By Kieran McCartan, Ph.D, David S. Prescott, LISCW, & Kasia Uzieblo, Ph.D.
All too often, professionals and
the public alike can view abuse as involving those who cause harm, and those who
have harmed. This dichotomous view, in which people become labeled and
understood as either “offenders” or “victims” overlooks the often-horrific
circumstances that the people involved have endured. For example, it can be a
common experience that children who grow up in adverse environments become an
easier target for those seeking to exploit their vulnerabilities. Often, those
same children may be implicitly or explicitly coerced into illegal behaviors.
This is one example of the pernicious nature of sexual abuse; one never knows
how young people will respond to circumstances that are by definition difficult
to survive.
This is clearly evidenced in a recent story about young
people who had been victimized in the Rochdale sexual abuse grooming scandal in
the UK. In recent years in England and Wales, there have been a series of gang-related
grooming scandals coming to light. Quite often, these scandals involved victims
who had not been listened to, respected, treated properly of believed. Sometimes
they were prosecuted for crimes directly linked to their own abuse (for
example, a girl becoming agitated and arrested for disorderly conduct when the
police wouldn’t believe that she was being abused), or at least seen as being
as complicit in their own abuse. The girls in question were often arrested for other
illegal behaviors as well. These unacceptable responses often derailed cases,
made the crown prosecution service wary, and caused serious harm to these
children in later life (i.e., mental health, social and employment issues). This
kind of double victimization by the system who neglected their abuse and punished
its symptoms is manifestly inhumane. The public is witness to the impact of
trauma and adverse experiences on the development and life course of these
girls.
Research shows us that those who
have been victimized by sexual abuse and other crimes often have multiple
interrelated vulnerabilities. Therefore, it should not be a surprise that
victims of crime are dysfunctional in other ways that could lead them into
contact with the system. Our hope is that this case leads more adults to see
these multiple vulnerabilities and to understand problematic behaviours
holistically so that we can provide the correct tailored support to the
individual. Seeing multiple vulnerabilities as causal factors, in a rational
choice sense, that lead people to be “willing” victims only does more harm.
Ultimately, we hope that more
professionals can understand developmental and life-course challenges appear to
normalize abuse in the lives of young people. It is simply not the case that
adversity causes young people to seek out abusive situations. When society can
change our perspective on the people that come into our services to be more prevention-focused
and trauma-informed, we can understand that we need to change our language and
ways of working to better support them.
One clear example of this need to
shift our understanding is the language used around sexual abuse as opposed to sexual
exploitation. In sexual exploitation, we talk about gifts, compliance, and aspects
of choice, whereas in sexual abuse we often do not. This is problematic because
sexual exploitation is itself a form of sexual abuse involving very similar
victim-access behaviors. The use of terms such as “gifts” gives the impression
that the victim is a willing accomplice and, therefore also guilty. This draws
attention away from the fact that they have been victimized and labels them as
“problematic”, which can impact them personally, legally, and socially. Another
example is the still widely held belief in a “just world”. People, including professionals
like police officers (Sleath
&Bull, 2012) still far too often tend to perceive the victim’s
misfortune as deserved, also in sexual abuse cases. As we know, this belief in
a just world is related to victim-blaming and might explain why we tend to
have that blind spot for these adverse life events.
Fortunately, we are starting to
see some changes around this. One of the authors’ (Kieran) neighboring police
force in Gloucestershire have made a
commitment not to arrest young people for low-level anti-sociality linked to
their victimization (and stands in contrast to the case in Michigan in which a girl
was jailed for not doing her homework). This means that they can focus on
supporting the young people by addressing the causes of their victimization and
making sure that the individuals responsible are held to account.
No comments:
Post a Comment