The abuse of power exposes the power of abuse
(This article addresses the widespread impact of abuse that is perpetrated by someone in a position of authority – e.g., a teacher, judge, police officer, prison guard, priest, etc. Recommendations are offered for the perpetrator’s colleagues who have become secondary victims of the abuse.)
Being physically or sexually assaulted by a stranger is traumatic enough. To be assaulted by someone you know and trust can be even worse. After being assaulted by a stranger, you can go home for safety and comfort. But what if the abuser lives in your home? Where then do you go for that safety and comfort?
Stranger violence vs. intimate partner violence
The key difference between stranger violence and intimate partner violence is the presence of, and investment in, the relationship. With stranger violence, there is no relationship, so the victim’s reaction is both predictable and understandable. She or he will likely want the attacker to be arrested, prosecuted and held fully accountable for the abuse. The victim will also prefer not to have contact with the attacker again.
This is not necessarily the case with intimate partner violence. The victim’s investment in the relationship can change everything. Instead of having nothing to lose, she (usually she, sometimes he) may now have everything to lose. Specifically, she may be concerned with:
(1) Herself (e.g., she’s embarrassed, humiliated or confused; she’s concerned that she may have done something to “cause” the abuse; or she may fear for her safety, realizing that more women are seriously hurt, even killed when they attempt to leave than when they stay with an abusive partner);
(2) The abuser (e.g., he promised to change, he apologized, he offered to go to counseling with her, or she just doesn’t want to see the man she loves go to jail or lose his job);
(3) The children if she has any (e.g., the children might “identify with the aggressor” and hence blame her for breaking up the family, or the abuser has threatened to hurt or abduct the children if she calls the police or attempts to leave); and
(4) Other people (e.g., family members who have never seen the abuse might not believe her; clergy might tell her to go home and try to be a better wife; or she’s worried that if she leaves him, she’ll lose contact with the friends they share).
Those of us who address domestic and sexual violence need to understand that these are just a few of the many pressures influencing victims’ decision-making. If we don’t understand the context of the abuse, we are likely to doubt, criticize or even blame victims for their own victimization. For example, how often have we heard (or voiced) complaints that the victim recanted, changed her story, returned to the abuser, or even testified on his behalf against the prosecutor who is trying to protect her?
We might think “If that guy hit me, I would have been out of there in two seconds!!” Such a reaction comes from inappropriately applying a stranger violence standard to intimate partner violence. Of course we would leave in two seconds – we have nothing to lose because we have nothing invested in that relationship. But she does. And because of that investment, her ambivalence about coming forward makes much more sense.
When the abuse comes from within the system
A victim of abuse has a difficult enough time coming forward when the entire system is there to help. What happens though, when the abuser is part of that system, the very system designed to protect her? Imagine that you are one of the following:
1. An eight year-old choir boy who has been sexually assaulted by a “Man of God” and are trying to decide whether to go to another priest to disclose the abuse;
2. A 13 year-old student who wonders whether it is safe to go to one school teacher to disclose the sexual abuse perpetrated by another teacher;
3. A female inmate who has been sexually assaulted by a prison guard. You wonder what will happen to you if you become a snitch by reporting the abuse. Will the system protect you or accuse you of seducing the guard?
4. A domestic violence victim whose husband is a police officer. You are not sure that you can trust the other officers to come to your aid if your husband violates a restraining order; or
5. A victim advocate who has been sexually assaulted by a judge who is the most trusted and powerful person in your own court room.
If you were in any of these situations, would you have the courage to come forward or would you remain silent? How risky would it be to ask for help from the same system that employs the person who abused you?
Secondary victims
In addition to potentially silencing the victim, the presence of the abuser in the system affects how the system itself responds to the victim and to the abuser. Those who work with the abuser have been victimized as well. In effect, the system has been attacked from within, creating secondary victims out of its employees.
The experience of victims and secondary victims can be remarkably similar. For example, a victim of domestic violence does not expect her husband to attack her. Likewise, school teachers do not expect one of their own to sexually exploit underage students; court personnel do not expect a respected judge to attack victim advocates. Both the victims and the professionals are caught off guard and may be unsure of how they should respond.
Some of the same pressures on the victim that were described above also influence those who work in the system. Specifically, these professionals are understandably concerned with:
(1) Themselves (e.g., “What will happen if I confront my colleague and then have to continue to work with him/her?”);
(2) The abuser (e.g., “This is really out of character.” “He’s taken steps to make sure it won’t happen again.” “He’s said he’s sorry.” “He’s been punished enough, hasn’t he?”);
(3) Consumers of the system (e.g., “She is too valuable to lose as a teacher, officer, judge, etc.” “We need to reestablish stability in our place of work”);
(4) Other people (e.g., “How will my colleagues react if I take a stand against the alleged perpetrator?” “Others are offering support, maybe I’m over-reacting”).
Recommendations:
One of the worst outcomes of a case in which the abuser is part of “the system” is the system turning against itself – colleagues harshly criticizing each other for taking one side or the other. We need to recognize that this systemic breakdown is a very real possibility and take steps to guard against its damaging effects. Following is a partial list of recommendations.
1. See it, label it, and talk about it. Abuse thrives in secrecy. Be on the lookout for abuse perpetrated by colleagues. Be vocal about your agency’s or profession’s intolerance of that behavior. Consult with other professionals when you suspect abuse. Whatever you do, don’t remain silent.
2. Recognize the risks. Understanding the impact of “the abuse of power from within the system” helps to protect members of that system from its damaging effects. Increased awareness and understanding will better prepare professionals to support each other in confronting the abuse.
3. Responsibility. Remember that the only person who ever is responsible for the abuse is the perpetrator. The victim never is. We, as members of their community or profession, share responsibility for holding perpetrators accountable for their actions.
4. Be clear about the causes of abuse. To hold perpetrators fully accountable we need to recognize and challenge the excuses and explanations they use to avoid responsibility (e.g., “I only did it because I was drunk,” “She provoked me,” “I just lost control,” “I have difficulty managing my anger,” “I suffer from deviant arousal patterns,” etc.). Remember that abuse is a choice and that there never is a good enough reason to hurt someone.
5. Intra-agency policies. All stakeholders (e.g., law enforcement, criminal justice, education, victim advocacy, batterer intervention, etc.) need to adopt internal policies and procedures for the screening, identification and handling of their own employees who become abusive;
6. Interagency policies. Community coalitions need to draft Memoranda of Understanding that cover the interagency handling of cases involving abusers who work in their system;
7. Training. Professional training (both in-house and interdisciplinary) needs to be developed to raise awareness of, and develop proficiency in, identifying and dealing with abusers within their systems.
8. Vicarious traumatization. Professionals who work with trauma survivors often suffer ill effects of exposure to that work over a prolonged period of time. Workshops and conferences that deal with vicarious traumatization need to be expanded to deal specifically with cases in which the abuser is part of the system responding to the trauma.
9. Compassion for survivors of violence. Professionals who are exposed to abuse perpetrated by a colleague have an opportunity to more fully understand the experience of abuse victims. That increased understanding can help them to develop more effective strategies for intervening in other cases.
10. Recognize the need for prevention efforts. The fact that the news is filled with stories of professionals violating the boundaries of their students, employees, clients, patients, inmates, parishioners and other consumers shows that our society has failed to establish clear interpersonal boundaries, particularly sexual boundaries. The medical profession has adopted the simplest of principles that should be applied to all interpersonal interactions. That principle, the Hippocratic Oath, demands that we “First Do No Harm.” Promoting that standard might be the best place for us to start.
Being physically or sexually assaulted by a stranger is traumatic enough. To be assaulted by someone you know and trust can be even worse. After being assaulted by a stranger, you can go home for safety and comfort. But what if the abuser lives in your home? Where then do you go for that safety and comfort?
Stranger violence vs. intimate partner violence
The key difference between stranger violence and intimate partner violence is the presence of, and investment in, the relationship. With stranger violence, there is no relationship, so the victim’s reaction is both predictable and understandable. She or he will likely want the attacker to be arrested, prosecuted and held fully accountable for the abuse. The victim will also prefer not to have contact with the attacker again.
This is not necessarily the case with intimate partner violence. The victim’s investment in the relationship can change everything. Instead of having nothing to lose, she (usually she, sometimes he) may now have everything to lose. Specifically, she may be concerned with:
(1) Herself (e.g., she’s embarrassed, humiliated or confused; she’s concerned that she may have done something to “cause” the abuse; or she may fear for her safety, realizing that more women are seriously hurt, even killed when they attempt to leave than when they stay with an abusive partner);
(2) The abuser (e.g., he promised to change, he apologized, he offered to go to counseling with her, or she just doesn’t want to see the man she loves go to jail or lose his job);
(3) The children if she has any (e.g., the children might “identify with the aggressor” and hence blame her for breaking up the family, or the abuser has threatened to hurt or abduct the children if she calls the police or attempts to leave); and
(4) Other people (e.g., family members who have never seen the abuse might not believe her; clergy might tell her to go home and try to be a better wife; or she’s worried that if she leaves him, she’ll lose contact with the friends they share).
Those of us who address domestic and sexual violence need to understand that these are just a few of the many pressures influencing victims’ decision-making. If we don’t understand the context of the abuse, we are likely to doubt, criticize or even blame victims for their own victimization. For example, how often have we heard (or voiced) complaints that the victim recanted, changed her story, returned to the abuser, or even testified on his behalf against the prosecutor who is trying to protect her?
We might think “If that guy hit me, I would have been out of there in two seconds!!” Such a reaction comes from inappropriately applying a stranger violence standard to intimate partner violence. Of course we would leave in two seconds – we have nothing to lose because we have nothing invested in that relationship. But she does. And because of that investment, her ambivalence about coming forward makes much more sense.
When the abuse comes from within the system
A victim of abuse has a difficult enough time coming forward when the entire system is there to help. What happens though, when the abuser is part of that system, the very system designed to protect her? Imagine that you are one of the following:
1. An eight year-old choir boy who has been sexually assaulted by a “Man of God” and are trying to decide whether to go to another priest to disclose the abuse;
2. A 13 year-old student who wonders whether it is safe to go to one school teacher to disclose the sexual abuse perpetrated by another teacher;
3. A female inmate who has been sexually assaulted by a prison guard. You wonder what will happen to you if you become a snitch by reporting the abuse. Will the system protect you or accuse you of seducing the guard?
4. A domestic violence victim whose husband is a police officer. You are not sure that you can trust the other officers to come to your aid if your husband violates a restraining order; or
5. A victim advocate who has been sexually assaulted by a judge who is the most trusted and powerful person in your own court room.
If you were in any of these situations, would you have the courage to come forward or would you remain silent? How risky would it be to ask for help from the same system that employs the person who abused you?
Secondary victims
In addition to potentially silencing the victim, the presence of the abuser in the system affects how the system itself responds to the victim and to the abuser. Those who work with the abuser have been victimized as well. In effect, the system has been attacked from within, creating secondary victims out of its employees.
The experience of victims and secondary victims can be remarkably similar. For example, a victim of domestic violence does not expect her husband to attack her. Likewise, school teachers do not expect one of their own to sexually exploit underage students; court personnel do not expect a respected judge to attack victim advocates. Both the victims and the professionals are caught off guard and may be unsure of how they should respond.
Some of the same pressures on the victim that were described above also influence those who work in the system. Specifically, these professionals are understandably concerned with:
(1) Themselves (e.g., “What will happen if I confront my colleague and then have to continue to work with him/her?”);
(2) The abuser (e.g., “This is really out of character.” “He’s taken steps to make sure it won’t happen again.” “He’s said he’s sorry.” “He’s been punished enough, hasn’t he?”);
(3) Consumers of the system (e.g., “She is too valuable to lose as a teacher, officer, judge, etc.” “We need to reestablish stability in our place of work”);
(4) Other people (e.g., “How will my colleagues react if I take a stand against the alleged perpetrator?” “Others are offering support, maybe I’m over-reacting”).
Recommendations:
One of the worst outcomes of a case in which the abuser is part of “the system” is the system turning against itself – colleagues harshly criticizing each other for taking one side or the other. We need to recognize that this systemic breakdown is a very real possibility and take steps to guard against its damaging effects. Following is a partial list of recommendations.
1. See it, label it, and talk about it. Abuse thrives in secrecy. Be on the lookout for abuse perpetrated by colleagues. Be vocal about your agency’s or profession’s intolerance of that behavior. Consult with other professionals when you suspect abuse. Whatever you do, don’t remain silent.
2. Recognize the risks. Understanding the impact of “the abuse of power from within the system” helps to protect members of that system from its damaging effects. Increased awareness and understanding will better prepare professionals to support each other in confronting the abuse.
3. Responsibility. Remember that the only person who ever is responsible for the abuse is the perpetrator. The victim never is. We, as members of their community or profession, share responsibility for holding perpetrators accountable for their actions.
4. Be clear about the causes of abuse. To hold perpetrators fully accountable we need to recognize and challenge the excuses and explanations they use to avoid responsibility (e.g., “I only did it because I was drunk,” “She provoked me,” “I just lost control,” “I have difficulty managing my anger,” “I suffer from deviant arousal patterns,” etc.). Remember that abuse is a choice and that there never is a good enough reason to hurt someone.
5. Intra-agency policies. All stakeholders (e.g., law enforcement, criminal justice, education, victim advocacy, batterer intervention, etc.) need to adopt internal policies and procedures for the screening, identification and handling of their own employees who become abusive;
6. Interagency policies. Community coalitions need to draft Memoranda of Understanding that cover the interagency handling of cases involving abusers who work in their system;
7. Training. Professional training (both in-house and interdisciplinary) needs to be developed to raise awareness of, and develop proficiency in, identifying and dealing with abusers within their systems.
8. Vicarious traumatization. Professionals who work with trauma survivors often suffer ill effects of exposure to that work over a prolonged period of time. Workshops and conferences that deal with vicarious traumatization need to be expanded to deal specifically with cases in which the abuser is part of the system responding to the trauma.
9. Compassion for survivors of violence. Professionals who are exposed to abuse perpetrated by a colleague have an opportunity to more fully understand the experience of abuse victims. That increased understanding can help them to develop more effective strategies for intervening in other cases.
10. Recognize the need for prevention efforts. The fact that the news is filled with stories of professionals violating the boundaries of their students, employees, clients, patients, inmates, parishioners and other consumers shows that our society has failed to establish clear interpersonal boundaries, particularly sexual boundaries. The medical profession has adopted the simplest of principles that should be applied to all interpersonal interactions. That principle, the Hippocratic Oath, demands that we “First Do No Harm.” Promoting that standard might be the best place for us to start.