Stalking Many women are stalked by their former husbands or former bfs.

. Publisized cases of stalking would be patricia allen from Ottawa. She was hunted down by her estranged husband, he shot her thru the chest with a crossbow in 92. Terry-lyn bab from Winnipeg was stalked and harassed for a year and killed by a man from a hospital. American study found that 8% of women and 2% of men said they have been stalked with a high degree of fear at some time in their life. Another study done in England and wales found that 19% of women and 12% of men were victims of stalking in their lifetime. Another study done in aussie, found that 16% of women had been stalked by a man in their lifetime. Canada- 2004 GSS found that 11% of women were stalked in the previous 5 yrs in a way that caused them to fear for their safety. Or the safety of someone known to them. This 11% figure is based on the legal cad defn. Defining stalking: a knowing, purposeful course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to fear bodily injury or death to him- or herself or a member of his or her immediate fmly. Wallace defn. Wallace divides this defn into 6 key elements Knowing: stalker must know that the victim will be fearful or being injured. Purposeful: acts must be done consciously and that a reasonable person would know to be fear inducing. Course of conduct: more than a single act, not just one act more than one time. Reasonable person: what would a reasonable person feel having undergone the victims experience. Fear of injury or death: victim must fear being injured or killed. Victim or immediate fmly: the acts are toward the victim or the victims fmly.

Anti stalking legislation Anti stalking laws called criminal harassment was passed in cad parliament in 1993. Law was intended to protect ppl living in fear of someone that is following them, harassing them and intimidating them. These ppl are often women.

Can cause a victim to fear for their safety in the absence of direct threats. Having someone sitting outside your house in their car etc. The implied threat of injury for these actions holds the potential for substantial psychological harm. It can really mess with someones head Law punishes the harm that has already been perpetrated. Even though no kind of attack the law punishes the psychological harm that has already been perpetrated by these actions. The law or criminal harassment under Section 264 of the criminal code states No person shall, w/o lawful authority and knowing that another person is harassed or recklessly as to whether the other person is harassed, engaged in conduct referred to in subsection 2) that causes that other person reasonably, in all the circumstances to fear for their safety or the safety of anyone known to them. Dont mem subsection for test. Just understand it.

(2) the conduct mentioned in subsection (1) consists of Repeatedly following from place to place the other person or anyone known to them. Repeatedly communicating with directly or indirectly the other person or anyone known to them. Phone calls, coming up to you in person, email, letters etc. Besetting (surrounding) or watching the dwelling house or place where the other person or anyone known to them resides, works carries on business or happen to be, or Engaging in threatening conduct directed at the other person or any member of their fmly. Differences from cad law and wallaces defn: unlike wallaces defn (iv) does apply to one time acts. 1,2,3 includes anyone known to the victim in this defn. wallaces defn is anyone in your immediate fmly. These are the 2 difference. 10 years imprisonment or a fine for punishment. Ppl who were charged with this were prohibited from using, owning a firearm etc as a condition of getting bail. Another condition is that they cant go to a particular place or a certain person. This law allows something to do be b4 something happened which is a more progressive law

Forms of stalking The most common form for male victims was being intimidated or threatened.

Relationship to Stalker Most victims know their stalker. 23% of victims were stalked by friends. Most common perp rship were friends. 17% by current or ex partners. 14% by persons known by sight only 18% by co-workers, neighbours and other relatives. Less than 25% were stalked by a stranger. We tend to think that stalking would be by a stranger but its not the most common.

Risk markers of stalking Young females have the highest risk. 2004 GSS 10% of cad women 15-24 reported some form of stalking in the previous yr. for a one year rate, that is high Aboriginal person had twice the risk of being stalked in the previous yr. Looked at marital status in gss, divorced and single women had the highest rates.

Fmly violence in vulnerable populations Vulnerable pops: groups of individuals who share some common characteristic not held by the rest of the pop and who are uniquely vulnerable with respect to risk, and or experiences surrounding violence.

Gays and lesbians- vulnerable pop Very little research. Some of them argue that lesbians are more violent than gay men. Others argue that gay men are more violent than lesbians. There is no agreement on this

The types of partner violence experienced in these groups are all diff kinds. One additional group is homophobic control. Which is derived from work on lesbian violence. But can apply to both. This refers to threatening to tell friends or fmly that the victim is gay or lesbian, telling the victim that he or she deserves all that they get (meaning the abuse) b/c they are gay or lesbian, and reminding them that they have no options b/c the homophobic world wont help them. This is really controlling the person by using sexuality against them. Been noted that forced sexual intercourse appears to be a prob particularly among gay men. Additional factors to make it difficult to get out rship if they are gay or lesbians: Gay or lesbians with hiv or aids may feel that their partner is the only person who will accept them and be supportive of them. Might stay for this reason. If the abuser has hiv or aids the victims may feel remorseful about reporting their partner or leaving them. Reason being that they know leaving the partner may be potentially damaging to their health. Abuser may prevent victim from disclosing or leaving the rship by threatening to out the victim. outing: which means disclosing the victims sexual preference for those who have not come out yet. Short of services for gays and lesbians. Victims may suffer more humiliation from behaviours from some homophobic attitudes of some police officers, judges etc.

Victims with disabilities Both physical and mental impairments. Physical disability: physiological disorders of conditions, disfigurement or loss of the use of any body system. Ex. Cerebral palsy, epilepsy, MS, Aids or HIV, cancer, heart disease, diabetes etc. Mental impairments: any mental or psych disorder learning disorders, emo illnesses etc. Some research indicates that children and adults that have developmental disabilities (a medical or physical incapacity that arises before adulthood, and usually lasts throughout life cerebral palsy) and other severe disabilities have as much as 5x the rate of violent victimization thats compared to the gen pop. This is a very elevated rate. This violence that they experience is less likely to be reported compared to the violence that happens to the rest of the pop. Less likely to have prosecutions and convictions. One of the major probs is underreporting. Very big issue. There may be

communication barriers, not easy for them to report victimization. They may have mobility barriers- getting to place to report can be challenging. Be unable to report b/c of a mental reason. Also some agencies dont report if the person had a disability, this reflects the lack of awareness of this pop being vulnerable to victimization. Persons with disabilities living in institutions have a greater risk of victimization. They have a double the rate compared to their counterparts that arent institutionalized. The example of physical child abuse: some studies found that disabilities are risk factors for PCA- can contribute to risk. Other studies dont find it as a risk factor. One study in the US based on national rep sample of 35 child protection agencies. They found that the rate of violence was almost twice as high for children with disabilities. Most common disabilities that experience violence was some kind of emo disturbance, learning disability, physical health prob, speech or lang delay or impairment. Major difficulty in interpreting these cases which came first. For 47% of maltreated kids with disabilities the disability directed contributed to the abuse. In nearly half the cases it was a risk factor for the abuse For 37% in fewer cases the abuse presumably caused the disability or contributed to it. The abuse happened b4 it. Disability can lead and result to abuse**

The example of partner violence against women with disabilities Stereotype out there that women with disabilities dont have rships. This is of course not true. The prevalence rates were 4.9% w/ disabilities compared to 3.9% w/o disabilities. Men who espouse patriarchy and sexual proprietariness need to receive the msg that such ideologies are inappropriate and along with violence, such behaviours toward women, including women with disabilities, will not be tolerated. Not going to be asked about this.

HIV/AIDS Victims of rape now have the additional worry whether or not they are infected with HIV. If it wasnt bad enough this adds and additional element of psych abuse to the act. Its been noted that sexually assaulted children are at greater risk of acquiring HIV. Its bc the assaults are more likely to be repeated over a long period of time. Children are at greater risk of injury during penetration.

Persons who are already hiv positive and experiencing some form of violence may be less likely to report it given the stress of reporting the crime. The stress associated with going to the police, going to legal help etc.

Aboriginal women (Nov. 17th, 2011 Contd) Wallace includes a statement: violence on native American tribal lands is one of the most pressing issues on modern society. Aboriginal women are 8x more likely to be killed by their partner There hasnt been much research on this pop either. It is starting to increase but not too much to report. Colonization theory: no body tested this theory and also risk factors. Things that make them vulnerable: high rates of alc abuse, having larger fmly sizes are all risk factors to be examined. If colonization theory is true you will see a high risk of these risk factors. It suggests that something else is going on that leads to a high risk of violence Aboriginal women more likely to be young, lower levels of edu, be unemployed, have partner unemployed, living common law, living in rural era, have been married, partner that prevents their income access, have partner that abused alc, large fmly size. cross-tabulation table.

Watched documentary on abuse amongst those living on a reserve in Manitoba and the actions that are taken to help the perpetrators and victims. How residential schools affected adults mentally and psychologically which caused them to commit some abuse crimes against their own children etc. CHCH focussed on helping offenders by keeping them in the community. Assessment teams and whole community with dealing with offenders. Save government $ by not jailing offenders One way of trying to bring in Aboriginal culture when helping offenders.