Written evidence submitted by the Lesbian & Gay Foundation (VAW 0023)
Introduction
[1] The Lesbian & Gay Foundation (www.lgf.org.uk) is a vibrant charity committed to achieving more positive outcomes for lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGB&T) people, with a wide portfolio of well-established services and new initiatives. The LGF is also the lead organisation of the Department of Health funded National LGB&T Partnership.
[2] The Lesbian and Gay Foundation is based in Manchester, and supports over 40,000 lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGB&T) people each year. In addition to a wide range of health and advocacy services, it also undertakes research, information provision and policy campaigning on a national scale. As a result, the Lesbian & Gay Foundation provides more direct services and resources to more LGB&T people than any other organisation of its kind in the UK. The LGF is reported by service users to be one of the first points of contact for them when they have been at a crisis point in their lives. We campaign for a fair and equal society where all lesbian, gay and bisexual people can achieve their full potential, and our mission is: ‘Ending Homophobia, Empowering People’.
Meeting the needs of LGB&T people with regards to VAWG
[3] We believe that the Government currently does not meet the needs of LGB&T people with regards to existing service provision in the area of sexual violence and domestic abuse. In addition, strategies and action plans for the prevention and investigation of VAWG do not reflect the experiences of LGB&T people. We will present a range of evidence to highlight marginalised issues in these areas.
[4] The following evidence has been taken from our publication ‘Beyond Babies & Breast Cancer – Expanding our understanding of women’s health needs’ (2013) available at http://www.lgf.org.uk/get-support/downloads/detail/?downloadid=274:
[5] One in four women in England will be a victim of domestic abuse at some point in her life. A common perception is that the perpetrators of this abuse are male and that therefore women who have relationships with women are at low or no risk. However, this assumption is not borne out by the facts – the largest ever survey of lesbian and bisexual women in England found that 25% of lesbian and bisexual women reported
having been a victim of domestic abuse; the same percentage as in the general population (Hunt & Fish, 2008). In two thirds of these cases the perpetrator was female. These reports of abuse included both psychological and physical abuse, with physical violence occurring in over half of the cases.
“There is very little information regarding domestic abuse within a lesbian relationship; everything seemed tailored to the heterosexual relationship, and I had to specifically look for information regarding my circumstances.”
(Ref: Hunt, R & Fish, J, Prescription for Change, Stonewall, UK, 2008)
[6] It is rare to find research which disaggregates information based on sexual orientation. However, one large-scale population based study did separate out the experiences of lesbian, bisexual and heterosexual women, with startling results. Lesbians were found to be slightly more likely than heterosexual women to be victims of sexual violence and to be victims of physical violence by a partner but slightly less likely to be a victim of rape. Just over 67% of lesbians who reported that they were a victim of violence from an intimate partner said that the perpetrator was also female. The most dramatic difference was between bisexual women and both their heterosexual and lesbian peers. Bisexual women were significantly more likely than lesbian or heterosexual women to become victims of intimate partner violence, sexual violence and rape. In total, the lifetime prevalence of rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner was 61% for bisexual women, nearly 44% for lesbians and 35% for heterosexual women.
(Ref: Walters, M L, Chen J, & Breiding, M J, The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 Findings on Victimization by Sexual Orientation, Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, USA, 2013.)
[7] “It is also important to recognize that women who are battered by their female partners may be accompanied by their batterers to the women’s bathroom, a women’s changing room, a doctor’s examining room and even a domestic violence shelter. Women have told stories of being asked about domestic violence by emergency room nurses while their violent partners, who were assumed to be a helpful friend or sister, looked on.”
(Ref: Burke, C., ‘Think, Re-think: Woman-to-woman domestic violence’, Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence Newsletter, May 1999, USA, 1999.)
[8] Most women’s refuges and other services for women fleeing domestic abuse are set up with the express aim of keeping out men, who may be the abusing partner of these women. However, similar safeguards are not always in place for women fleeing violence from a female partner, who may find that their abuser can gain easy access to the same services that they are accessing.
“Sometimes you were really invisible, especially if you were a dyke, it’s like ‘it’s only a women, that slapped you for God’s sake, it’s not a man,’ but at the end of the day, a slap is a slap, a kick is a kick. I just wanted someone to say ‘Oh God, are you OK?’”
(Ref: Alexander, N & Clare, L ‘You still fell different: The experience and meaning of women’s self-injury in the context of a lesbian or bisexual identity, Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, Vol 14, Issue 2, pp. 70-84, USA, 2004.)
[9] The following evidence comes from the National LGB&T Partnership, which comprises a number of organisations working with and on behalf of LGB&T people. It was collected to inform a joint response to the consultation on the draft guidance on ‘Domestic violence and abuse: identification and prevention’ carried out by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) between 2 August and 27 September 2013.
[10] Currently there is no strategic approach from prevention to detection and treatment of domestic abuse for LGB&T people to ensure effective support by housing, advice, health, social care services, etc. We need to take a comprehensive look at this and undertake more research in this area. Therefore, we recommend the development of a strategy to address LGB&T domestic violence that includes prevention, support and advocacy for victims, development of specialist services and perpetrator programmes.
[11] Sexual orientation and gender identity monitoring by all services working with victims and perpetrators of sexual violence and domestic abuse is crucial as it is impossible to determine accessibility of services and specific needs of LGB&T people without this. It allows organisations to better understand service users' access, experience and outcome, meaning services are better able to meet their needs. Similar points can be made about other protected groups and as such the Government should clearly state its commitment to equality and diversity monitoring. As often sexual orientation and gender identity are not monitored even when other characteristics are (e.g. age, ethnicity, gender, religion) this needs to be specifically mentioned.
[12] When reviewing and commissioning services local commissioners need to bear in mind that sexual violence and domestic abuse services might be best delivered as part of an integrated specialist service offer, e.g. by a LGB&T or BME organisation, and take the necessary steps to identify and meet needs in this regard.
[13] Information displays in waiting areas need to include LGB&T friendly material to make LGB&T people feel welcome and reduce barriers to accessing support services. Separate literature needs to be developed targeting LGBT victims and identifying LGBT specific weapons of power and control. For instance, many LGBT people do not realise that a threat to out them is a form of domestic abuse.
[14] There are very few domestic abuse services for people in same-sex relationships and often risk assessment procedures that the police and service providers use are not appropriate for same-sex couples. Therefore risk assessment procedures need to be improved in general and appropriate responses and understanding developed to ensure they meet the needs of victims of LGB&T domestic violence. Risk indicators, for instance, may not correlate in the same way as research indicates that LGB&T people are more likely to be victims of domestic violence in a first relationship and are more likely to escalate to weapons in a shorter time frame (due to similar body strength).
[15] There are a range of issues in relation to accommodation for LGB&T victims of sexual violence and domestic abuse:
- Female services and accommodation not being appropriate for trans women for example because of a joint use of shared areas. This can make both trans women and other residents feel uncomfortable, especially if other women in the refuge are hostile.
- Many refuge workers do not know how to respond to requests for housing for trans women. It is important that services are trained to respond appropriately and sensitively to trans, lesbian and bisexual women and meet their legal obligations under the Equality Act 2010.
- There being a lack of refuge accommodation for gay or bisexual men fleeing domestic abuse as most services cater exclusively to women.
- LGB&T specific refuges need to be developed to meet the specific needs of LGB&T victim’s of domestic violence who may face homophobic or transphobic bullying in mainstream provision where staff often don’t know how to deal with LGB&T issues.
[16] Sexual violence and domestic abuse service providers should not make assumptions about the gender of the perpetrator or the nature of the relationship in order not to put up barriers to disclosure for LGB&T people. This also includes not assuming assume that the women who looks butch is automatically the perpetrator and the women who looks femme is automatically the victim. Staff need to be trained in the dynamics of LGB&T domestic violence including recognising the impact of internalised homophobia and trans phobia and using culturally competent tools such as, for instance, the same sex power and control wheel.
[17] Often domestic abuse is presented as an issue for young people in terms of parental or sexual relationships. This does not take into account that LGB&T young people living in familial homes have a greater likelihood of suffering domestic abuse at the hands of siblings. LGB&T youth homelessness is directly correlated to experiences of coming out and domestic violence from siblings and family members (see Guasp, 2012). While there is no similar research in relation to trans youth homelessness specifically, we would expect similar challenges in relation to non-acceptance of their gender identity.
[18] Again, in terms of ongoing risk assessment this needs to be appropriate for LGB&T people. All agencies carrying out risk assessments need training in same sex domestic violence to ensure they understand how risk correlates and can identify victim’s of same sex domestic violence at very high risk and refer in to MARACS.
[19] The Government needs to make sure that programmes for perpetrators are appropriate for perpetrators in same-sex relationships, too. This also includes female perpetrators. Current Perpetrator programmes such as the IDAP programme are aimed at heterosexual male perpetrators and recognise that the main causal factor behind heterosexual domestic violence is male privilege. Programmes need to be developed for perpetrators of same sex domestic violence recognising the impact of heterosexism and internalised homophobia. There are programmes in the USA that could be piloted here.
[20] Considering that alcohol and substance use is a contributing factor (but not a cause!) in domestic abuse we need to include treatment of drug and substance use as part of wider programmes to deal with domestic abuse.
[21] Police and legal profession also need to ensure that staff are trained in domestic abuse, especially in terms of same-sex relationships and LGB&T people to prevent abusers using sexual orientation or gender identity against their (ex) partners. This might be relevant, for instance, in custody disputes where trans individuals have gone into same-sex relationships following relationship break down and their ex partners are trying to keep children away from the new relationship. It is crucial here that professionals do not apply oppressive assumptions that serve to further abuse LGB&T people experiencing domestic violence. All advice and counsel needs to be neutral and non-partisan.
[22] When domestic abuse occurs in same-sex relationships it can be difficult to identify who is the perpetrator and who is the victim due to resistance or self-defence violence. Research and intervention programmes in the United States have developed assessment tools for working with same sex domestic violence.
[23] We recommend that resources are made available for a number of pilot projects looking at service provision for victims and perpetrators of LGB&T domestic violence. Interventions should include group work programmes for victims that enable them to identify power and control and internalised homophobia, safety planning and advocacy, specialist refuge provision and perpetrator programmes. Interventions to deliver specialist training to mainstream service providers on LGB&T domestic violence that include assessing risk should also be funded. There is enough research on the prevalence of domestic abuse in same-sex relationships. What is needed is an evaluation of pilot projects and interventions to gather evidence on what works. We have limited evidence from a project undertaken by The Lesbian & Gay Foundation with funding from the Home Office that offering LGB&T specific counselling to gay or bisexual men who have experienced domestic abuse or sexual violence significantly improves clients’ mental health. 100% of the 65 men who have completed therapy at the LGF noticed a significant improvement in their overall mental health and wellbeing as measured by the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation Information Monitoring System with pre-therapy scores reducing by at least 50%. We would expect to see similar results for LGB&T specific counselling to lesbian or bisexual women.
[24] Some useful research findings re LGB&T and domestic abuse:
- Trans (64%) people were far more likely than other groups of LGBT People to report Domestic Violence and Abuse (Count me In Too Report by Kath Browne and Spectrum LGBT Forum Brighton)
- 48% of respondents experienced some form of domestic abuse at home while adolescents; 54% experienced some form of domestic abuse from a partner or spouse and 60% experienced some form of domestic abuse from family members. (Engendered Penalties Report 2004 by Press For Change)
- 80% of respondents stated that they had experienced emotionally, sexually, or physically abusive behaviour by a partner or ex-partner. Although 80% of respondents identified having experienced some form of abusive behaviour from a partner or ex-partner, only 60% of respondents recognised the behaviour as domestic abuse. (Out of Sight, Out of Mind? Report by Scottish Transgender Alliance and The Scottish LGBT Domestic Abuse Project).
- There is also a lack of research on sibling violence, especially with regards to the impact of this on LGB&T people and youth homelessness.
LGB&T asylum seekers and VAWG
[25] In our experience current asylum policies are weighted against women and against LGB&T people and as such inadequate to identify valid grounds for asylum for these groups. We have supported a significant number of lesbian or bisexual women asylum seekers who have had claims rejected despite having faced severe VAWG - often especially as a result of their sexual orientation (e.g. corrective rape) -in their country of origin, and being active in local groups such as the Lesbian Immigration Support Group (LISG) or the LGF’s Stepping Stones group. We believe that this is linked to the ‘culture of disbelief’ in the Home Office when it comes to women’s asylum claims that has been identified by research. UK Border Agency case owners fail to understand the nature of violence that women might flee from and this leads to case owners doubting the credibility of the claim, and then refusing the woman’s request for asylum. Equally, often asylum seekers are disbelieved when they disclose a minority sexual orientation, which compounds the systemic bias against lesbian and bisexual asylum seekers.
[26] Further problems which hinder a fair hearing of women’s claims include inadequate levels of information regarding the situation in the country of origin, and barriers to disclosure such as lack of access to female interviewers and interpreters. Furthermore, problems with the quality of decision making on asylum claims are
compounded by a lack of quality legal advice. Without good legal representation,
women struggle to put their cases effectively or challenge initial decisions correctly. The legal arguments around gender-related persecution can be complex and can founder if the adviser is not up to date on case law. Finding legal representation is increasingly difficult since the closure of large providers such as Refugee & Migrant Justice in 2010 and the Immigration Advisory Service in 2011. This problem is set to worsen under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) which further undermines the availability of legal representation. Under this Act, while legal aid remains for asylum cases it is removed for immigration cases. This means that providers are likely to reduce in number and so there will be a knock-on effect for people seeking representation for asylum claims, and the number of women left without legal representation will increase
[27] Key facts on women seeking asylum include the following (taken from UK Feminista ‘Justice and Rights for Women’ briefing available at http://ukfeminista.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Justice-and-Rights-for-Women.pdf):
- Between 5,000 and 7,000 women come to the UK seeking asylum in their own right each year, and recent research suggests that nearly half of these women have experienced rape (Women for Refugee Women). Two thirds of the women in that study had experienced gender related persecution of some kind, including female genital mutilation, forced prostitution or forced marriage. These women are seeking asylum from serious human rights but this is not recognised.
- Three quarters of women who claim asylum are refused at first decision. In one recent study by Women for Refugee Women, of those refused asylum, 25% had been detained. 67% were made destitute, and more than half had contemplated suicide.
- Problems in initial decision-making by the Home Office are illustrated by the number of initial decisions which are overturned in the courts when women go to appeal. Between 35% and 41% of initial decisions on women’s cases were overturned at appeal in 2011. There was a significant difference between the successful appeals in women’s asylum claims and men’s asylum claims, of which only 26% are overturned at appeal.
- Further resources:
5 March 2014
1