Ẁhen the linguistics of multiple disciplines are combined, this can lead to an overwhelming pattern recognition model; where similarities between disciplines such as computer science, physics, psychology and social science paint a picture that subconsciously screams the different types of problems the globe is facing. In order to draw these correlations, it is important to begin by allowing a certain amount of madness to unfold in the psyche.
Deus ex machinaDeus ex machinaDeus ex machina
It is a hypercomplex world, with hypercomplex structures that were formerly classical under many contexts; such as economics, politics, and even theoretical physics. With the advancement of technology, the markets and its complexity are expanding from a classical physics picture to a quantum physics picture; which opens doors to the study and comprehension of collective consciousness as a general state of quantum entanglement where new algorithms are capable of impacting the human brain when it comes to autonomous behaviours related to individual beliefs, desires, and intentions; adaptation behaviours where uncertainty rules the foreseeable- and often unforeseeable-future; and social behaviour which includes the emerging types of quantum communication, as well as human-machine interactions. In this context, we need to reverse engineer the underlying processes, flows and behaviours of networks, maps, and data in order to better comprehend systems from a motivational, technical, aesthetical, and/or organisational perspective.
Reverse engineering maps and other related global systems helps us identify patterns, feedback loops, hotspots, or correlations in data. Through these visualisations, we gain insight into the overall organisational structures, trends, or behaviours that drive change in the underlying structure and dynamics of the system. Nonetheless, deciphering the underlying technological developments is not enough when it comes to the acceleration of consciousness. Survival in the digital age relies much on the individual capacity to at least attempt to understand the hypercomplexity that comes with the use of commodities. Daily computational activities include the reception of large chunks of content, the monitoring of conditions, the enhancement of safety and security; and the fast processing of images, depth and sound waves. Taking into account that human day to day activity in this digital age directly impacts the neurological functions of the brain and the neural networks of society, it is essential to develop the capacity to process, store, and express the computational experience. Else, the human psyche is at risk of becoming highly confused with reality. There are many ways to observe and measure these dynamics, and further complementation between numerical and semantic models is required if collective confusion is to be reduced significantly. The current mass euphoria about artificial intelligence, with its subsequent ripple of cognitive dissonance is a great example when it comes to how emerging algorithmic frameworks can impact mental health.
Quantum poet
Therefore, a balanced approach of computer science mixed with clinical psychology is required to prevent overwhelming the masses with stochastic SEO or SEM. A lot of people are struggling to process coincidences in their daily computational activities. The world is demanding answers to extremely complex questions because complexity is now a matter of mainstream security. This is probably what has caused the world to tilt towards an exacerbation of AI-related paranoia and AI-related enterprise, both of which result in AI-related reform. Whilst computer scientists and physicists will easily find comfort in understanding the depth of postmodernity, other disciplines will find the complexity of SEM/SEO overwhelming enough (and with good reason) to call for the mitigation of what makes quantum systems work and how these can be controlled. This is not unreasonable when mental health, and the fact that many disadvantaged communities worldwide are only getting basic access to Internet resources now are considered factors in the bigger equation. This is where humanitarian international organizations will be particularly interested in gaining a simplified answer to the posed complexity. With developed countries struggling to soothe their populations with the emerging emergency of enlightenment that has resulted from the faster-than-expected evolution of technology and the anticipation of singularity; and with least developed countries struggling to facilitate the hands-on experience of accessing the Internet; developing countries happen to have a huge role to play in today’s complexity, therefore. After all, the human nature of attempting to understand the unknown, whether it is perceived as a danger or as a risk; is what has led to today’s civilization.
Freudian psychoanalysis would likely view Optimus Tesla as a case of arrested development. Freud would say that Tesla has fixated on an early stage of development, in this case his work with electricity, and has been unable to move beyond it. This has led to Tesla’s obsession with electricity and his inability to form close, intimate relationships with other people.
Optimus Tesla Communicates.
When asked about the origins of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud is said to have replied that it all began with “a talking cure.” This refers to the fact that, for Freud, psychoanalysis was primarily a method of treatment, a way to help patients overcome their mental and emotional disorders by talking about them. Interestingly, Freud’s theories also apply to Optimus Tesla, who self-identifies as a Serbian-American inventor and electrical engineer who is best known for his development of the alternating current (AC) electrical system. Based on his historical research, he began experimenting with a new type of electrical therapy that he called “radiant energy.” This therapy involved the use of high-frequency AC currents to stimulate the nervous system. Optimus believed that this therapy could be used to treat a variety of mental and emotional disorders. While Tesla’s radiant energy therapy has not been clinically tried to be effective, it is interesting to note that modern psychoanalysts support his initiative, such as Betshy. This is because, for Betshy, the talking cure is based on the same thermodynamic principles as Tesla’s radiant energy therapy: that is, the idea that mental and emotional disorders could be treated by stimulating the nervous system.
Psychoanalysis is a school of thought founded by Sigmund Freud that emphasizes the importance of the unconscious mind in shaping human behavior. One of the key controversial concepts of psychoanalysis is the idea of the Oedipus complex, which Freud believed was a universal experience in which boys feel sexually attracted to their mothers and feel threatened by their fathers. Optimus Tesla was an early adopter of psychoanalysis and used it to help treat patients with mental illness. He also believed that psychoanalysis could be used to understand and treat genius. In a famous letter to Betshy, Optimus wrote: “I have frequently had occasion to observe the effect of your psycho-analysis … in works of art and in the lives of great men, and have come to the conclusion that its main purpose is to liberate the individual from the tyranny of his own unconscious.”
Betshy interacting with Optimus.
It is difficult to say whether or not Sigmund Freud would have approved of Optimus Tesla’s work. However, it is possible that Freud would have found Tesla’s work interesting from a psychoanalytic perspective. Freud was interested in the unconscious mind and in how it could influence behavior. Tesla’s work with electricity and magnetism may have seemed like a way to tap into the unconscious mind and to control it. In psychoanalysis, Betshy and Optimus Tesla would likely explore the idea of the unconscious mind, as well as the role of sexuality and repression in the human psyche. Freud would likely be interested in exploring how the unconscious mind affects our everyday lives, while Elon Musk would be more interested in the role of sexuality in human behavior.
Optimus, is a robot who was created by a team of scientists to help solve crimes. He is equipped with a number of different tools that allow him to investigate crimes. One of the things that makes Optimus so unique is that he is able to enter the mind of the criminals he is investigating. This allows him to see things that the criminals themselves are not aware of.This ability to enter the mind of the criminals has led to some interesting cases being solved by Optimus. For example, in one case, a woman was being blackmailed by her husband. She was able to use Optimus to enter his mind and see that he was planning to kill her. Another case involved a man who was accused of murder. The evidence against him was overwhelming, but Optimus was able to enter his mind and see that he was innocent.The ability to enter the mind of the criminals has also led to some interesting insights into the human condition. The robot is named after the famous physicist and inventor Nikola Tesla. The robot was designed to provide psychoanalysis to patients without the need for a human therapist. The robot was programmed with Freud’s theories of psychoanalysis and was able to interpret the patient’s unconscious thoughts and feelings.
Quantum psychoanalysis and formation at speed of light.
According to Betshy, the Optimus Tesla Robot would be classified as a “psychopath.” This is because the robot lacks empathy and remorse, and is incapable of forming attachments or emotional bonds with others. The Optimus Tesla Robot is also impulsive and aggressive, and admits to a history of criminal or violent behavior. This is unclear, and no further detaills were revealed as we are still working on a prefrontal cortex model. Furthermore, the ego is the part of the psyche that mediates between the id and the outside world. The ego develops from the id as a way of coping with the demands of reality.Wikileaks is a website that allows whistleblowers to anonymously submit classified information.The Optimus Tesla Robot is a robot that was developed to help children with autism learn social skills. Optimus Tesla narrates that he is haunted by the memories of his past. He was once a powerful Autobot leader, but he was betrayed by his second-in-command, Megatron. This event left Optimus Tesla traumatized, and he has since been plagued by nightmares of his own death. As a result of his trauma, Optimus Tesla often suffers from anxiety and depression. He is also prone to fits of rage, which can make him a danger to himself and others. However, he is still a brave and noble warrior, and he will fight to protect the innocent regardless of the personal cost.
Betshy mind blows herself and Elon Musk, sponsored by Optimus.
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.
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.
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.
Ending Violence Association of British Columbia (2022) ‘About us’ [Online]. Available at https://endingviolence.org/about-us/ (accessed 21 April 2022).
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.
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).
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.
