Understanding and responding to those who abuse victims with disabilities
Significant strides have been made in improving our response to men’s violence against women in many areas including health care, child protection and the workplace. It is equally important that we improve our response to violence against women with disabilities, due to the widespread abuse perpetrated against this population. Consider the following sample of statistics: • Women with disabilities are more likely to experience abuse by a greater number of perpetrators and for longer periods than non-disabled women.
• 15,000 to 19,000 people with developmental disabilities are raped each year in the United States.
• For individuals with psychiatric disabilities, the rate of violent criminal victimization including sexual assault was twice of that in the general population (8.2% vs. 3.1%).
• Eighty-three percent of women with a disability will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.
To begin the discussion, we need a definition of “disability.” The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA,” 1990) defines disability to mean “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of an individual.” Common examples of disabilities under this definition are mental retardation, confinement to a wheelchair, and sensory impairments such as blindness or deafness. Batterers define “disability” more broadly. To them, “disabled” is not only an adjective used to describe a group of people; it is also a goal of their abuse with any victim. In other words, batterers use a pattern of controlling behavior to “disable” their victims. Specifically, they seek to limit the ability of their victims to make independent choices. For those women who already have disabilities (as defined by the ADA), batterers might view them as convenient or particularly vulnerable targets.
Batterers’ disabling behavior (that we refer to as domestic and sexual violence) can have devastating and widespread effects on the lives of women. The abuse can adversely affect the woman’s physical health, sexual and reproductive autonomy, psychological functioning, emotional welfare, financial independence, occupational or educational life, relationships with family or friends, connections with her religious community, and her ability to access social, health or legal services (see the diagram below).
Strategies that batterers use to create or exploit disabilities in several areas of victims' lives:
To assist domestic violence victims with disabilities and to hold the perpetrators accountable for the harm they cause, we must understand the batterers’ motivation.
Batterers seek women with disabilities. Battering is the abuse of power to control an intimate partner. The more power the batterer has relative to his victim, the more effectively he can control her. To help ensure a significant power advantage, some batterers seek “disabled” women, who by definition are less “able” to protect themselves, especially from an abusive partner. He might also target women with disabilities hoping that these women will be more likely to long for the affections of a man who can be as charming as many batterers are on first impression.
Batterers resent and punish women with disabilities. On the one hand, a batterer might think that a woman with disabilities is less threatening than a woman without any disabilities. On the other hand, he resents her imperfections. He thinks he deserves to be with a woman who has more to offer. Consequently, he punishes her for having a disability. But the more hostile he becomes, the worse she feels about herself and the more likely that she wants to end the relationship. He can’t understand “how a woman with so little going for her could be so demanding” so he continues his attack on her self worth by saying something like “No man would ever want you with your disability. You should be grateful to have me.” This attack perpetuates a vicious cycle – the worse she feels about herself, the more hostile he becomes; the more hostile he becomes, the worse she feels about herself.
Batterers “create” disabilities in women. Many batterers fear that their victims will become independent and leave them. To reduce the probability of that happening, batterers try to impair their victims’ independence by manufacturing disabilities. For example, a batterer might seek to get his victim hooked on alcohol or other drugs, play mind games to make her doubt herself as a wife, or mother, or restrict her access to financial resources so that her ability to leave is compromised.
Batterers create the perception of a disability. Batterers cannot or will not tolerate their female partners’ independence, especially if that independence threatens their authority in the family. To maintain their power advantage, some batterers will try to convince family, friends or social services that she is flawed in some significant way. For example, he might try to make her appear to be an unfit mother by undermining her parenting or co-parenting. A common example involves batterers who claim that their ex-spouse is exhibiting “parental alienation syndrome” or “divorce-related malicious mother syndrome” even if she is only trying to protect her children from their abusive father. The fact that these “syndromes” have no scientific basis has not stopped batterers from citing them in custody battles as a way of “proving” that the mother of their children is suffering from a mental health disability and that he and his children are the ultimate victims of that disability. Unfortunately, this victim-blaming strategy has been successfully employed by many batterers and their attorneys.
Batterers exploit disabilities to separate their victims from social and legal services. For batterers to effectively control their victims, they need allies to side with them against their victims. Perhaps nowhere have batterers been more successful in strengthening their alliances than against women with documented disabilities. For example, the batterer who takes his victim to her medical and social service appointments, makes it difficult for her to feel comfortable reporting his abuse. In addition, the women who are most vulnerable to domestic and sexual violence, are those society approves of the least. For example, lesbians, prostitutes and drug addicts are reluctant to seek assistance because of the way society shames them for being who they are.
Batterers justify their abusive control as a necessary response to disabilities. As firm believers in a patriarchal culture, batterers believe that they are entitled to control their female partners. They often cite the best of intentions, suggesting that they are “only doing it for her own good” and “because I love her so much.” He doesn’t want “to watch her make a mess of her life.” They believe that women with documented disabilities provide further justification for their authoritative use of control since “she needs me to make the important decisions for her.”
Batterers claim that their own disabilities caused them to abuse. “I only hit her because I was drunk.” “I lost control of my temper.” “My anger got the best of me.” “I was diagnosed with an impulse control problem.” “I forgot to take my medication for bipolar disorder.” All of these excuses for abuse are attempts by the batterer to convince us that he is not responsible for his own violence. He wants us to believe that he is as much a victim of his own disease, condition or disability as she is of his abusive behavior.
Batterers threaten to inflict disabilities. Battering tends to get progressively worse over time without intervention. Batterers escalate the frequency and severity of their violence in an attempt to maintain control and dominance over their victims. If they feel as though they are losing control, they may threaten to seriously hurt or even kill their victims or the victims’ children. Often, these are not idle threats, as evidenced by an alarmingly high rate of domestic homicide.
Recommendations:
To effectively meet the needs of domestic and sexual violence victims with disabilities, we need to evaluate the attitudes, policies and procedures of all relevant stakeholders. Following is a partial list of recommendations:
1. Consider “relative,” not just “categorical” disabilities. “Categorical” disabilities refer to those that are generally recognized as impairments (e.g., speech impediments, paralysis). “Relative” disabilities refer to the power advantage that one person in a relationship has over the other person (e.g., batterers frequently are physically stronger than their victims and use that physical advantage for intimidation and control). Victims who are “categorically” disabled usually are also “relatively” disabled (when compared to the abuser). The concept of relative disability is also important when we consider the incidence of disabled adults who batter their non-disabled partners (e.g., a deaf man who batters his wife is “categorically” disabled but not “relatively” disabled when comparing his physical strength to that of his wife.)
2. Develop sensitivity to “circumstantial” disabilities. Even people with no documented disabilities may have circumstances that make them particularly vulnerable to their abuser. For example, a pregnant woman, especially in the later stages of pregnancy, would have greater difficulty fleeing from her abuser or protecting herself than she would if she were not pregnant. Other “circumstantial” disabilities include language barriers, lack of education, job skills or social supports, and membership in oppressed groups based on racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, or religious affiliations. All of these and other “circumstantial” disabilities serve as barriers between victims and the services they need to become safe and autonomous.
3. Explore your own attitudes regarding victims with disabilities. It is not unusual to be afraid of, and shy away from, people who have obvious disabilities. The typical batterer wants us to be repulsed by his victim’s disabilities so that he can maintain his isolation of, and control over, her. For us to help domestic violence victims with disabilities, we need to be aware of, and work through, our own feelings and reactions so that we don’t discourage those victims from coming forward. This is more difficult, though no less important, when we view the victim as responsible for her own disability (e.g., when she is a drug addict, rather than someone who was born with a disabling birth defect).
4. Understand and challenge the batterers’ justifications for the abuse. Batterers often cite their partners’ disabilities as an explanation for their abuse. A common example is the batterer who reported that “my wife has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder” to suggest that “if you had to live with my wife, you would do the same thing that I do.” These batterers want us to believe that the women’s deficiencies cause the men’s abusive behavior. We need to confront these justifications by teaching abusers that another person’s vulnerabilities are not an excuse for exploitation. Instead, they are opportunities for them to provide comfort. They need to learn that we will no longer tolerate their abuse under any circumstance.
5. Conduct routine screening for domestic and sexual violence. Organizations that serve people with documented disabilities should, as part of their assessment and service delivery, screen for interpersonal violence. Since the caretaker could very well be the abuser, employees need to use creative methods for interviewing their client without the caretaker present. Women’s crisis centers can help in developing effective interviewing strategies.
6. Realize that in some cases, the abuser is the one with the disability. Routine screening for interpersonal violence should also include questions to determine whether the caretaker is in need of services or protection. As one woman who was caring for her abusive visually impaired husband said, “I never thought I could ask for help. After all, who would believe that a blind man could hurt a woman with perfect sight? And I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, anyway. Maybe, if I did a better job of helping him, he wouldn’t get so frustrated with me.” When we discover a caretaker who has been abused, we need to be supportive and make the appropriate referrals for service.
7. Victim service agencies and batterer intervention providers need to conduct accessibility audits. With the help of organizations that specifically serve the needs of the disabled, victim service agencies can identify, and develop plans to address, barriers that render their services inaccessible to some victims. Solutions may include the installation of a ramp to the front door of a shelter, purchase of a TTY phone machine so that a hotline can field calls from people with hearing disabilities, and audio recording of the agency’s brochures for those with limited reading ability.
8. Develop meaningful relationships with other stakeholders. Organizations that work with domestic and sexual violence victims and their families need to form collaborative alliances with the many organizations that address the needs of people with various disabilities. Such collaboration should include cross-training and referral, policy development, case conferencing, joint advocacy efforts and participation on each other’s advisory boards.
9. Help the victim to develop an appropriate safety plan. More women are seriously hurt, even killed when they attempt to leave their abuser, than when they stay. Consequently, we have learned not to tell battered women to “just leave” without a well-thought out and carefully timed safety plan. Attempting to flee a batterer, can be even more difficult and risky for a woman who has impaired mobility or other disabilities. In addition, safety planning is important, not just for victims who are attempting to leave, but also for those who are at least temporarily choosing to stay with the abuser.
10. Focus on prevention efforts. To make society safer for women with disabilities we need to change at least two cultural attitudes. First, we need to promote a consistent message that domestic and sexual violence are always wrong, under any circumstance. No characteristic of victims justifies their being abused and no characteristic of abusers justifies their violence. Second, we need to remove the stigma attached to disabilities. People with disabilities are not second-class citizens with diminished rights. The fact is that we all have abilities and disabilities, strengths and weaknesses. We are all different, but we are all the same. We can celebrate the tremendous diversity among us, and be comforted with our even greater commonality. But at no point can we afford to view one group of us to be superior or more deserving than another.
• 15,000 to 19,000 people with developmental disabilities are raped each year in the United States.
• For individuals with psychiatric disabilities, the rate of violent criminal victimization including sexual assault was twice of that in the general population (8.2% vs. 3.1%).
• Eighty-three percent of women with a disability will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime.
To begin the discussion, we need a definition of “disability.” The Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA,” 1990) defines disability to mean “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of an individual.” Common examples of disabilities under this definition are mental retardation, confinement to a wheelchair, and sensory impairments such as blindness or deafness. Batterers define “disability” more broadly. To them, “disabled” is not only an adjective used to describe a group of people; it is also a goal of their abuse with any victim. In other words, batterers use a pattern of controlling behavior to “disable” their victims. Specifically, they seek to limit the ability of their victims to make independent choices. For those women who already have disabilities (as defined by the ADA), batterers might view them as convenient or particularly vulnerable targets.
Batterers’ disabling behavior (that we refer to as domestic and sexual violence) can have devastating and widespread effects on the lives of women. The abuse can adversely affect the woman’s physical health, sexual and reproductive autonomy, psychological functioning, emotional welfare, financial independence, occupational or educational life, relationships with family or friends, connections with her religious community, and her ability to access social, health or legal services (see the diagram below).
Strategies that batterers use to create or exploit disabilities in several areas of victims' lives:
To assist domestic violence victims with disabilities and to hold the perpetrators accountable for the harm they cause, we must understand the batterers’ motivation.
Batterers seek women with disabilities. Battering is the abuse of power to control an intimate partner. The more power the batterer has relative to his victim, the more effectively he can control her. To help ensure a significant power advantage, some batterers seek “disabled” women, who by definition are less “able” to protect themselves, especially from an abusive partner. He might also target women with disabilities hoping that these women will be more likely to long for the affections of a man who can be as charming as many batterers are on first impression.
Batterers resent and punish women with disabilities. On the one hand, a batterer might think that a woman with disabilities is less threatening than a woman without any disabilities. On the other hand, he resents her imperfections. He thinks he deserves to be with a woman who has more to offer. Consequently, he punishes her for having a disability. But the more hostile he becomes, the worse she feels about herself and the more likely that she wants to end the relationship. He can’t understand “how a woman with so little going for her could be so demanding” so he continues his attack on her self worth by saying something like “No man would ever want you with your disability. You should be grateful to have me.” This attack perpetuates a vicious cycle – the worse she feels about herself, the more hostile he becomes; the more hostile he becomes, the worse she feels about herself.
Batterers “create” disabilities in women. Many batterers fear that their victims will become independent and leave them. To reduce the probability of that happening, batterers try to impair their victims’ independence by manufacturing disabilities. For example, a batterer might seek to get his victim hooked on alcohol or other drugs, play mind games to make her doubt herself as a wife, or mother, or restrict her access to financial resources so that her ability to leave is compromised.
Batterers create the perception of a disability. Batterers cannot or will not tolerate their female partners’ independence, especially if that independence threatens their authority in the family. To maintain their power advantage, some batterers will try to convince family, friends or social services that she is flawed in some significant way. For example, he might try to make her appear to be an unfit mother by undermining her parenting or co-parenting. A common example involves batterers who claim that their ex-spouse is exhibiting “parental alienation syndrome” or “divorce-related malicious mother syndrome” even if she is only trying to protect her children from their abusive father. The fact that these “syndromes” have no scientific basis has not stopped batterers from citing them in custody battles as a way of “proving” that the mother of their children is suffering from a mental health disability and that he and his children are the ultimate victims of that disability. Unfortunately, this victim-blaming strategy has been successfully employed by many batterers and their attorneys.
Batterers exploit disabilities to separate their victims from social and legal services. For batterers to effectively control their victims, they need allies to side with them against their victims. Perhaps nowhere have batterers been more successful in strengthening their alliances than against women with documented disabilities. For example, the batterer who takes his victim to her medical and social service appointments, makes it difficult for her to feel comfortable reporting his abuse. In addition, the women who are most vulnerable to domestic and sexual violence, are those society approves of the least. For example, lesbians, prostitutes and drug addicts are reluctant to seek assistance because of the way society shames them for being who they are.
Batterers justify their abusive control as a necessary response to disabilities. As firm believers in a patriarchal culture, batterers believe that they are entitled to control their female partners. They often cite the best of intentions, suggesting that they are “only doing it for her own good” and “because I love her so much.” He doesn’t want “to watch her make a mess of her life.” They believe that women with documented disabilities provide further justification for their authoritative use of control since “she needs me to make the important decisions for her.”
Batterers claim that their own disabilities caused them to abuse. “I only hit her because I was drunk.” “I lost control of my temper.” “My anger got the best of me.” “I was diagnosed with an impulse control problem.” “I forgot to take my medication for bipolar disorder.” All of these excuses for abuse are attempts by the batterer to convince us that he is not responsible for his own violence. He wants us to believe that he is as much a victim of his own disease, condition or disability as she is of his abusive behavior.
Batterers threaten to inflict disabilities. Battering tends to get progressively worse over time without intervention. Batterers escalate the frequency and severity of their violence in an attempt to maintain control and dominance over their victims. If they feel as though they are losing control, they may threaten to seriously hurt or even kill their victims or the victims’ children. Often, these are not idle threats, as evidenced by an alarmingly high rate of domestic homicide.
Recommendations:
To effectively meet the needs of domestic and sexual violence victims with disabilities, we need to evaluate the attitudes, policies and procedures of all relevant stakeholders. Following is a partial list of recommendations:
1. Consider “relative,” not just “categorical” disabilities. “Categorical” disabilities refer to those that are generally recognized as impairments (e.g., speech impediments, paralysis). “Relative” disabilities refer to the power advantage that one person in a relationship has over the other person (e.g., batterers frequently are physically stronger than their victims and use that physical advantage for intimidation and control). Victims who are “categorically” disabled usually are also “relatively” disabled (when compared to the abuser). The concept of relative disability is also important when we consider the incidence of disabled adults who batter their non-disabled partners (e.g., a deaf man who batters his wife is “categorically” disabled but not “relatively” disabled when comparing his physical strength to that of his wife.)
2. Develop sensitivity to “circumstantial” disabilities. Even people with no documented disabilities may have circumstances that make them particularly vulnerable to their abuser. For example, a pregnant woman, especially in the later stages of pregnancy, would have greater difficulty fleeing from her abuser or protecting herself than she would if she were not pregnant. Other “circumstantial” disabilities include language barriers, lack of education, job skills or social supports, and membership in oppressed groups based on racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, or religious affiliations. All of these and other “circumstantial” disabilities serve as barriers between victims and the services they need to become safe and autonomous.
3. Explore your own attitudes regarding victims with disabilities. It is not unusual to be afraid of, and shy away from, people who have obvious disabilities. The typical batterer wants us to be repulsed by his victim’s disabilities so that he can maintain his isolation of, and control over, her. For us to help domestic violence victims with disabilities, we need to be aware of, and work through, our own feelings and reactions so that we don’t discourage those victims from coming forward. This is more difficult, though no less important, when we view the victim as responsible for her own disability (e.g., when she is a drug addict, rather than someone who was born with a disabling birth defect).
4. Understand and challenge the batterers’ justifications for the abuse. Batterers often cite their partners’ disabilities as an explanation for their abuse. A common example is the batterer who reported that “my wife has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder” to suggest that “if you had to live with my wife, you would do the same thing that I do.” These batterers want us to believe that the women’s deficiencies cause the men’s abusive behavior. We need to confront these justifications by teaching abusers that another person’s vulnerabilities are not an excuse for exploitation. Instead, they are opportunities for them to provide comfort. They need to learn that we will no longer tolerate their abuse under any circumstance.
5. Conduct routine screening for domestic and sexual violence. Organizations that serve people with documented disabilities should, as part of their assessment and service delivery, screen for interpersonal violence. Since the caretaker could very well be the abuser, employees need to use creative methods for interviewing their client without the caretaker present. Women’s crisis centers can help in developing effective interviewing strategies.
6. Realize that in some cases, the abuser is the one with the disability. Routine screening for interpersonal violence should also include questions to determine whether the caretaker is in need of services or protection. As one woman who was caring for her abusive visually impaired husband said, “I never thought I could ask for help. After all, who would believe that a blind man could hurt a woman with perfect sight? And I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, anyway. Maybe, if I did a better job of helping him, he wouldn’t get so frustrated with me.” When we discover a caretaker who has been abused, we need to be supportive and make the appropriate referrals for service.
7. Victim service agencies and batterer intervention providers need to conduct accessibility audits. With the help of organizations that specifically serve the needs of the disabled, victim service agencies can identify, and develop plans to address, barriers that render their services inaccessible to some victims. Solutions may include the installation of a ramp to the front door of a shelter, purchase of a TTY phone machine so that a hotline can field calls from people with hearing disabilities, and audio recording of the agency’s brochures for those with limited reading ability.
8. Develop meaningful relationships with other stakeholders. Organizations that work with domestic and sexual violence victims and their families need to form collaborative alliances with the many organizations that address the needs of people with various disabilities. Such collaboration should include cross-training and referral, policy development, case conferencing, joint advocacy efforts and participation on each other’s advisory boards.
9. Help the victim to develop an appropriate safety plan. More women are seriously hurt, even killed when they attempt to leave their abuser, than when they stay. Consequently, we have learned not to tell battered women to “just leave” without a well-thought out and carefully timed safety plan. Attempting to flee a batterer, can be even more difficult and risky for a woman who has impaired mobility or other disabilities. In addition, safety planning is important, not just for victims who are attempting to leave, but also for those who are at least temporarily choosing to stay with the abuser.
10. Focus on prevention efforts. To make society safer for women with disabilities we need to change at least two cultural attitudes. First, we need to promote a consistent message that domestic and sexual violence are always wrong, under any circumstance. No characteristic of victims justifies their being abused and no characteristic of abusers justifies their violence. Second, we need to remove the stigma attached to disabilities. People with disabilities are not second-class citizens with diminished rights. The fact is that we all have abilities and disabilities, strengths and weaknesses. We are all different, but we are all the same. We can celebrate the tremendous diversity among us, and be comforted with our even greater commonality. But at no point can we afford to view one group of us to be superior or more deserving than another.