rejecting their faith in God. At least for this sample, faith is a key component of healing. Similarly, Pooler and Barros-Lane (2022) found that “faith in God” was the most salient predictor of resilience, affirming this finding.

This current study of survivors found that “being believed and validated” was the most common and potent factor supporting their recovery. Similarly, “finding someone who heard and believed me” was the second most important predictor of resilience among a sample (n = 160) of ACSA survivors (Pooler and Barros-Lane 2022). Sharing their Story (Theme Seven) is the vulnerable and risky, yet essential way of finding support, belief, and validation. It is also the way people process and make sense of what happened to them in relationship with self, others, and God.

In Time and Patience (Theme Eight), survivors note that healing takes longer than expected, and Pooler and Barros-Lane (2022) found the more time that passes after abuse the more resilience is present. One immediate implication is that the injuries to a survivor of ACSA are complicated and nuanced, therefore healing and recovery are complicated and nuanced. This does mean that survivors can learn to be patient with how long their recovery might take and this information can help survivors have realistic expectations of themselves and help supporters and churches know that healing may have ebbs and flows and take more time than they expect.

Limitations and Future Research

This study does have some limitations. First, this is a qualitative study with a limited sample size; therefore, the study is not statistically generalizable. However, qualitative research focuses more on the depth and quality of the findings and this study fills an important gap regarding how little we know about the resilience and recovery of ACSA survivors. Another limitation is that the women in this study came from a sample of women who were connected with faith affiliated support organizations. None of the 27 women interviewed had jettisoned their faith, and yet there are survivors for whom faith is not a priority nor a support for them, and none of them were represented in this study. The theme around faith and spirituality might have been quite different (possibly not even developed) with a more inclusive and representative sample of survivors.

Another limitation is the early use and exploration of AI for analysis (Hitch et al. 2025). Without directly comparing the findings of AI against a human using traditional qualitative analytical processes it is not possible to know what might have been overlooked, missed, or minimized. With AI there is no current way to know if data saturation had been reached and if a human generated analysis would have yielded different themes (Hitch et al. 2025). However, the researcher in this study was quite familiar with the interviews and with survivors, which is an important and necessary pre-requisite to using AI. It would not be recommended to use AI to analyze data from research subjects with whom the researcher is not acquainted fully. An advantage of using AI is that it can save time, but the question remains, at what expense (Hitch 2023)?

Future research can continue to explore the factors that contribute to recovery. It is unlikely that this study captured every factor that is important, although most of the themes from this study have been previously discovered in the literature. This study showed that ACSA survivors heal in much the same way as other sexual assault survivors. One of the most important next steps in research would be to identify the clinical interventions that work effectively with survivors of ACSA. It has been suggested that EMDR and somatic experiencing therapies would be helpful (Pooler and Droesch 2025), but no study to date has examined that.

6. Conclusions

People recover from tragic and overwhelming injuries, and ACSA survivors are no different. Nine themes about how survivors recover were identified in this study and being believed and validated seems to be the first archway through which survivors travel on their journey; and recovery may not happen without being believed. Survivors of ACSA are reclaiming their voices, telling others what happened, and demanding accountability and reform in institutions where the harm transpired. Survivors report that research and information about their experiences supports their healing efforts and this paper was an attempt to enlarge the stories of ACSA by focusing on how they recover. I am deeply appreciative of the 27 survivors who were willing to be interviewed for this study. Their courage to face enormous pain and find meaning and hope in the midst of tragedy have inspired me to remain open and curious about the many facets of human resilience. These survivors may be some of our best teachers.