The Power Threat Meaning Framework

According to the British Psychological Society (n.d.) the Power Threat Meaning Framework applies to everyone. This framework was initially created as an alternative to more traditional psychiatric nomenclatures. This model is trauma-informed and it is utilised by high profile hospitals such as Rampton Hospital (Willmot and Siddall, 2022). 

The framework consists in asking four initial questions, which answers can then be re-used to answer the two final questions. Willmot and Siddall (2022, pp. 32-33) state that the framework can also be ‘applied to understanding the needs of people who offend or behave in challenging ways’.  The framework makes some assumptions about trauma:

  • Mental illness and behavioural problems can be understood by analysing the role of power abuse. 
  • Abuses of power can impact negatively on people and can restrict them to the point where individuals might not be able to meet their most basic needs. 
  • Much of what we know as psychopathology can also be understood as learned responses people have developed to adapt or survive to adverse circumstances.  

Power 

The framework looks into the negative operation of power in a holistic way based on a person’s narrative. It is recognised that power can be biological/embodied, coercive, economic, social, cultural, and interpersonal. It also recognises that much of this reality is configured to privilege ‘white, male,  heterosexual, wealthy, educated, and mentally healthy people’ (Willmot and Siddall, 2022, pp. 32-33). 

Threat

Threat within the scope of this framework refers to the risks related to abuses of power which can prevent a person from meeting their core needs. There are several types of threats such as physical, economic,  health, social, emotional, quality of life, disability, or deprivation threats. These threatening events or potentials can lead to relational dysfunctions, disrupted attachments, abandonment fears; feelings of betrayal, shame, guilt, insecurity, and entrapment. 

Meaning

The framework is also person-centred, and recognises that every individual is unique. This leads to the assumption that people interpret events and give meaning to these events in unique ways. For instance, male and women due to societal stereotypes might have different expectations for behaviour. Different cultures give different meaning to different events, for instance, some cultures would engage in honour-abuse of girls who have been sexually assaulted. Therefore, the social, environmental, and political contexts all influence meaning. 

Framework

The framework posits that much of what we know as psychopathology are responses people develop to perceived threats in order to cope and/or survive (Willmot and Siddall, 2022). Ultimately, people at times develop specific habits, behaviours, or personality patterns as a result of their unmet needs. Hence, this framework seeks to ask some questions which answers can elucidate the unique perspective of the individual, potential power abuse triggers, as well as unique needs that must be met. These are the questions:

  • What has happened to you? (i.e. How is power operating in your life?)
  • How did it affect you? (i.e. What kind of threats did this pose?)
  • What sense did you make of it? (i.e. What is the meaning of these situations and experiences to you?)
  • What did you have to do to survive? (i.e. What kind of threat responses are you using?)
  • What are your strengths? (i.e. What access to power resources do you have?)
  • What is your story? (i.e. Pulling of these reflections together)

These questions allow for the understanding of how a person has experienced abuses of power, the threats that resulted from such dynamics, the unique meaning a person gave to these events, and the specific threat responses that were developed as a result, as well as the strengths. Having this information in place, proactive support plans can be formulated ensuring that all interventions are  trauma-informed, and person-centred. 

References

British Psychological Society (n.d.) ‘Power Threat Meaning Framework’ [Online]. Available at https://www.bps.org.uk/power-threat-meaning-framework (accessed 29 April 2022). 

Willmot, P. and Siddall, Y. (2022) ‘Trauma, Violence, and Gender’, in Willmot, P. and Jones, L. (eds) Trauma-Informed Forensic Practice, London, Routledge, pp. 32-48 [Online]. Available at https://www.routledge.com/Trauma-Informed-Forensic-Practice/Willmot-Jones/p/book/9780367626914 (accessed 29 April 2022). 

Photo by cottonbro: https://www.pexels.com/photo/person-in-black-pants-and-black-shoes-sitting-on-brown-wooden-chair-4101143/ 

Human Rights Fascism for Victims of Domestic Abuse in Canada

Victims are being thrown into jail for disclosing their experiences of domestic abuse. 

I recently had a deep conversation with a dear friend from Canada, whose name I will keep confidential. We were talking about narcissistic relationships and narcissistic abuse. I explained to her the status of domestic abuse in the UK, where previous to 2021 before the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 was passed, most domestic abusers got away with their crimes. I was curious to understand what the situation in Canada is about domestic abuse. The Canadian Women Foundation (2021) posits that every six days, a woman is killed in Canada as a result of domestic violence.

I was horrified to find out that the government is currently arresting both perpetrators and victims of domestic abuse simultaneously. What this means is that when a victim of domestic abuse calls the police for help in Canada, the victim is also placed in jail and if they have children, they are automatically placed in foster care. I was shocked, I could not believe the level of fascism that is taking place in Canada. My first thought was ‘how is the Canadian government getting away with these human rights violations’? As a founding member of the United Nations charter, Canada has international commitments to maintain peace and security. 

My friend disclosed to me that a few years ago she had been arrested and placed in jail for three days for calling the police about domestic abuse and to report her perpetrator. It seemed, the police could not make up their minds about how to tackle domestic abuse, so they decided to give equal punishment to both the victim and the perpetrator. This is unacceptable, since there exist international conventions which place a duty on the Canadian government to protect victims. However, what they are doing instead is victimising those who have been abused. 

I decided to conduct a little research about it, and found that many women are going through this in Canada, not just my friend. For instance, the Ending Violence Association of British Columbia (EVA BC; 2022a) deals with cases of domestic abuse and coordinates interventions to help victims. They have a Community Coordination for Women’s Safety (CCWS) program which formulates and implements strategies to support victims of domestic abuse (EVA BC; 2022b). The CCWS (2010) wrote a report which corroborated my friend’s story. The report  (p. 2) states: 

‘In  recent  years,  CCWS  and  EVA  BC  have  received  numerous  reports  from communities  of cases involving  the arrest of both parties  in relationship  violence situations. These communities have contacted us to express their concern. They report that women are being arrested even when there is evidence of a history of violence  by  their  male  partners’

Furthermore, they explain the impact that such situation has, such as: 

  • Less prosecution for these cases. 
  • More liability for police services. 
  • Empowerment of the perpetrator to continue the abuse. 
  • Victimisation of victims. 
  • Increased potential for homicide. 
  • Decreased likelihood that victims will disclose or seek help. 
  • Thwarted access to justice for victims. 
  • Thwarted attempts to access support for victims. 

Similarly, the Woman Abuse Council of Toronto (2005) published a report where they highlight the problematic situation of victims of domestic abuse being charged with domestic violence whilst living with abusive men. They made several recommendations which included: 

  • To take into consideration that women’s use of force is not the same as men’s (often, violence arising from women was  self-defence). 
  • That when it comes to arrests, the dominant aggressor should be identified in a relationship where domestic abuse has taken place. 
  • That there need to be mechanisms in place to ensure that victims are able to access support services and victim services, which are thwarted by criminalising the victim. 
  • That more legal aid should be available to women. 

Finally, and more recently Grace (2019) reported around the same problematic, persistent, and pervasive issues related to the inappropriate arrests of women in domestic abuse cases. The article explains that whilst the police has a duty to identify the dominant aggressor in a relationship, women continue to be inappropriately arrested in situations of intimate partner violence. She states: ‘Women experience these failures by police as betrayal. Some even feel the police become complicit to their on-going abuse. As a result, women who have been inappropriately charged in situations of intimate partner violence say they would be unwilling to turn to the police for protection in the future, even if they are again victims of violence’. Furthermore, she provides 18 case studies and accounts of this situation. 

As it can be seen in this post, the situation of domestic abuse in Canada is a mess. My friend was one of those people who were inappropriately arrested, and who now feels that no one can protect her from domestic violence, because the police themselves are being abusive of their power. This type of human rights violation should not happen in theory, but in practice, as it has been demonstrated, injustice is an everyday experience for many women in Canada. This situation has been going on for a long time, and despite recommendations and updates to policies, it continues to affect victims and to silence their voices through state-sponsored fascism. 

References

Canadian Women Foundation  (2021) ‘The facts about gender-based violence’, 29 October [Online]. Available at https://canadianwomen.org/the-facts/gender-based-violence/ (accessed 21 April 2022). 

Community Coordination for Women’s Safety (2010) ‘Women Being Arrested’, Ending Violence Association of British Columbia, June [Online]. Available at http://endingviolence.org/files/uploads/eing_Arrested_Backgrounder_Revised_June_2010_0.pdf (accessed 21 April 2022). 

Ending Violence Association of British Columbia (2022) ‘About us’ [Online]. Available at https://endingviolence.org/about-us/ (accessed 21 April 2022). 

Ending Violence Association of British Columbia (2022) ‘Community Coordination for Women’s Safety (CCWS)’ [Online]. Available at https://endingviolence.org/prevention-programs/ccws-program (accessed 21 April 2022). 

Grace, A. (2019) ‘“They Just Don’t Care”: Women Charged with Domestic Violence in Ottawa’, Manitoba Law Journal 153 [Online]. Available at https://www.canlii.org/en/commentary/doc/2019CanLIIDocs2790 (accessed 21 April 2022). 

Woman Abuse Council of Toronto (2005) ‘Women Charged with Domestic Violence in Toronto: The Unintended Consequences of Mandatory Charge Policies’, March  [Online]. Available at http://www.oaith.ca/assets/files/Publications/womenchargedfinal.pdf (accessed 21 April 2022). 


Photo by NEOSiAM  2021: https://www.pexels.com/photo/person-s-hands-covered-with-blood-673862/

The Occupational Impacts of Domestic Abuse

The perpetrator’s control, whether overt, coercive or psychological; impacts on the day to day life of the victim(s). He terrorises the vulnerable person, and the victim might be living with all sorts of restrictions such as not being allowed to go out, or only allowed to go out for specific purposes (e.g. school or work). Everything could be under the perpetrator’s control including the victim’s fashion choices, social networks, and even her diet. 

The victim might be materially dependent on the abuser, or might be coerced into materially supplying for the abuser. In extreme cases, even basic activities such as using a phone or accessing the internet might be restricted. This is because the perpetrator wants to express supreme dominance over the victim. He wants to subjugate her, and the victim might be living in chronic fear of consequences. Furthermore, the victim will most possibly become isolated, manipulated, and made to live in distress, secrecy, and horror. All of this can of course take a toll on the occupational performance of the victim. 

Individuals who are affected by domestic abuse can at times display behaviours that challenge their institution. They may take a study break in order to comply with the perpetrator’s capricious requests, or to heal actual bodily harm (ABH). They might also ask for time out in order to cope with their mental health, or to use substances as an escape route. Individuals might perform poorly in exams and assessments, might display demotivation and lack of ambition, and there is a disruption to long-term career plans.  

Furthermore, individuals affected by domestic abuse might be prevented from getting to work as a result of physical injury or restraint, might be threatened, gaslighted, and given all home-based responsibilities to stop them from going out. If the victim manages to go to work, there might be a clear deterioration in performance or jobs might be poorly done. If a manager is not engaging in trauma-informed practice, it is more likely that they will not be able to effectively safeguard a victim when she shows symptoms. The victim might not disclose the abuse, and the manager might actually exacerbate her situation with this type of subjugation. The victim might lose her job, career, and/or prospective promotions. Finally, in extreme cases a perpetrator might stalk and/or harass the victim within the workplace, and trigger conflict between the victim and her colleagues, especially if these are unaware or unsympathetic. 

Impacts on Children 

Children affected by domestic abuse find it more difficult to form secure attachments, and often show deficits in language, cognitive, emotional, and social development. This may manifest in the form of poor educational achievement, behaviour that challenges, mental health problems, and interpersonal maladaptations.  Those in puberty might behave in similar ways to their perpetrators, and engage in disruptive behaviours. They may experience truancy, and/or might attempt to protect their perpetrators. They might become isolated, and might be prevented from forming friendships. When a child is subjugated, they are prevented from exercising their freedom of thought, and from expressing their subjectivity. All this affects their psychological health, and can impair performance. 

The Health Impacts of Domestic Abuse

Domestic abuse takes a toll on victims, and they experience all sorts of maladies as a result of the abuse they were put through, both in the short term and in the long term. This blog post will inform the reader about the health impacts that domestic abuse can have on adults and children. 

Impacts on Adults

Individuals affected by domestic abuse often present with depression, and are more susceptible to suicidal ideation, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), other stress and anxiety disorders, insomnia, and eating disorders. They also have low self-esteem and confidence levels. Furthermore, domestic abuse can change the victim’s behavioural temperament permanently, especially when the victim is a child. Research shows that when children are abused, as early as adolescence they can engage in hypersexual, promiscuous, or disinhibited behaviours, as well as risky behaviours such as using illicit drugs, drinking heavily, and/or smoking. 

Moreover, women who were sexually abused as children find it particularly difficult to connect in appropriate or safe ways, and are more prone to allowing abusive relationships to enter their lives. It is believed that this happens because these traumatised women cannot distinguish between men who show affection, and men who make sexual advances. For instance, they may think that expressions of affection or support are sexual advances and might respond sexually, and/or might think that expressions of sexual desire are ‘love’ and respond romantically.  What this tells us is that individuals already affected by mental health problems as a result of their traumas are more vulnerable to being domestically abused, and likewise those experiencing domestic abuse are more likely to get mental health problems. 

Domestic abuse can cause physical illness whether as a result of actual bodily harm (ABH), the stress associated with the abuse, and/or risky behaviours. ABH includes cuts, bruises, burns, bites, broken bones or teeth, as well as severe head injuries and damage to the eyes, ears, chest and abdomen. All these forms of ABH can consequently lead to long-term illness, disability, and/or death. If the victim is pregnant, domestic abuse can trigger a miscarriage or harm the fetus. Furthermore, sexual abuse can damage the genital, pelvic, and urinary areas whether through brute force or the transmission of infections. Risky behaviour can also lead to sexually transmitted diseases, self-injury, as well as other health problems associated with substance abuse. 

Physical symptoms worsen mental health problems, and mental health problems also worsen physical symptoms. This is why people who already have disabilities-especially women- are more likely to be abused than non-disabled individuals due to their vulnerability regardless of whether the disability is motor, mental, or intellectual (SafeLives, n.d.). Perpetrators see vulnerability as an opportunity, and seek to exploit this deliberately. 

All this is without mentioning yet the health impacts of female genital mutilation (FGM) which are devastating. Not only can FGM lead to all of the above mental health symptoms, it can also lead to tremendous physical impairments such as severe and long-term pain, infections, difficulty in walking or having sex; bleeding, cysts and abscesses from the wounds; difficulty urinating or experiencing incontinence, life-threatening complications during pregnancy and childbirth, infertility, and/or death. 

Impacts on Children

Children are very vulnerable to distress, and this is why experiencing and/or witnessing domestic abuse can be severely traumatising for them. They might develop symptoms of anxiety and depression, have nightmares or intrusive flashbacks, clinical fear, behaviour that challenges, regression, aggression, withdrawal or lack of engagement, low self-esteem, self-harm, suicidal ideation, risky behaviours, and eating disorders. Indeed, when children are made to feel scared, confused and powerless; this can be introjected and a reaction formation can happen leading children to behave in similar ways to the perpetrator. 

Children also experience physical symptoms when they have been exposed to domestic abuse. They might experience similar symptoms to adults such as injuries that can cause concussion or brain damage. They undergo epigenetic changes with every adverse experience, and they might become neglected, underfed, and unwashed if they are in an abusive environment. Moreover, they may present with bed-wetting difficulties, stomach and headaches, and a disrupted circadian rhythm. They might also present with self-injury, or injury obtained through risky behaviours.  

Finally, children go through very intense transitions after domestic abuse has been exposed. They might have to move home, and away from friends. They might also experience a disruption to their education. They might develop an attachment trauma after they lose the abusive family member who they might not have perceived as abusive. They might find the conviction of the abusive relative traumatic. They may experience a change in quality of life, and in the worst case scenarios they might be separated from their parents and placed in foster care. All these factors increase the chances of developing health problems. 

References

SafeLives (n.d.) ‘Spotlight #2: Disabled people and domestic abuse’ [Online]. Available at https://safelives.org.uk/knowledge-hub/spotlights/spotlight-2-disabled-people-and-domestic-abuse (accessed 21 February 2022). 

Why People Do Not Report Domestic Abuse

There are many barriers to disclosure of domestic abuse. One reason why many individuals stay in abusive relationships and/or do not report domestic is because of their own subjective feelings such as fear of consequences if they leave the relationship (e.g. dependencies), grief which manifests as feelings loss for the relationship they wanted and/or thought they had, denial of what is actually happening to them, self-blame for the abuse they are receiving (perpetrators tend to blame the victim), shame about what others might think if they found out about the individual’s situation, and guilt over their inability to prevent or stop the abuse, as well as of others witnessing the abuse (e.g. children). Furthermore, another reason why individuals do not report domestic abuse, is that they feel that the local authorities will not take them seriously (many women do report it and perpetrators still get away with their crimes), so they experience subjective feelings of hopelessness that ‘nothing would get done anyway’. 

Another reason why people do not report domestic abuse is due to societal perceptions. The way society is known to perceive and deal with victims is awful. Individuals can experience fears that no one will believe them, or that there will be impunity. They might have no faith in justice due to personal experiences, or/and exposure to high profile cases where victims were torn apart either by the criminal justice process or by the media and tabloids. Furthermore, societal perceptions of gender mean that men will feel ashamed to disclose their experiences. Similarly, homophobic perceptions lead to LGBTQ+ individuals hiding their experiences due to their private sexual orientation. And, cultural perceptions can lead to all sorts of subjective reluctance to report domestic abuse, as individuals might be afraid of repercussions, embarrassment, or honour-based abuse. 

Apart from all of the above, there are several identifiable factors that affect the disclosure of domestic abuse. These are: 

Stereotypes

These are generalised subjective beliefs that individuals have about the world, which influence how they perceive others. Because there are so many misconceptions and false stereotypes of victims of domestic abuse, such as that they are weak, poor, and submissive women without education and living in social housing; many people might be unable to relate to this, and therefore they might find it more difficult to identify their experiences as a domestic abuse; or they might feel that no one will believe them because they do not fit the stereotype. Furthermore, since there is so much stigma associated with these misconceived stereotypes, individuals might not want to be perceived in such a way, and so might not disclose their experiences. Finally, those who do relate to the stereotype might feel that it is normal because of their circumstances to report the abuse, and might feel hesitant to disclose due to how they believe they are perceived. All these misconceptions can lead to victims isolating, and losing hope.  

Labelling

Because of the stigma associated with the word ‘victim’ (i.e. stereotypes), individuals do not want the label ‘victim’ added to their subjective identity, even if indeed they are victims. They might subsequently fear other associative labels such as ‘weak’, ‘stupid’, ‘dramatic’, ‘crazy’ or ‘bad mother’. 

Stigma

Many victims are aware of the stigma, and feelings of shame come with this. They might rather stay in that relationship than risk becoming stigmatised (e.g. men might feel that people will make fun of their masculinity for speaking up). 

Discrimination

Victims might fear that due to the current awful status of justice in our society, they will be discriminated against if they disclose their experiences of domestic abuse. They might also fear that others will attribute negative and unfair stereotypes to them, or fear that they will be excluded or marginalised as a result of their seeking support from their social network and/or community. 

Victim Blaming

Finally, because of the toll that domestic abuse has on victims, individuals experience subjective feelings of self-blame. They might already have been constantly blamed by their perpetrators and might fear that other people will also blame her.  Moreover, some cultural traditions do blame women for making decisions such as leaving an abusive relationship, and so victims might genuinely get blamed by relatives or their community if they disclose their ordeal, making it less likely that they will seek support (honour-based abuse). 

In conclusion, there are many reasons why people do not report domestic abuse, and many factors which prevent victims from disclosing their ordeals. Stereotypes and the stigma created by these is a major theme when it comes to lack of disclosure. The system at times fails victims, and the dark figure of crime is ever present.

Photo by Lucxama Sylvain from Pexels

Acquired Traumatic & Traumatised Narcissism

Adults who experienced domestic abuse when they were children have more potential to suffer from long-term health impacts such as diabetes, obesity, and heart disease. They might also experience mental health problems which involve low levels of resilience, and higher levels of anxiety and depression, among other health complications. Those who endured severe physical violence as children at times carry their injuries into adulthood in the form of disabilities; intellectual, social, and emotional difficulties can arise, and individuals might perform poorly occupationally as a result of the abuse they’ve been through. Furthermore, their perceptions of a ‘normal’ relationship can also be affected (e.g. women who cannot differentiate between affection and a sexual advance), and the traumas can also lead to shallow object relations, where those who survived are unable to form a meaningful connection with others. Yet, the most concerning aspect of childhood domestic abuse is that in some cases these children can grow to imitate the behaviour of their perpetrators and subjugate others. This is what acquired narcissism is, a relational system where the person exposed to domestic abuse goes on to introject such patterns of behaviours and to abuse other innocent victims, displacing the trauma. This article will focus on this potential consequence of domestic abuse, and what happens when a victim becomes a perpetrator drawing from Shaw (2014).

Some narcissists are born with this predisposition (e.g. psychopaths), whilst others acquire the predisposition through trauma (e.g. sociopaths), getting absorbed in a generational and social cycle of abuse. This is how acquired narcissism works. That is, the individual is not born with it, but rather he acquires it through adverse experiences. Shaw (2014) defined traumatic narcissism as ‘the action of subjugation. In the traumatizing narcissist’s relational system, the narcissist fortifies himself by diminishing the other. The other is then conquered, controlled, or enslaved at worst—and exploited’. In other words, traumatic narcissism can be described as the narcissism that can consciously traumatise other people through behaviours. Similarly, traumatised narcissism happens when someone who has already been narcissistically abused, unconsciously behaves in ways that resemble their perpetrator. Traumatised narcissism— which is also traumatising— can be acquired in adulthood, is often temporary, and recovery depends on the individual’s ability to heal trauma; whereas traumatic narcissism as described by Shaw (2014) is acquired through childhood trauma, is often long-term and constitutes a pathology that is consistent with an individual’s personality and trajectory. Moreover, in some cases victims of narcissistic abuse go on to become traumatised narcissists. In rare cases, adults go on to become traumatic narcissists; especially when they are subjected to adverse epigenetic changes or traumatic brain injury resulting from their circumstances.

For those with acquired traumatic narcissism, narcissistic trauma is often relational or developmental, and relational trauma happens when there is a constant disruption of a child’s sense of feeling loved and safe (Monroe, 2017). There might be a form of physical or emotional neglect and abandonment, a violation of boundaries, and/or abuse. In other words, relational trauma happens when a child’s needs are not met by their caregivers, and where the child ends up feeling betrayed by their parents. All this can affect a child epigenetically, and alter their biological make-up in the long-term. For instance, Shaw (2014, pp. 7-8) states: ‘these people typically experience significant depressive symptoms, which are actually post-traumatic symptoms of cumulative developmental, or relational, trauma—symptoms that are often expressed in the form of painful lifelong longing for love that can never be requited. In development, to be recognized primarily as object—in other words, to be rigidly objectified—is to be cumulatively traumatized in one’s efforts to consolidate the sense of subjectivity’. 

Furthermore, the American Psychological Association (n.d.) defines subjectivity as ‘the tendency to interpret data or make judgements in the light of personal feelings, beliefs, or experiences’. Stripping someone off their subjective can lead to problems with intersubjectivity, which Oxford Reference (n.d.) describes as ‘the mutual construction of relationships through shared subjectivity’. Indeed, those with acquired narcissism struggle to maintain stable relationships with others precisely because of their many relational traumas. According to Shaw (2014, p. xv) ‘the traumatizing narcissist seeks to abolish intersubjectivity, and to freeze a complementary dynamic in the relationship, allowing recognition in one direction only—toward himself’.

This is why narcissists are extremely talented at hiding and protecting their vulnerabilities always wary of the world around them, a world that betrayed their trust. They seek to impress others through what seems like a normal demeanour. Yet, covertly, a narcissist will display the following behaviours: 

  1. Passive aggression: they may say things that are not directly offensive but that are still hurtful. 
  2. Introversion: they might be more reclusive but still need narcissistic supply from others. 
  3. Sulky behaviours: they may act in sullen ways when they do not get their way. 
  4. Constant dissatisfaction: they chronically blame the world for their circumstances, and constantly complain. 
  5. Grandiosity: they secretly think they are superior to others, and will only associate with those they deem to be superior. 
  6. Sense of entitlement: they always want to take what they desire, often crossing boundaries. 
  7. Playing as the victim: they always say that the world is doing something to them, and do not take responsibility for the harm they cause. 
  8. Hypersensitivity to criticism: they might rage if criticised and might feel hurt at the slightest comment. 

Morever, Shaw (2014, p. 13) states that ‘the heightened sadistic tendencies of the traumatizing narcissist may be masked in some cases by charisma and seductive charm. She has successfully dissociated the need to depend on idealized others by achieving a complete super-idealization of herself. She is overt in her need for superiority and domination, successful in seducing others into dependence on her, and cruel and exploitative as she arranges to keep the other in a subjugated position’. A common misconception is to think that the narcissist’s grandiose overcompensation is somewhat rooted in high self-esteem. I would argue it is more rooted in egocentrism. The truth is that narcissists are hypersensitive to their own impression management. That is, the facade they show to the world is their vulnerability because deep down they do not love who they are. Overtly, the malignant narcissist will exhibit the following behaviours:

  1. Pathological jealousy: they may experience feelings of envy and anger at the slightest disadvantage.
  2. Psychopathic behaviours: callous, cold-blooded, and instrumental harmful actions.
  3. Persecutory delusions: excessive paranoia based on false beliefs that the world is out to get them.
  4. Cruelty: having no remorse for engaging in sadistic behaviours.
  5. Coercive control: manipulating, threatening or controlling the victim.
  6. Pathological lying: not being able to tell the truth.
  7. Distress-based responses: things that hurt his self-esteem or self-image might trigger his dangerous behaviours.
  8. Sexual promiscuity: having more than one sexual partner.
  9. Hypersensitivity to criticism: always on guard for real or imagined criticism.
  10. Aggression: an inability for self-restraint when raging.

The individual with acquired narcissism is essentially looking for the love that he or she did not receive in childhood. According to Shaw (2014, p. 10) ‘patients described as pathologically narcissistic are often those whose self-esteem is terribly fragile; who easily feel insulted, attacked, and humiliated […] someone who in development has suffered severe damage to their self-esteem system, and whose self-esteem regulation is therefore inconsistent and precarious, subject to the internal persecution of the split-off protector self’. Furthermore, according to Mahendran (2015, p. 179) there are five main cognitive biases used by narcissists in order to maintain their self-esteem: (1) misremembering, which is a particular way in which people tend to remember past events in ways that are self-serving; (2) self-serving attribution, which consists in attributing blame to external events for failures, and attributing credit to the self for successes; (3) false consensus effect, which consists in assuming that other people will make the same choices one does, and behave in similar ways to one; (4) sour grapes effect, which consists in devaluing unattainable goals and rewards; and (5) unrealistic optimism which consists in attributing a positive expectation or outcome to something, even if the evidence and standards contradict it. 

In conclusion, acquired narcissism can be severely detrimental and is often a result of domestic abuse. Acquired narcissism can be conscious or unconscious, temporary (traumatised narcissism) or long-term (traumatic narcissism), and has many biases reinforcing an unstable sense of image.

References

American Psychological Association (n.d.) ‘Subjectivity’, APA Dictionary of Psychology [Online]. Available at https://dictionary.apa.org/subjectivity (accessed 17 December 2021). 

Mahendran, K. (2015) ‘Self-esteem’, in Turner, J., Hewson, C., Mahendran, K. and Stevens, P. (eds) Living Psychology: From the Everyday to the Extraordinary 1, Milton Keynes, The Open University. 

Monroe, H. S. (2017) ‘How Relational Trauma Affects Teen Mental Health, Relationships, and Self-Esteem’, Newport Academy, 1 September [Online]. Available at https://www.newportacademy.com/resources/mental-health/relational-trauma/ (accessed 16 December 2021). 

Oxford Reference (n.d.) ‘Intersubjectivity’ [Online]. Available at https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100008603 (accessed 16 December 2021). 

Shaw, D. (2014), Traumatic Narcissism: Relational Systems of Subjugation, New York, Routledge [Online]. Available at https://www.routledge.com/Traumatic-Narcissism-Relational-Systems-of-Subjugation/Shaw/p/book/9780415510257# (accessed 16 December, 2021). 

Domestic Abuse: Situational Factors

The following common situational factors tend to contribute to the risk of domestic abuse, and tend to be elements that victims report. Some of these aspects, we already have talked about in this blog

  • When individuals are experiencing the close monitoring that comes with coercive control, there is a higher likelihood of other forms of domestic abuse occurring such as physical and economic abuse. 
  • When individuals experience adverse family circumstances where elements of financial problems, unemployment, alcohol or substance use disorder are present, there is a higher likelihood of domestic abuse occurring. 
  • When individuals are connected to adverse cultural traditions such as female genital mutilation (FGM), forced marriage, or honour-based abuse; there is a higher likelihood for other forms of domestic abuse to take place. The more patriarchal the culture, the more risks there are. 
  • When individuals are connected to adverse community circumstances such as community aggression, violence, fear of others, a distrust of authority figures (e.g. police), poor housing, low socio-economic status, low education levels, and poor access to support services and facilities; there is a higher likelihood of domestic abuse occurring and individuals might have no option to turn to in the case of domestic abuse taking place.  
  • When there are individuals who are traumatised and display behaviour that challenges such as risky behaviour, this might lead to an escalation of domestic abuse at home and other interpersonal conflict. Sadly, the risk is also increased by these situational factors.
  • When there are people who have financial constraints, they are more likely to stay stuck in an abusive environment or relationship, and more likely to depend on a perpetrator. Therefore, financial problems increase the likelihood of domestic abuse occurring. 
  • When there are individuals who are isolated from their social networks, they become more vulnerable, suggestible, and the risk of domestic abuse increases. 

DID YOU KNOW? 

When a perpetrator has a history of being domestically abusive, sadistic, and/or controlling; there is a potential for recidivism to occur. This is why since 2014, victims have a right to make a request to the police for a disclosure of any history of domestic abuse from their partner. This is to prevent the perpetrator from reoffending by giving potential victims a heads up about what could happen in their relationship, as it is known that perpetrators of domestic violence rarely change. According to the Home Office (2022), ‘The Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme (DVDS), also known as “Clare’s Law” enables the police to disclose information to a victim or potential victim of domestic abuse about their partner’s or ex-partner’s previous abusive or violent offending’. This was implemented in 2014 across all police forces in England and Wales after 36 year old Clare Wood was murdered in 2009 (BBC News, 2014). Clare was strangled and set on fire by her obsessive exboyfriend George Appleton at Salford, and it was concluded that she received no support from the local authorities even though George had a history of violence against women (VAW; BBC News, 2011). 

References

BBC News (2011) ‘Salford murder victim Clare Wood “was not protected”’, 23 May [Online]. Available at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-13506721 (accessed 17 February 2022). 

BBC News (2014) ‘“Clare’s Law” introduced to tackle domestic violence’, 8 March [Online]. Available at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-26488011 (accessed 17 February 2022). 

Home Office (2022) ‘Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme Factsheet’, GOV.UK, 31 January [Online]. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/domestic-abuse-bill-2020-factsheets/domestic-violence-disclosure-scheme-factsheet (accessed 17 February 2022). 

Categories
Forensic Psychology

Signs, Symptoms and Indicators of Domestic Abuse

This blog post will educate the reader about the signs of domestic abuse, and how to identify it in every day life. It also touches on the specific symptoms and indicators of female genital mutilation, forced marriage, honour-based abuse, and digital domestic abuse; as well as who is most at risk from experiencing these.

Physical Abuse

Individuals affected by physical violence present with recurrent physical injuries such as black eyes, bruises, split lips, marks on the neck, or sprained wrists. Moreover, the explanations given for these injuries might be inconsistent, and might be obviously a cover-up for something else. Finally, they might also wince when making motor movements as if in pain and trying to avoid pressure on a specific part of the body. However, it must be noted that perpetrators tend to be wary of where they leave marks, so as to avoid getting caught. So in many cases, physical abuse is hidden from the public eye and the victim is manipulated into keeping things secret. Physical signs of domestic abuse might not always be visible because the perpetrator might be ensuring that they leave no evidence that could incriminate them. This might mean that they will attack the victim in specific hidden places such as the head, the stomach, or breasts, among other places. Furthermore, they might have manipulated the victim to hide the marks, or to keep silent; and the victim might actually be using clothing, make-up, and accessories to actively cover the injury. 

Emotional & Psychological Abuse

Individuals affected by emotional abuse present with symptoms of agitation and anxiety, chronic tiredness and insomnia, substance or alcohol use disorder, submissiveness (e.g. apologising all of the time), anhedonia, low self-esteem, low self-confidence, fear or wariness, depression, and/or suicidal ideation. Whilst these symptoms might not always be caused by domestic abuse, these are commonly experienced by people who are in abusive relationships. Therefore, it is important to take into account these indicators when safeguarding adults from potential abuse which might be hidden. Emotional signs of domestic abuse are inherently invisible and can only be detected by observation. If the victim does not have a support network who knows them well, it might be more difficult for anyone to notice any differences in behaviour. Furthermore, not everyone is equipped with the knowledge to correctly identify signs of emotional abuse. Moreover, victims might actually avoid disclosing anything, especially if the perpetrator has manipulated them to keep things to themselves through blame and/or threats. 

Individuals affected by domestic abuse present with behavioural markers that could reveal their ordeal such as drastic behaviour or personality changes, unjustified self-isolation, being unable to attend scheduled meetings, avoidance of social gatherings, the sudden reluctance to engage in activities once enjoyed, and/or secretive behaviours. Furthermore, the individual might appear anxious and/or fearful, and their behaviour might seem extremely ‘well-behaved’ when around their perpetrator. These individuals may try to cover up the abuse they are being put through by giving excuses that are unrelated to what is actually happening. Behavioural signs of domestic abuse are difficult to pinpoint if the victim is not known to the witness very well, and therefore the witness cannot notice a change in usual behaviour. This means that unless someone notices the situation, a bystander intervention is unlikely, especially when the victim makes excuses for apparent unusual incidents which no one can recognise as an inconsistency. 

Coercive Control

Individuals affected by coercive control present with signs and indicators such as asking their perpetrator for permission to socialise with others, receiving numerous texts and/or calls from their perpetrator, having no money or access to it, having no car and being picked up by their perpetrator all the time, and/or needing to be home at specific times. These individuals might also keep these patterns secret, and might actually feel shame related to their ordeal. Signs of coercive control are often quite hidden from everyday life because the victim might appear to be respectful rather than fearful of her perpetrator. Others might not pick up on the abusive flood of texts and/or calls, or might not understand that all of these communications come from the perpetrator. Furthermore, victims might feel embarrassed to disclose their financial situation and/or dependencies, and might avoid answering truthfully when questioned about details. 

Female Genital Mutilation (FGM)

Women who have been genitally mutilated present with difficulty walking, sitting, or standing; they show signs of being in pain, and may spend longer in the toilet than usual. They might be anxious, depressed, and/or might be self-isolating without a justification. They might present with drastic changes of behaviour and personality, may engage in truancy at school/college/university, might become absent from work and/or might withdraw from social activities. Furthermore, the Home Office has a list of countries flagged as ‘risky’ when it comes to female genital mutilation. These are Somalia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Egypt, Nigeria, Eritrea, Yemen, Kurdistan, and Indonesia. Women and girls at risk of female genital mutilation are those who speak about special ceremonies or rituals about womanhood in their culture, those who say that they are going on holiday outside the UK, those who say that a ‘special’ relative is coming to visit them, and those have family members who have been already mutilated. This means that when women and girls present with any of the above indicators, and especially when they have connections to any of the blacklisted countries, they should be safeguarded through bystander intervention.

Forced Marriage

Forced marriage happens here in the UK and also abroad. Sometimes only the woman is forced, and other times both parties are forced. Individuals affected by forced marriage present with truancy or absence from work, fearfulness and anxiety about holidays, failure to return to occupational life after a holiday, not being allowed to study or work, having excessive parental control,  depression or isolation, and/or attempts to escape their ordeal at home. Furthermore, those at risk of being forced into marriage include those who have connections to those who have already been forced to marry, and those whose culture promotes early marriage. Countries known to have child marriage include Nigeria, Central African Republic, Chad, Bangladesh, Mali, South Sudan, Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mozambique and India (Reid, 2018); as well as Pakistan (Ijaz, 2018). 

Honour-based Abuse

In some cultures, the family or community might attempt to protect or defend their shared values through abusive means and/or threats of abusive means such as harassment, assault, imprisonment, murder and rape. This is what is known as honour-based abuse and it is directly linked to beliefs, and attitudes. Individuals affected by this type of abuse present with drastic changes in behaviour or personality, anxiety, demotivation, poor performance, excessive control by others, self-isolation which cannot be justified, confrontational and argumentative behaviours, truancy or absence from work, attempts to escape their ordeal, self-harm, depression, substance or alcohol use disorders, suicidal ideation, and/or actual bodily harm (ABH). Furthermore, individuals at risk of honour-based abuse include those who have relatives who have been forced into early marriage, and those who come from cultures where honour-based abuse is perceived as normal. Countries flagged as risky when it comes to this type of abuse include Turkey, Kurdistan, Afghanistan, South Asia, Africa, the Middle East, South and Eastern Europe, and traveller communities. This means that people from these cultures are particularly at risk of being abused. 

Digital Domestic Abuse

Digital domestic abuse entails harassment, bullying, and/or stalking through an online platform, and/or the restriction of someone from  accessing technology. Individuals affected by digital domestic abuse present with an excessive number of texts/calls, appear visibly upset or distressed after texts/calls, online attacks against their integrity, and online embarrassing media involving them. Furthermore, individuals who are being coercively controlled through technology present with a monitored access to social media, emails, and/or the internet by their perpetrators,  signs that others have access to their personal digital accounts, a controlled access to technology by the perpetrators, a recurrent pattern of asking for permission from their perpetrator before connecting digitally with the people in their lives, an excessive guardedness about what is said in emails or other digital platforms, and/or a recurrent pattern of borrowing other people’s technology for access to the internet. Moreover, an individual can be both abused digitally, and also face to face, with punishments, reprimands and other negative consequences used by the perpetrator to intimidate the victim into obeying. 

References

Ijaz, S. (2018) ‘Time to End Child Marriage in Pakistan’, Human Rights Watch, 9 November [Online]. Available at https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/11/09/time-end-child-marriage-pakistan (accessed 14 February, 2022). 

Reid, K. (2018) ‘Untying the knot: 10 worst places for child marriage’, World Vision, 6 July [Online]. Available at https://www.worldvision.org/child-protection-news-stories/10-worst-places-child-marriage (accessed 14th February, 2022).  

Categories
Forensic Psychology Journalism

Understanding Domestic Abuse in England

Every person’s perception of what constitutes abuse is different. Some victims stay and accept their predilection, whilst others fight and/or leave. Some victims succeed in leaving, whilst others are killed in the process. Domestic abuse has statutory definitions that give an objective scope which applies to everyone in the jurisdiction, whether they have insight into their realities or not. According to the Crown Prosecution Service (n.d.), domestic abuse can be defined as ‘any incident of controlling, coercive or threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of their gender or sexuality’. This short definition has it within its scope that domestic abuse is something that happens in everyday life. 

Domestic abuse does not always entail physical violence. Psychological abuse has been hypernormalised in our societies, and every day forms of sadism are quite common and ingrained in policies and procedures. Furthermore, domestic abuse is relevant to the police, and thinking that it should stay behind closed doors is another misconception. Domestic abuse happens all the time, everywhere, and thinking that it is rare is another misconception. Domestic abuse is not always a crime of passion, and sometimes it is slow, prolonged and premeditated. Thinking that domestic abuse is always a loss of control is a misconception. Disagreements are not equivalent to abuse. Whilst disagreements are normal, abuse is not normal. Moreover, thinking that domestic abuse is only perpetuated by strangers is another major misconception. Finally, domestic abuse happens to all groups and classes of society. Assuming that it only happens to poor people is another misconception. 

Globally, the United Nations (n.d) defined domestic abuse as ‘a pattern of behaviour in any relationship that is used to gain or maintain power and control over an intimate partner. Abuse is physical, sexual, emotional, economic or psychological actions or threats of actions that influence another person. This includes any behaviors that frighten, intimidate, terrorize, manipulate, hurt, humiliate, blame, injure, or wound someone. Domestic abuse can happen to anyone of any race, age, sexual orientation, religion, or gender. It can occur within a range of relationships including couples who are married, living together or dating. Domestic violence affects people of all socioeconomic backgrounds and education levels’. Based on this definition, it can be said that domestic abuse is a form of sadism, as the latter is all about the subjugation of the victim. 

Locally, the Devon & Cornwall Police (2020) define domestic abuse as ‘the misuse of power and control by one person over another. This controlling behaviour may be exerted in various ways, such as through physical violence, emotional and/or psychological manipulation, forcing sexual acts or taking over your finances. It can begin at any time, can be obvious or subtle and can happen suddenly or gradually. It can happen to anyone regardless of class, age, race, religion, culture, disability, sexual orientation or lifestyle’. Based on this definition, it can be said that those who engage in domestic abuse are also engaging in sadistic behaviour

There are some misconceptions about victims of domestic abuse, such as believing that the victim wants to be abused because they are not able to leave the relationship, that the victim should leave the relationship if they want help from statutory services, that the victim is at fault for the criminogenic behaviours of their abuser, that only women are victims of domestic abuse, that women lie about their abuse, that some people/women are attracted to abusive people/men, and that some people like the violence in their relationship (e.g. rough sex defence). For instance, the Home Office (2022) published a policy paper explicitly stating that ‘consent to serious harm for sexual gratification’ is not a defence. Justice Minister Alex Chalk is cited saying ‘No death or other serious injury – whatever the circumstances – should be defended as ‘rough sex gone wrong’ which is why we are making it absolutely clear that this is never acceptable. Perpetrators of these crimes should be under no illusions – their actions will never be justifiable in any way, and they will be pursued rigorously through the courts to seek justice for victims and their families’. This means that even if a person consents to rough sex, if their partner abuses them to the point actual bodily harm (ABH), then this is by law a crime. This will give women more clarity on what constitutes appropriate touch, sex, and when to identify abuse and report abuse. Furthemrore, Keir Starmer (2013) published an article on The Guardian stating that false allegations of rape and domestic violence were rare. This shows the importance of taking all allegations seriously. 

What’s more, there are also misconceptions about the perpetrator such as believing that alcohol and drugs excuse such behaviours, that their abusive childhoods justify their behaviours, that mental health problems excuse domestic abuse, that they only attack because they are stressed out, that it is only a loss of temper on the abuser’s part, that just because they engage in domestic abuse does not mean they are bad parents (such as a father who abuses a mother and a child witnesses it), and that all abusers are men. 

The National Office for Statistics (ONS; 2021a) reported in November that domestic abuse as recorded by the police in England and Wales rose by 6%. There were 845, 734 events. There were 33 arrests per 100 cases. Yet, even though these rates increased, referrals to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) decreased by 3%. Furthermore, convictions decreased by 70%. This shocking evidence proves that even though the problem is increasing, the UK state apparatus is dealing less and less with the problem. The ONS (2021b) reports that 37.7% of offences were of violence against the person, and 18.8% of offences were of sexual nature. 72.3% of victims of violence were female whilst 27.7% were male, and 93.4% of victims of sexual offences were female, whilst only 6.6% were male. This shows that the issue of violence against women in England and Wales is far from being resolved. 

Moreover, moving more locally, the ONS (2021b) reports that there were 20,905 crimes of domestic abuse reported to the Devon & Cornwall police in the year ending 2021. This accounted for a 23.1% of total recorded crime. This saw a significant longitudinal increase in domestic abuse related crime from previous years. It went from 13.8% in the year ending in 2016 to 23.1% in 2021, increasing by over 9% in the past 5 years. There were 16, 464 offences of violence against the person, accounting for 41.1% of domestic abuse related crimes. This also saw a significant increase in the past few years. 

There are four aspects that influence perceptions of domestic abuse: (1) the media, which often distorts information by not always identifying incidents of domestic abuse, sensationalising the reality of more subtle abuse and only focusing on more violent crime. Furthermore, the media also downplays the role of the perpetrator and sometimes attributes responsibility to the victim suggesting that the perpetrator was triggered. Moreover, because we live in a patriarchal world, the media sometimes covers more stories of violence against men, even though violence against women is most common. Finally, the media also sensationalises class, making it look like domestic abuse only happens in poor families; (2) religion, which has sets of dysfunctional beliefs which reinforce abusive practice such as the idea that honour-based abuse or forced marriage is acceptable, that women are inferior and should be submissive to men, that men as family heads should take disciplinary action at home against the rest of the family, that divorce is wrong, and that homosexuality is a sin; (3) culture, which has social norms that directly impact on perceptions of domestic abuse such as the ideas that men should assert power over women because they are ‘superior’, that the restriction of women’s movements/activities is acceptable, that women should accept physical violence as a method for conflict resolution, that women are responsible for the marriage working, that domestic abuse should never be spoken about (i.e. making it a taboo topic), that anyone who wants divorce should be ashamed of themselves, that brides should be bought and exchanged as if they were cattle (e.g. Iraq), that honour is dependent on female sexual behaviour, and that traditions such as forced marriage and female genital mutilation are normal; and (4) personal experience which influences perceptions of relationships, especially when people have lived experience in domestic abuse. Depending on their level of insight, some may fully reject abusive behaviour whilst others might accept it as a normal part of life.

Did you know…

The Matrimonial Causes Act (1978) made it possible for women to be legally separated from their abusive husbands, and the Domestic Violence and Matrimonial Proceedings Act (1976) enabled women to apply for court orders against their abusive husbands. In 1985, there were laws against female genital mutilation. In 1994 rape became illegal within a marriage, and in 2004 common assault became an arrestable offence. Police stations created dedicated Domestic Violence Units with specialist staff in the late 80s and early 90s. Moreover, the Protection from Harassment Act (1997) implemented measures against stalking and threats of violence, and the Domestic Violence, Crime, and Victims Act (2004) made stricter sentences so couples of the same sex could also apply for injunctions. In 2002, children were allowed to be removed from the home if they were witnesses of domestic abuse. In 2014, Clare’s law (named after Clare Wood) allowed the police to give details to potential victims of their partner’s abusive history in order to prevent abuse. In 2015 coercive control and revenge porn became illegal, and finally, the Domestic Abuse Act (2021) created a statutory definition of domestic abuse.  

References

Crown Prosecution Service (n.d.) ‘Foreword From Kate Brown, CPS Lead for Domestic Abuse’, Domestic Abuse [Online]. Available at https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/domestic-abuse (accessed 7th February 2022). 

Devon & Cornwall Police (2020) ‘What is domestic abuse?’, 2nd October [Online]. Available at https://www.devon-cornwall.police.uk/advice/threat-assault-abuse/domestic-abuse/what-is-domestic-abuse/ (accessed 7th February 2022). 

Home Office (2022) ‘Consent to serious harm for sexual gratification not a defence’, GOV.UK, 31 January [Online]. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/domestic-abuse-bill-2020-factsheets/consent-to-serious-harm-for-sexual-gratification-not-a-defence (accessed 12 February 2022). 

Office for National Statistics (2021a) ‘Domestic abuse in England and Wales Overview: November 2021’, 24 November [Online]. Available at https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/domesticabuseinenglandandwalesoverview/november2021 (accessed 12th February 2022). 

Office for National Statistics (2021b) ‘Domestic abuse prevalence and victim characteristics’, 24 November [Online]. Available at https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/domesticabuseprevalenceandvictimcharacteristicsappendixtables (accessed 12 February 2022). 

Starmer (2013) ‘False allegations of rape and domestic violence are few and far between’, The Guardian, 13 March [Online]. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/13/false-allegations-rape-domestic-violence-rare (accessed 12 Feberuary 2022). 

United Nations (n.d.) ‘What is Domestic Abuse’ [Online]. Available at https://www.un.org/en/coronavirus/what-is-domestic-abuse (accessed 7th February 2022). 

Categories
Opinion

The Contexts of Everyday Sadism

Sadism can be described as the psychological need to inflict harm on another human being, and it often manifests in the form of cruel actions. It is a subclinical form of malignant narcissism (Buckels et al., 2013). Many people have sadistic thoughts, and indeed, anger can at times elicit such thoughts; yet, sadists are not satisfied with having fantasies or thoughts where they indulge in the idea of harming others, they actually take actions where they consciously inflict such harm on other human beings. There are telltale signatures that can help you spot a sadistic offender. According to Reale et al.  (2017, p. 4) ‘the most important indicators of sadism are (a) that the offender is sexually aroused by sadistic acts, (b) the offender exercises power/control/domination over the victim, (c) the offender humiliates and/or degrades the victim, (d) the offender tortures the victim or engages in acts of cruelty, and (e) the offender mutilates sexual parts of the victim’s body’. Nevertheless, more subtle forms of sadism occur in everyday life and these do not always involve physical violence. Pfattheicher et al. (2017, p. 338) state that ‘the very essence of sadism is that sadists are motivated to dominate and to control other individuals by harming them because they experience pleasure through their cruelty […], for instance when killing bugs or harming an innocent person’. 

Some researchers believe that the tenet of sadism is disempowering and controlling the victim, rather than the infliction of pain per se. Either way, sadism is harmful and those who engage in it tend to get a boost out of the harm and helplessness they are causing. For instance, Debardeleben in Hazelwood and Michaud (2001, p. 88) cited and quoted in Luyn  (2007, p. 21) state: the wish to inflict pain on others is not the essence of sadism. The central impulse is to have complete mastery over another person, to make him or her a helpless object of our will. . . . And the most radical aim is to make her suffer. Since there is no greater power over another person than that of inflicting pain on her. To force her to undergo suffering without her being able to defend herself. The pleasure in the complete domination over another person is the very essence of the sadistic drive’. Sadism can happen in multidisciplinary settings, from politics to healthcare, and education; as well as in personal life. Sadism can happen through actions, policies, decisions, and narratives; and it can be pervasive, problematic and persistent. Sadism can be internalised by the superego (Freud, 1923) quo when it is culturally hypernormalised and exhibited by authority figures.  Now, one might wonder, is sadism de facto or is it de jure? That is, does sadism encompass actions which violate the law of a jurisdiction (de facto), or does it also involve actions that are perfectly legal (de jure)? The answer is: both. Do people in general struggle to understand sadism because of the same reasons they struggle to understand the definition of what constitutes torture? Nowadays, someone can correctly feel like they are being tortured, but de facto sadists will argue “Oh, it is not torture!”. Well, if it involves the infliction of mental, emotional, psychological, or physical harm on another human being; then yes, it is legally correct to say that it is torture. Moreover, psychologically speaking, it is also correct to say that if someone consciously and deliberately inflicts harm on another human being, then indeed it is sadistic cruelty. Whether consciously or unconsciously, intentional or unintentional, everyday sadism can harm anyone, so it is important to have awareness about how to protect yourself in these unprecedented times. 

But how can we clarify intent? Well, de jure sadism occurs when the state creates regulations which are harmful to people and does not fulfil its substantive and procedural obligations to prevent harm. For instance, people who suffer from pituitary brain tumours often develop a very low stress tolerance (i.e. a high propensity for adrenal fatigue). If the jurisdiction creates and designs institutional mechanisms which are based on the induction of stress contingencies, then it can be said that the jurisdiction has indeed created a sadistic environment that induces medico-legal injury on these people. This happens with many different types of minority groups. The point that is most concerning about all this is that in the institutional bias of ‘some people need to be stressed out in order to develop X or Y ability’ or ‘stress can be positive and productive’ is ultimately where the sadistic factor is really found. I always think: ‘Do women need rape?’ The answer of course, quickly becomes: ‘No, women do not need rape!’; so the next question is: ‘Do people need obstacles, adrenal fatigue, degradation, and all other forms of inhumane treatment in order to learn?’, the answer should equally be: ‘No, because that is a breach of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and it is sadistically cruel’. But, why is it so difficult for de jure decision-makers to understand this basic principle? De jure sadism also occurs when de facto sadism is not investigated adequately, nor processed through the legal system, or when there are no substantive and procedural mechanisms for its prevention.


No wonder there is a lot of de facto sadism. If a human being’s conscience is in a way partially constructed by the social and legislative norms of the world around them, and if such a status quo has sadistic protocols; then it can be expected that people in general will also develop attitudes, and show manifestations of such sadistic tendencies which are of course internalised and culturally inherited. Now, the worst type of experienced sadism is when someone has both, de jure and de facto sadists around them and against them. This happens to minority groups of all types, not just to people with pituitary adenomas. The Hostile Environment Policies 2014-2016 were a great example of state-led cultural and attitudinal sadism. Webber (2019, p. 77) states: In the UK, these policies are collectively known as the “hostile environment”, policies which have the avowed aim of making life impossible for migrants and refugees who do not have permission to live in the UK, and which remove such migrants from the rights to housing, health, livelihood and a decent standard of living, liberty, freedom of assembly and association, family and private life, physical and moral integrity, freedom from inhuman or degrading treatment, and in the final analysis the right to human dignity and to life’. Indeed, the UK revealed at that point in time that it was culturally acceptable to hate immigrants; and in the legal industry you and I both know that justice is about what is correct or incorrect according to the principles which guide morals, behaviours, and so on. So it is clear that the UK does not want all those immigrants walking in the streets. It is clear that the world is filled with inequalities which create all types of problems forcing people to escape their homes and visit their international neighbours asking for first aid. So what can be done in order to balance all this? Abusing, torturing, and humiliating the disadvantaged is not the answer though. Furthermore, having our prime minister incorrectly call the legal human right of claiming asylum ‘illegal’ (Grierson and Sabbagh, 2020) is an attack against truth, and an offence against the international community. There is no such a thing as an illegal asylum seeker. I suppose the UK might have to create an asylum office in every country so people can apply for asylum without having to risk their lives crossing the channels. That would be a procedural solution to the concern of the contingencies of asylum travel. An asylum embassy, consulate, or something of the sort. Does it exist? No, because visas—  like democracy—  are business.  Asylum, however,  is the state of the global human condition; so what, Elon Musk can’t invade Mars fast enough?

References

Buckels, E. E., Jones, D. N. and Paulhus, D. L. (2013) ‘Behavioral Confirmation of Everyday Sadism’, Psychological Science, Los Angeles, SAGE Publications, 24(11), pp. 2201–2209 [Online]. Available at https://pmt-eu.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/13ueeno/TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1177_0956797613490749 (Accessed 11 August 2020).

Freud, S. (1923) ‘The Ego and the Id’ [Online]. Available at https://www.sigmundfreud.net/the-ego-and-the-id-pdf-ebook.jsp (accessed 14 November 2021). 

Grierson, J. and Sabbagh, D. (2020) ‘Boris Johnson accused of scapegoating migrants over Channel comments’, The Guardian, 10 August [Online]. Available at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/10/boris-johnson-hints-at-law-change-to-deport-migrants-who-cross-channel (Accessed 11 August 2020). 

Luyn, J. B., Akhtar, S. and Livesley, W. J. (2007) Severe personality disorders, Cambridge, New York, Cambridge University Press [Online]. Available at https://pmt-eu.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/h21g24/44OPN_ALMA_DS5189773850002316 (Accessed 28 July 2019). 

Pfattheicher, S., Keller, J. and Knezevic, G. (2017) ‘Sadism, the Intuitive System, and Antisocial Punishment in the Public Goods Game’, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications, 43(3), pp. 337–346 [Online]. Available at https://pmt-eu.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/gvehrt/TN_sage_s10_1177_0146167216684134 (Accessed 26 July 2019). 


Reale, K., Beauregard, E. and Martineau, M. (2017) ‘Is Investigative Awareness a Distinctive Feature of Sexual Sadism?’, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, pp. 1-18 [Online]. Available at https://pmt-eu.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/gvehrt/TN_medline29294688 (Accessed 26 July 2019).

Categories
Journalism

Women Who Are Mad

De facto and de jure social injustices are an expression of the id quo. These impulses have a detrimental effect on women’s daily lives, making it a lot more difficult for them to enjoy their human rights. This document has shared data particles of knowledge about current injustices occurring to ‘mad’ and ‘intersectional’ women in the UK, the psychological impact of these injustices (e.g. Borderline Personality Disorder), and the legal framework of international law, which the UK is subject to. De jure and de facto injustices exacerbate mental health problems, and lead to the introjection of maladaptive behaviours, and can corrupt the individual superego. Furthermore, UN Women (2016) recommends that  all countries take on board the Istanbul Convention, and the UK is a country member of the UN Security Council. The UK’s Domestic Abuse Act 2021 does not fully cover all the criteria necessary for the prevention and protection of women’s rights, as well as the prosecution of perpetrators of violence against women. Similarly, the Equality Act 2010 only protects some of the many characteristics that elicit discrimination against human beings, and the word ‘dignity’ does not appear once in the Human Rights Act 1998. This seemingly innocuous semantic exception is a malpraxis. All these technical legislative failures lead to very costly consequences for the least advantaged in the status quo. The facts and figures have shown that women in the mental health sector are the most affected group, out of which patients with BPD tend to struggle the most with daily attitudinal obstacles, intersectional discrimination, and de facto impediments.

Film Review: We Are Monster (2014)

This film directed by Antony Petrou is rich in forensic psychological detail. It really shows the dark side of the criminal justice system (CJS). Based on a true story, We are Monster tells the story of the murder of Zahid Mubarek by Robert Stewart.

Psychoanalytic film theory: It is clear that many of the attitudes Stewart displayed were inherited from his father’s personality. In other words, the film captures the phenomenon of introjection, a defence mechanism which consists of internalising and adopting personality traits and/or behaviour of other people, especially authority figures. The film shows Stewart recalling a memory of his father arguing with his mother about her having been sexually involved with a person of a darker skin. From this scene it is clear that his father had an extremist and antisocial attitude towards people of different skin colours, and he is heard using racial slur. Consequently, Stewart came to associate a darker skin with ‘filth’ and ‘evil’, having internalised his father’s attitudes. The film constantly shows him having a conversation with a hallucination of himself similar to the way his father used to speak in general. In psychoanalytical terms, it could be said that the film shows Stewart’s ID talking to him all the time. The ego or self is shown to negotiate with this hallucination, and to be led and manipulated towards specific behaviours. It is difficult to say whether the introjection was accompanied by reaction formation, because it is difficult to differentiate Stewart’s criminogenic attitudes and/or actions from those of his father. The film portrays his childhood as self-less, cold, and full of trauma. Therefore, it is unclear whether these behaviours constitute an exploration of his father’s ego through a primary regression to a narcissistic state in which the superego is formed based on values learned from the world; or whether it is his self that has become established as a personality (i.e. whether this would be his behaviour if he was not experiencing a psychotic break). The film captures his schizophrenic crisis quite well. It allows the viewer to enter the criminal mind from thought to action. Petrou manages to illustrate the criminal insanity perspective by placing emphasis on the hallucination as the drive towards criminogenic activity.

Political anchors: This case was a huge scandal in the year 2000 and many inquiries were launched at Feltham Young Offender Institution in order to investigate the steps the government of the UK could have taken in order to prevent this tragedy, and what steps could be taken to prevent it from ever happening again. It was concluded that legally, there was much more the system could have done to prevent this re-offending, and the death of Zahid Mubarek. This case was a scandal when it occurred, and it is perceived as a double-edged cumulative failure.