Domestic Violence in International Context

Diana Scharff Peterson, Julie Schroeder, Julie A. Schroeder

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• eBook ISBN: 9781317209911
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Scienze sociali
• Subtopic: Criminologia

Domestic violence does not discriminate and is prevalent throughout the word regardless of race, age or socio-economic status. Why, then, do reactions and response differ so widely throughout the world? While some countries work diligently to address the matter through prevention and training, others take a 'hands-off' approach in their response. This book is one of the first to investigate domestic violence on a global scale and provides best practices gleaned from various countries around the world to paint a detailed picture of how police response to domestic violence is currently being conducted and provide training bodies with up-to-date information to enhance current curricula.

Domestic Violence in International Context brings together expert scholars native to twelve different countries to examine the history and scope of domestic violence and how it is being addressed, repressed or ignored in their thirteen respective countries. Their specialised knowledge and unique data come together to create a series of snapshots that will guide nations, societies and communities worldwide in formulating effective strategies to prevent, intervene and combat this epidemic, and examine partnerships and programmes already in place.

This book is essential reading for practitioners, policy makers, and human rights organisations, as well as students and scholars of criminology, social work, sociology and law.

1 Intimate partner violence in Canada

Policies, practices, and prevalence

Amanda V. McCormick, Irwin M. Cohen, and Darryl Plecas

Introduction

The United Nations defines violence against women (VAW) as “any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts . . .” (UN, 1993). A common form of VAW is the threat or infliction of physical, sexual, emotional, or financial harm in the context of interpersonal relationships; known broadly as domestic violence and, more specifically, as intimate partner violence (IPV) (Provincial Office of Domestic Violence, 2014). For many years, IPV was considered an issue to be dealt with in private; more recently, however, there has been broader recognition at a policy and practice level that IPV is a public concern that affects society as a whole (Ministry of Children and Family Development, 2014). This chapter provides an overview of prevalence rates for victimization by an intimate partner, examines the paradigm shift in Canadian society toward IPV, highlights some innovative strategies adopted across Canada, and concludes with a summary of key remaining challenges in effectively preventing and responding to IPV.

The nature and extent of intimate partner violence in Canada

Though consistently rated highly on the Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development’s (OECD) Better Life Index (www.oecdbetterlifei­ndex.org/countries/canada/), IPV is a common occurrence in Canada, with nearly one in ten Canadian adults reporting recent physical and/or sexual intimate partner violence victimization (Brennan, 2011a; Gannon & Mihorean, 2005; Mihorean, 2005; Patterson, 2003), costing an estimated $7 billion or more per year in direct and associated costs (Zhang, Hoddenbagh, McDonald & Scrim, 2012). The rates of emotional and financial abuse are even higher; however, the Canadian General Social Survey does not consider these as forms of IPV. Given that physical/sexual IPV, and emotional and financial victimization appear highly correlated (e.g., Brennan, 2011b), the national victimization statistics likely underestimate the extent of spousal victimization in Canada.

Domestic violence is a highly gendered occurrence. While domestic violence can be perpetrated by a female against her male or female partner, the vast majority of domestic violence police calls for service in Canada involve heterosexual couples where the male partner is accused of engaging in violence against a female partner (Zhang et al., 2012). Further, the violence perpetrated by male partners against their female victims is often considerably more serious, often involving choking and physical beatings (Brennan, 2011a, 2011b; Sinha, 2013).

Of note, the rates of IPV are substantially higher for Aboriginal women in Canada. In 2009, twice as many Aboriginal women (15 percent) compared to non-Aboriginal women (6 percent) reported having been victimized by a spouse in the previous five years. In addition, over half (59 percent) of the Aboriginal victims reported being injured, compared to less than half (41 percent) of non-Aboriginal victims (Brennan, 2011b). There are many underlying factors that explain the increased risk of Aboriginal women to domestic violence, many of which originate from the negative effects of the Indian Act in 1876, which transformed many matriarchal Aboriginal cultures into patriarchal systems. One of the most damaging policies that has had a consequential ripple effect over many subsequent generations of Aboriginal families was the practice of removing Aboriginal status from an Aboriginal woman who married a non-Aboriginal man, forcing these women to become economically and emotionally dependent on their male spouses (Alberta Justice and Solicitor General & Alberta Crown Prosecution Service, 2014). Many Aboriginal peoples also suffer from ongoing direct and multi-generational traumas as a result of the policy decision to place Aboriginal children in residential schools in an attempt at assimilation. This practice led to wide-ranging traumas resulting from routine neglect, as well as the infliction of physical, sexual, emotional, and spiritual abuse, and has directly contributed to the high rates of post-traumatic stress disorder found in many Aboriginal communities that is often self-medicated through substance abuse, and which permeates society through the infliction of violence against loved ones (Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996). Thus, whereas historical Aboriginal responses to VAW might include confrontation by peers, followed by banishment, castration, and death, many Aboriginal communities in Canada today have become numb to this trend, with some communities reporting victimization rates upward of 70 percent (Bopp, Bopp & Lane, 2003).

In terms of people coming to Canada from other countries, approximately 5 percent of immigrant women in Canada report IPV (Sinha, 2013). Often, this trauma is compounded by concerns regarding sponsorship security, ineligibility to obtain social services, and barriers to social and professional help resulting from language difficulties, shame, economic dependence, and cultural norms (MacLeod & Shin, 1993; Bhuyan, Osborne, Zahraei & Tarshis, 2014). Given that one-fifth of Canadians identify as “foreign-born” (Statistics Canada, 2011), violence against immigrant women is a pressing concern for Canadian society.

Unfortunately, the most recent Canadian victimization study found that less than one-quarter (23 percent) of female IPV victims reported their victimization to the police (Brennan, 2011a). Of note, this reporting rate was a substantial decrease from a decade ago when 37 percent of female victims of IPV reported their victimization to the police (Ogrodnik, 2006). These rates may be even lower among immigrant populations in Canada, especially among Indo-Canadian and Muslim women where patriarchal notions concerning a woman’s position in the family play a dominant role in acceptance of engaging in VAW (Ammar, Couture-Carron, Alvi & San Antonio, 2014; Baobid, 2002; MacLeod & Shin, 1993). Similarly, there are relatively low rates of reporting domestic violence to the police among Aboriginal populations, despite the greater likelihood for violence to be inflicted against Aboriginal women by their partners (e.g., Brennan, 2011a; Malcoe & Duran, 2003; Sinha, 2013; Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). Given Canada’s longstanding undertones of discriminatory attitudes toward its Aboriginal citizens, this underreporting may be the byproduct of poor quality police response to previous calls for service.

For Aboriginal and immigrant women, fear of being ostracized by one’s community and fear of shaming the family are additional reasons that detract from the likelihood of calling the police in response to intimate partner victimization, as well as perceptions that the police will give their cases less attention than non-ethnic women (Ammar et al., 2014; Campbell, 2010; Epstein, 1999; Jiwani & Buhagiar, 1997; MacLeod & Shin, 1990; Martin & Mosher, 1995; McGillivray & Comaskey, 1999; Miedema & Wachholz, 1998; Native Women’s Association of Canada, 1994; Wolf, Ly, Hobart & Kernic, 2003). There may also be a preference to deal with the issue first using the family, church, or larger community (Baobid, 2002; Miedema & Wachholz, 1998; El-Khoury et al., 2004; Wolf et al., 2003). Additional issues that make the decision to call the police more complex for immigrant women include a fear of deportation upon conviction (for the partner, as well as for herself), language barriers, and social and economic dependence on their partner, which is also an important reason for why Aboriginal women infrequently report victimization by their partner to the police (Baobid, 2002; Chambers, 1998; Dosanjh, Deo & Sidhu, 1994; Gillis et al., 2006; Jiwani & Buhagiar, 1997; MacLeod & Shin, 1990; Martin & Mosher, 1995; McDonald & Cross, 2001; Miedema & Wachholz, 1998; Native Women’s Association of Canada, 1994; Wolf et al., 2003). An additional significant barrier to immigrant women’s involving the police is a general lack of awareness about rights and the law. In fact, 15 years ago, Miedema and Wachholz (1998) conducted focus groups with nearly 50 women who had immigrated to New Brunswick, Canada, many of whom reported subsequent victimization at the hands of their husband. Consistently, the women believed they would be deported if their husband (sponsor) was arrested or convicted of domestic violence. A second set of false beliefs centered on divorce and the fear that they would lose custody of their children, as well as be denied the right to claim any household property or other material gains (Miedema & Wachholz, 1998).

The underreporting of IPV to police explains why spousal victimization composes 32 percent of Canadian victimization data on all violent crimes, but only 11 percent of police-reported violent crime in Canada (Zhang et al., 2012). This is unfortunate, given Ogrodnik’s (2006) observation that, in a significant percentage of cases (57 percent), the level of spousal violence decreased following police intervention. However, the reduced recidivism following police intervention could also be a consequence of a more severe criminal justice system response, as victims reported that they were more likely to call for police assistance when the abuse was more severe, they feared their partner would kill them, there was a previous history of abuse, or there was the use of a weapon or alcohol in the incident (Bonomi, Holt, Martin & Thompson, 2006; Brewster, 2001; Chambers, 1998; Dutton, Goodman & Bennett, 1999; Gillis et al., 2006; Ogrodnik, 2006; Sinha, 2013; Wiist & McFarlane, 1998).

Still, it is notable that police intervention can have a positive effect on reducing recidivism among domestic violence offenders, but that Aboriginal and immigrant women are less likely to benefit from this intervention, as Canadian statistics also show that, not only is intimate partner violence homicide highly gendered (Campbell et al., 2007; Ontario Domestic Violence Death Review Committee, 2008; Taylor-Butts & Porter, 2011), but Aboriginal women are disproportionately at risk of experiencing lethal domestic violence (Sinha, 2013). Of note, intimate partner homicides are relatively rare in Canada, with one-fifth (18 percent) of all solved homicides in Canada involving intimate partners (Beattie, 2005). However, the rates of IPV ending in homicide tend to be slightly higher in the western provinces than the rest of Canada, with British Columbia slightly above the national average. Still, in general terms, the rate of IPV ending in homicide has remained relatively stable over the past decade (Dauvergne, 2005; Kowalski, 2006; Provincial Office of Domestic Violence, 2014; Taylor-Butts & Porter, 2011). The remainder of this chapter will focus on the increasing politicization of IPV in Canada, while acknowledging ongoing challenges with effectively managing this complex phenomenon.

Responses to IPV in Canada

Consistent with the experiences of many other nations, IPV has not always been regarded as a public issue in Canada. When, in 1982, the Canadian government introduced a motion that police lay charges in domestic violence assaults against women, the immediate response from the floor was “laughter and jeers” (Sweetman, 1982, as cited in Alberta Justice and Solicitor General & Alberta Crown Prosecution Service, 2014).

For many years, the Canadian criminal justice system failed to recognize and respond to this form of VAW. Research conducted only two decades ago concluded that police officers did not perceive intimate partner violence as a legal problem and wanted to avoid domestic violence calls. In fact, victims were seen as weak, unreliable, uncooperative, or to be disbelieved (Hannah-Moffat, 1995; Stephens & Sinden, 2000). These attitudes have, for the most part, shifted substantially over the last two decades as policies and practices geared toward acknowledging and eliminating violence against women have been developed, leading to new police practices, including the development of specialized units to respond to both perpetrators and victims involved in intimate partner violence and the adoption of mandatory arrest policies to take much of the police discretion around appropriate response away.

Division of political responsibility

Canada has ten provinces and three territories. The British North America Act of 1867 and the Constitution Act of 1982 set in place a federal system of government, which divided lawmaking abilities into federal and provincial/territorial responsibilities. Whereas the Canadian federal government retained jurisdiction over the passage of criminal law, the provinces and territories were tasked with the actual administration of justice, as well as the administration of other social systems, including child welfare and the healthcare system. An unfortunate consequence of this policy decision is that, while national laws against assault, sexual assault, and financial victimization prohibit violence against women, the individual provinces and territories are responsible for devising individual policies and practices for their judicial system’s response. Further, each province and territory operates different policing models, ranging from fully provincial police forces (e.g., Ontario Provincial Police) to a mix of municipal (e.g., Calgary, Vancouver, and Abbotsford) and municipally contracted Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) detachments. Complicating this arrangement further is the provision of certain governmental powers to Aboriginal groups. For instance, First Nations communities can negotiate self-governing powers, meaning they can accept responsibility for administering justice, health, and other matters of the welfare state. These policy decisions have resulted in a wide range of local or jurisdictional practices in preventing and responding to IPV. The following sections will describe some notable Canadian examples of IPV policy and practice.

Policy and practice in British Columbia

British Columbia is one of the provinces and territories with the highest rates of IPV. In 2010, the national average of spousal victimization was recorded as 363 victims per 100,000 persons, but British Columbia’s victimization rate was 427 (Provincial Office of Domestic Violence, 2014; Sinha, 2012). Moreover, the province reported 147 spousal homicides in less than one decade, with the vast majority involving female victims (72 percent) and male perpetrators (84 percent) (British Columbia Coroner’s Service, 2012).

Policies addressing violence against women have been in place in British Columbia for several decades, starting with the 1986 Ministry of Attorney General Wife Assault policy and transitioning to the 1993 Violence Against Women in Relationships (VAWIR) policy which, despite its name, focuses equally on victims of either gender (Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General, Ministry of Attorney General & Ministry of Children and Family Development, 2010). The VAWIR policy has been updated several times (1996, 2000, 2004, and 2010). The 2010 amendments were designed to improve coordination between agencies involved in responding to domestic violence, particularly those involved in justice and child welfar...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Notes on contributors
• Foreword
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction: international response to domestic violence
• 1 Intimate partner violence in Canada: policies, practices, and prevalence
• 2 The prevalence of severe intimate partner violence in Sweden
• 3 Responding to domestic abuse in England and Wales
• 4 Levels of prevention of intimate partner violence against women analysed from the multi-causal-ecological pyramidal model: the case of Spain
• 5 Domestic violence: an epidemic which demolishes the myth of the traditional Italian family
• 6 Domestic violence in Austria
• 7 Domestic violence in Turkey: unreported cases and civic/state response
• 8 Status of victims of spousal violence and the future tasks: the case of Japan
• 9 The Vietnamese police response to domestic violence against women: the family unit under pressure
• 10 Domestic violence in Australia: a wicked problem
• 11 Domestic violence in South Africa
• 12 Combatting the menace of domestic violence: the Ghanaian experience
• Index