Contested Discourses in Multidisciplinary Sexual Assault Response Teams (SARTs).

This qualitative study explored how law enforcement officers, forensic nurses, and rape crisis advocates who are members of coordinated service delivery models such as Sexual Assault Response Teams (SARTs) describe their process of engaging with one another and managing their differences in professional orientation, statutory obligations, and power. Using semi-structured interviews with 24 SART responders including rape crisis center advocates, law enforcement, and medical personnel, we examined the ways that SART members discursively construct one another's role in the team and how this process points to unresolved tensions that can manifest in conflict. The findings in this study indicate that interdisciplinary power was negotiated through discursive processes of establishing and questioning the relative authority of team members to dictate the work of the team, expertise in terms of knowledge and experience working in the field of rape response, and the credibility of one another as qualified experts who reliably act in victims' and society's best interests. Implications of these findings for understanding and preventing the emergence of conflict in SARTs are discussed.