The use of mixed methods research approaches has increased over the past several years and these approaches continue to evolve as challenges to designing, conducting, interpreting, and reporting of quality mixed method studies persist. The design of a mixed methods study must be compatible with the philosophical assumptions, research question, and methods. This paper illustrates the integrated design, methods, results and findings of a mixed methods study that explored whether or not current counselling practices with women survivors of childhood sexual abuse (CSA) reflect the belief that women do not sexually abuse children. A sequential explanatory strategy was applied to this study and conducted in two phases. The first phase used a web-based survey to quantitatively determine the beliefs of Canadian therapists who work with women survivors (n=164) about CSA, perpetrator gender, and their counselling practices regarding inquiries about sexually abusive behavior. Telephone interviews were conducted in the second phase with selected survey participants (n=22) to qualitatively examine the relationship between their beliefs and their self-reported behaviour in counselling practice with women survivors. The results demonstrated that 70% of respondents thought it was important to inquire with women survivors about their thoughts and behaviour involving sexual abuse of children; however, the results also revealed differential gender beliefs about sexual perpetration and a discrepancy between the therapists’ stated ideals and description of their actual practices. The integrated findings and results convey a comprehensive and divergent understanding of a very complex issue that using only a quantitative or qualitative approach would not achieve.