Evan Stark PhD MSW Professor Emeritus Rutgers University Ill tell you what freedom is to me no fear I mean really no fear Nina Simone TOWARDS A NEW PARADIGM OF ABUSE R v Chase ID: 1015368
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "The Coercive Control Context:" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
1. The Coercive Control Context:Evan Stark, Ph.D. MSW Professor Emeritus, Rutgers University“I’ll tell you what freedom is to me: no fear. I mean really, no fear!” Nina Simone
2. TOWARDS A NEW PARADIGM OF ABUSE
3. R v Chase woman had survived 16 years of horrific physical abuse. She said: ‘I am going to stop sleeping with a knife under my pillow out of fear. I am going to get my self-esteem and confidence back. I will wear my hair down whenever I want to. I will wear tights every day. I am going to be late when I want to be. I am going to work wherever I want to work. I will talk to whoever I please and make all the friends in the world. I am going to love my family unconditionally. I am going to play sport.’[2017] NZHC 244
4. COERCIVE CONTROL Making ‘staying’ and ‘obeying’ (rather than ‘refusing,’ ‘resisting’ or ‘escaping’) appear the safest and/or the only viable option.What makes a ‘battered woman” is her constructed inability to refuse, resist or escape demands that compromise her integrity and offend her nature.
5. Any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse….regardless of gender or sexuality. This encompasses …the following types of abuse:psychologicalphysicalsexualfinancialemotionalHOME OFFICE DEFINITION: DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & COERCIVE CONTROL
6. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & COERCIVE CONTROLCoercive BehaviorAn act or a pattern of acts of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten their victim.”* (Home Office, 2014.)CONTROLLING BEHAVIORA range of acts designed to make a person subordinate and/or dependent by isolating them from sources of support, exploiting their resources and capacities for personal gain, depriving them of the means needed for independence, resistance and escape and regulating their everyday behaviour.
7. CHALLENGES
8. HOW WE GOT HERECurrent approaches aren’t/weren’t enough*Growing popular awareness that woman abuse = Coercive Control* Grassroots pressure for changeGovernment commitment to new frameworkSharp Rise in Reporting + Police Frustration*SHIFT FROM HIGH RISK VICTIMS TO HIGH RISK OFFENDERSGrowing Gap Between Criminal Justice Response, Societal Understanding and Family Court*
9. The Domestic Violence RevolutionCRIMINALMANDATORY ARRESTDEDICATED PROSECUTIONSPECIALIZED UNITSDANGEROUSNESSFAMILYCUSTODIAL PRESUMPTION‘THE GREEN BOOK’TRAININGCHILD WELFAREADD TO ASSESSMENTDOMESTIC VIOLENCE SPECIALISTSTRAINING
10. Them domestic violence modelAssaultIncidentInjuryHomeAshesEdvard Munch
11. Attrition from Report to Punishment(Hester 2006; Hester et al 2008)Reports to policearrestschargesconvictions2001/2002Three areasIn NE England86922225.5% of incidents6014% of incidents313.6% of incidents
12. U.S. INTIMATE PARTNER HOMICIDE RATE DECLINE 1976-2010 BI (SHR, 1976-2000)FEMALEMALE
13. DV is Not ABOUT SEVERE INJURY
14. Domestic Violence Offenders in Hester study50 % of perpetrators >1 dv incidents in 3 yrs18% reoffended against different partners 29% perpetrators > 10 offenses. DV perpetrators arrested for more nondv offenses (2.24) than dv offenses (.83)If convicted, fewer repeat offenses.Previous dv offenses strongest predictor of repeat
15. HOW THINGS (DIDN’T) WORK27 year old Albany man, Jamie Mitchell bit his girlfriend, punched her 21 times, fracturing her eye socket and breaking her nose and cheekbone when she came to his room to “talk things over.” Controlled her in numerous ways and caused severe psychological trauma. (Dec. 11, 2016) -suspended sentence…attributed to ‘mental health’ issues
16. When viewed through a violence lensFrustration, Victim-blaming, Revolving Door and Withdrawal on the Front LinesAbuse and Sexual Coercion are TRIVIALIZED & NORMALIZED
17. BY ABUSIVE FATHERS WITH CHILD CONTACT.2005 – 201519 CHILDREN KILLED2 WOMEN KILLED2 CHILDREN SERIOUSLY HARMED7 MEN DEAD BY SUICIDE1994-2004 29 CHILDREN KIKED . 29 children killed
18. ABUSE CAN BE STOPPED79-86/of every l00 cases reported involve ongoing abuse
19. NEW SCOTTISH OFFENSECauses physical/psychological harm either through intention or “recklessness” Defines Abuse as making person dependent on, or subordinate by isolating B from friends, relatives or other sources of support, controlling, regulating or monitoring B’s day-to-day activities, depriving B of, or restricting B’s, freedom of action, or frightening, humiliating, degrading or punishing B. Uses Reasonable person standard– so doesn’t actually have to cause these effectsCovers children, separated partners and ‘others.’Punishment: 12 months to 15 years on indictment + fine.
20. Coercive ControlPhysical/Sexual ViolenceIntimidation& Stalking & DegradationIsolationControl
21. Ongoing Violence: Female Victims in US (NIPSVS, CDC. 2010)
22. Lifetime Reports of Sexual Violence by Female Victims in US NISVS, 2010
23. PARTNER SEXUAL ASSAULTSTRANGER RAPEEpisode“Rape is rape”Relatively rareMedical – legal imagesVictim experiences as traumatic insultReport and chargesPSAContinuum of sexual coercionMay not involve violenceRepeated‘Good old Donald’ Normative masculinityVictim experiences as a part of dominationReport/no charges
24. Consider Coerced Sex
25. Rape as RoutineHe told me he wanted to fool around and I told him no. He kept persisting and taking off my clothes and I kept fighting him off. He took his belt and tied my hands behind my back aqnd he had fun. I never wanted him to do that again like that so I never said ‘no. Dila, age 26
26. INTIMIDATIONThe “Or Else” ProvisoWhat does you do when you really wants to make her afraid?
27. I'd go to the bathroom and if I was in there, you know, just sitting there was relief. [She thought], “Thank God, I'm alone.” Just to go to the bathroom--To me that was like going to Paris for some women. And if I was in there two minutes longer than he thought I should be just come in there [and she motioned grabbing herhair, showing how he would drag her out of the bathroom right off the toilet]. And if I was just in there, he wouldsay I was thinking --” conspiring.”
28.
29. DEGRADATION and GAS LIGHT GAMESritual enactments associated with sex, bodily functions or obedienceTARGET AREAS OF GENDER IDENTITY FROM WHICH PARTNERS GET THEIR SELF-RESPECT, ESTEEM AND POWERLink to Ownership, Property Rights and Trophy Partners
30. ISOLATIONRIGHT TO SOCIETY/SUPPORT/FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT
31. How does he Stay? CONTROL Harms to equality/autonomy/freedomEXPLOITATION (takes what is hers; treated as servant)DEPRIVATION (woman as dependent); exchanges necessities for compliance REGULATION – “Arbitrary Deprivations of Liberty.” (woman as captive) MONEY….MONEY…MONEY
32. Controlling behaviors charged under s. 76Access to/use of money, phone, FACEbook or other social mediaEnforced DietProhibited contact with friends, family and health servicesMonitoring and/or constraining movements (‘never letting her go out alone’)Continual belittlementRegulating what she wore, sleep, hairstyle & makeupHarming or threatening childrenContinual jealous accusations
33. SAFETY ZONESSEARCH AND DESTROY
34. CONTROL IN THE CONTEXT OF NO CONTROLHOW SHE RESISTS AND SURVIVES
35. Coercive ControlMulti-DimensionalCrosses-Social SpaceHistoricalCumulativeEncompasses a Spectrum of Victims
36. what about the children?
37. Contact& CustodyFAMILY COURTAbusive Male & Cooperating VictimNeglectful Mother &Invisible MenPlanet 1Planet 3“Good Enough” Father & Alienating MomPlanet 2Domestic Violence:Criminal Charges;CRIMINAL COURTLife on Three Planets(Adapted from Radford & Hester, 2006)Child Protection
38. Domestic Violence is the single most common context in which child abuse occurs
39. Who commits child abuse?Reported child welfare cases: men 20-55% (NCCAN; Am. Humane Society)When men are present: 2/3rds of reported incidents (Gil)Men:women 3:1 (Stark & Flitcraft)
40. Most children exposed to domestic violence remain physically and psychologically intact
41. Mrs. NicholsonMother protecting her childJean-Baptiste-Camille Corot
42. Ms. NicholsonCharged with “neglect” though her son was in school her daughter asleep, and the couple was separated
43. Risk of Exposure vs. Risk of trauma of RemovalWide range of possible effectsChildren from dv homes may be more vulnerable to removal traumaFoster care system has risk of abuse and disruption of contacts (5% v. 2%)Woman is isolated: battering may escalate
44. Judge Jack WeinsteinIt is unconstitutional for CPS to charge a non-offending parent with neglect and remove a child solely because she was a victim of domestic violence or refused services due to DV. 44 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 2003)
45. Seattle Findings:Of mothers with documented dv47% no mention in dissolution file28.9% unsubstantiated allegation No more likely to gain custodyFathers (If documented in both files)More likely to be denied visitation…BUT…..83% had no such restrictionsNo difference if not documented
46. Child Abuse as Tangential Wife AbuseIndividual =When the batterer hurts, intimidates, isolates or controls the child to hurt/control/isolate or intimidate the motherSystem =When the court, police, health or child welfare system use the child as a way to harm or control the parent
47. The battered mother’s dilemmaWhen the offending partner forces the victim to choose between her own and her child’s safetyIf I do what the court wants, I put myself and my child at risk. If I don’t, I lose my child.”“If I do what social services want, I put myself and my child at risk.”
48. Magdelena Lucsak: Killer or Victim?
49. The coercive control of childrenTHE MOST COMMON CONTEXT FOR CHILD ABUSE, CHILD KIDNAPPING AND NONACCIDENTAL CHILD FATALITYA FORM OF ‘SECONDARY VICTIMIZATION’ WHERE THE PRIMARY AIM IS TO EXERT POWER & CONTROL OVER THE RESOURCES IN A HOUSEHOLD OR FAMILYCAN BE PREVENTED IN WHOLE OR IN LARGE PART BY REMOVING THE PERPETRATORPREVENTION INCLUDES RECOGNIZING & SUPPORTING HOW CHILDREN RESIST, SUCCUMB TO AND COLLUDE WITH COERCIVE CONTROL
50. Coercive control is the single most common context in which child abuse occurs
51. COERCIVE CONTROL of CHILDREN Making ‘staying’, complying and ‘obeying’ (rather than saying ‘no,’ ‘refusing,’ ‘resisting’ or ‘escaping’) appear the safest and/or the only viable option.What makes a ‘battered child” is their subordination, exploitation and constructed inability to refuse, resist or escape demands that compromise their safety and well-being and offend their nature.
52. The Spectrum of Coercive Control Similar strategies used to undermine mother-child relationships by perpetrators of both child sex abuse and DVGrooming and Alienation
53. CC and risk in mediationPost separation47% reported escalating violence .51.9% reported at least l threat to their lives23.2% reported forced sexCOERCIVE CONTROL VS. DOMESTIC VIOLENCECC accounted for 81% of escalating violence; 80% of threats to life & 76% of forced sexDV accounted for 20% escalated violence; 17% threats & 24% forced sex75% (CC) vs. l8% (DV) expressed fear in mediationiNTIMATE PARTNER ABUSE SCREENING IN CUSTODY MEDIATION: THE IMPORTANCE OF ASSESSING COERCIVE CONTROLConnie J. A. Beck Chitra Raghavan Fam. Ct. Rev. 2010
54. Children are involved Multi-city: Children involved 9%- 27%Referee, Rescue, Distract, Substitute Victim, Coerced ObserverNine times more likely to intervene (Adamson & Thompson, 1988).Enlisted/Defensive Volunteer Co-offender
55. Comparative Study (166/199)violenceMothers62% strangled (choked) >1> 50% threatened with a weapon69% “beatings” 28% > 15x during year12.7 x pushed or grabbed on average Children> 50% of children ‘slapped’> 35% ‘hit with object’>3-5% burnedMcCloskey, Figueredo & Koss (1995
56. “ WITNESSING IN THE CONTEXT OF COERCIVE CONTROL‘CONTROLLED PARTICIPANT”RESPONSE TO WITNESSING OR CC?STRATEGY OF SUPPORT AND RESISTANCE An assigned role’‘powerlessness” in boys and girls “turn anger inwards”‘control in the context of no control.’
57. Child Sexual AbuseCSA73% of incest cases, mother is abused83% repeated incidents40% > 1 yearBatterers 4-6x more likely to commit CSA than nonbatterersComparative study36.8% of children sexually abusedAll but one by batterers
58. INTIMIDATIONSURVEILLANCE DESTROY PROPERTY PETS DEMONSTRATE OMNIPOTENCE VIOLENCE AGAINST OTHERS THREATS AG. MOM, EXAGGERATED PUNISHMENTWEAPONIZATION
59. isolationCONFINEMENT, ‘SEARCH & DESTROY’ HUMILIATION, HARASSMENT, ALIENATION FROM MOTHER, Stockholm syndrome
60. Perpetrators’/fathers’ coercive control prevented children from spending time with mothers and grandparents, visiting other children’s houses, and engaging in extra-curricular activities. These non-violent behaviours from perpetrators/fathers placed children in isolated, disempowering and constrained worlds which could hamper children’s resilience and development and contribute to emotional/behavioural problems. E. Katz (2016) Beyond the Physical Incident Model: How Children Living with Domestic Violence are Harmed by and Resist Regimes of Coercive Control’, Child Abuse Review, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 46-59.
61. He was everywhere we turned up. He was at my son’s basketball club. And he was upsetting the children and embarrassing them too […] I could see Luke [son] was embarrassed, he felt awkward and he felt guilty towards me. I was visibly upset. He was very clever; there were interdicts in place that he couldn’t verbally abuse me. But he would just say a few words, that meant something to me, but meaningless to other people. And that would set me off.’
62. PAS orCoercive Control of Mother and Child
63. Battered child’s dilemmaWhen a child must choose between their own and their mother’s or sibling’s safety and well-being
64. VIOLENCE MODEL vs. EXPERIENCED REALITYEpisode/Incident Injury focusedCalculus of HarmsIntimate RelationsSafety “Continuous”Multiple tactics/Cumulative HarmsEntrapment/ Frequency/DurationCrosses Social SpaceSafety, Autonomy/Dignity/Liberty
65. Children’s (Survival) StrategiesCOPE‘Control in the context ofNo control’ (‘Splitting’ e.g.)REPLACENEGOTIATE‘Good girl’ ‘Bad Girl”Identification with the AggressorESCAPECOLLUDERESISTPROTECT`
66. SAFETY ZONESSEARCH AND DESTROY
67. Reframing Child Harms‘witnessing/exposure’ vs. experience/agency Collateral Damage vs. ‘Secondary Victims’Vulnerable/Depressed Mothers vs.Illegitimate Exercise of Male Privilege ’ Failure to Protect vs.‘Control in the context of no Control.’
68. Knock v. KnockIdentification with the Aggressor as a SurvivalStrategy
69. ASSESSMENT
70. Assessment in the Context of Human & Liberty RightsViolence = Right to SecurityIntimidation and Degradation = Right to Dignity & Live Without FearIsolation = Right to association & supportControl = Right to Autonomy/IndependenceHow do you claim rights for children who have none?
71. Where do go from here?ASSESS FOR COERCIVE CONTROL BEFORE CONSIDERING OTHER MARITAL ISSUESAPPROACH COERCIVE CONTROL AS A SINGLE COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY THAT INCLUDES CHILDREN & OTHER ‘FAMILY’ADOPT DEFINITIONS, PROTOCOLS, POLICIES AND LAWS THAT RECOGNIZE THE SPECTRUM OF VICTIMIZATION ACROSS HISTORY OF RELATIONSHIPSLINK SUPPORT/SAFETY AGREEMENT TO STEPS TO RESTORE EQUALITY AND EMPOWERMENT FOR CHILDREN.RECOGNIZE THE COERCIVE CONTROL OF CHILDREN AS A FORM OF SECONDARY VICTIMIZATION.