When your partner abuses you: Practice, Prevention & Public Health Crisis of Intimate Partner Violence, which took place on Feb. 13, was the first in a three-part lecture series hosted by the College of Arts and the Peace and Reconciliation Centre. This event consisted of several guest speakers talking about intimate partner violence, as well as a question-and-answer period with a panel consisting of the speakers, and other professionals working in fields such as police, education, and public services. The event was meant to start the conversation about intimate partner violence and educate the UFV community about this unfortunately common crisis.
The speaker who opened the event was Grand Chief Clarence Pennier of the Sto:lo community, who talked honestly about his time as a residential school student and the abuse and trauma that was borne from that experience. He touched on the intergenerational trauma and abuse that came as a result of learned behaviour.
Pennier remarked, “I had three sisters and five brothers. We grew up as strangers because we couldn’t talk to each other. We all became alcoholics. Most of them died alcoholics. I have one brother left. And we don’t talk about what happened.” His speech ended with the hopeful note that they were trying to change the system, but it was going to take a long time for that to happen.
After the opening, the panelists were each given about 15 minutes to speak on the topics they were passionate about. The first of these speakers, Amanda McCormick, director of the School Criminology and Criminal Justice, spoke on the evolution of the criminal justice system in response to intimate partner violence. She offered that, historically, intimate partner violence was considered a domestic issue and, therefore, not under the authority of the system to get involved, otherwise known as the blind-eye approach. This was upended in the the 1980s, when feminist movements proposed that it was a prevalent and serious problem. Since the ‘80s, there has been research into how to deal with it and changes to try and help, though many of these policy changes were not based on proper evidence. This was followed by the criminalization era, in which charges to abusers are recommended 80 per cent of the time. Another discussion point was the dropping rate of reporting. In 2004, 28 per cent of incidents were reported, which dropped to 22 per cent in 2009, and finally to 19 per cent in 2014, less than one-fifth of cases. Finally, she proposed the possible third era, in which better practices are trying to be implemented to help victims of intimate partner violence.
Indrani Mathure, a member of the Abbotsford Crown Counsel, spoke on the approach the Crown Counsel has to the files associated with intimate partner violence, as well as strangulation. She mentioned the historically poor job done when dealing with cases, and that they were trying to improve. She touched on the complexity of the files, which require specialized knowledge and skills to handle appropriately. Another main point of the speech was strangulation, when a partner uses extreme physical force to restrict airflow by grasping one’s throat. It is a major red flag for abusive partnerships and can cause lasting health risks to the victim. She also mentioned that strangulation requires more research, both on the long-term health effects and how it is dealt with by police.
Michele Giordano, a chair of Violence Against Women in Relationships (VAWIR) committee, touched on violence reporting and the resources in place for victims. She said that intimate partner violence is a major concern. She mentioned that while a third-party reporting system is in place for sexual assaults, there currently exists no such system for intimate partner violence reports. The importance of looking after oneself after an assault was crucial. When speaking of why systems of reporting are important, she said, “If we wait, death can happen.”
The final speaker was Catherine Smith, an assistant professor in the nursing (BSN) program at UFV. She spoke on intimate partner violence as a major public health problem. She introduced the concept of sexualized violence and stressed the importance of talking about issues such as these: “Not everyone speaks up, so we have to speak for them or speak with them.” She also mentioned that the World Health Orginization has catogorized violence against women to be a global health issue.
As an event, this was a very effective way to educate the public on the complex issue of intimate partner violence. However, the talk was incredibly cis-centric and heteronormative, despite the fact that this was a problem that touches every demographic, as stated by Steven Schroeder, an associate professor in the history department, at the beginning of the forum. In nearly every case, the abuser was spoken of with male language, and the victim with female language. While it is understandable why this was done, it does not negate the fact that the issue of intimate partner violence can show up in any partnership, regardless of if it is heterosexual or not.
Image: Nicholas Ashenhurst-Toews/The Cascade
