British Psychological Society response to the Home Office. Introducing a stalking protection order

Transcription

1 response to the Home Office About the Society The, incorporated by Royal Charter, is the learned and professional body for psychologists in the United Kingdom. We are a registered charity with a total membership of just over 50,000. Under its Royal Charter, the objective of the is "to promote the advancement and diffusion of the knowledge of psychology pure and applied and especially to promote the efficiency and usefulness of members by setting up a high standard of professional education and knowledge". We are committed to providing and disseminating evidence-based expertise and advice, engaging with policy and decision makers, and promoting the highest standards in learning and teaching, professional practice and research. The is an examining body granting certificates and diplomas in specialist areas of professional applied psychology. Publication and Queries We are content for our response, as well as our name and address, to be made public. We are also content for the Home Office to contact us in the future in relation to this inquiry. Please direct all queries to:- Joe Liardet, Policy Advice Administrator (Consultations) The, 48 Princess Road East, Leicester, LE1 7DR consult@bps.org.uk Tel: About this Response This response was led for the by: Dr Lorraine Sheridan CPsychol, Division of Forensic Psychology With contributions from: Dr Adrian Scott CPsychol AFBPsS, Division of Forensic Psychology Dr Simon Duff CPsychol AFBPsS, Division of Forensic Psychology Kaye Thomas CPsychol AFBPsS, Division of Forensic Psychology We hope that you find our comments useful. Dr Ian Gargan CPsychol AFBPsS Chair, Professional Practice Board 1

2 response to the Home Office Are there orders or injunctions already available that could be used to better effect to address stalking? Do such measures provide sufficient protection to victims of stalking and in particular victims of stranger stalking in advance of a prosecution, or if a prosecution is not yet possible? 1a. The Society is not aware of any orders that currently exist to effectively manage the risk posed to victims of stranger stalking prior to the point of prosecution. It is our understanding that the effectiveness of existing orders and injunctions is somewhat limited in relation to this victim group. It may be that their limited flexibility is a consequence of their implementation once the perpetrator is already entrenched in their fixation on the victim. Either way, the critical issue will be the early identification, risk assessment and management of the perpetrator and therefore of the stalking behavior. Are there orders or injunctions already available that could be used to better effect to address stalking? Do you have experience of the use of currently available civil measures in this way? 1b. Again, The Society is unaware of any existing orders or injunctions that could be improved upon in relation to this victim group. Where we have observed the use of civil measures in relation to stranger stalking, we have not seen a great deal of success. Civil measures imposed on stalkers, particularly mentally ill stalkers, would appear to have limited utility. Many mentally ill stalkers are so fixated on their campaign that civil injunctions are not viewed by the stalker as a meaningful deterrent. In their Australian study of persistent stalkers, McEwan et al. (2009) noted that some were subject to new charges relating to their behaviour even whilst they are being managed under court order for the original stalking offence. Members of the Society have provided input into cases where breaches of civil injunctions were not acted upon, which of course undermines their utility. What do you see as the restrictions or deficiencies in the use of the currently available measures? 2. Psychological research suggests that legal sanctions may be effective in bringing some stalkers permanently to abandon their pursuit of the victim. However, such interventions often fail because the fundamental problems driving the stalking behavior remain unexplored and unresolved (MacKenzie & James, 2011). The Society has concerns regarding applying civil and criminal measures in isolation from other measures, and treating all stalkers similarly. Stalkers may engage in near identical stalking behaviours, but their motivations will differ widely. For example, some may be mentally disordered and believe that they are in a relationship with the target, others will be lonely individuals with poor social functioning who intend no harm, and still 2

3 others will stalk with dangerous (even sadistically-based) intentions (Sheridan & Boon, 2002). Taking a one size fits all approach to managing stalking behaviour is not advised given that the now broad and detailed literature suggests that such interventions may not only fail to protect the victim, but in some cases, exacerbate the stalking behaviour (Benitez et al, 2010; Mullen et al., 2006; Montesino, 1993). The confidence in the protection afforded by such orders may be further diminished by a reluctance of the police to react to reported episodes of continuing stalking and breaches of orders (Baum et al., 2009; Pathé et al., 2004, and personal experience of Society members noted in our response to 1b above). While orders and injunctions can be effective in bringing an end to stalking behaviours in suitably chosen cases (Meloy et al., 1997), in some situations they have the potential to offer a false sense of security for victims, especially when they are not enforced consistently, or when their mere existence has the potential to enrage the perpetrator and exacerbate the very behaviour they aim to discourage. As such, it is recommended that the basic subtype of stalker be identified as and when possible before considering the use of any existing or future measure. What do you see as the additional features a new Stalking Protection Order might have in order to enhance the range of options available to protect victims? 3. The Society welcomes the new order will seek to offer interim protection to victims. This is vitally important as one of the main issues faced by police officers is the lack of available avenues for early intervention in relation to stalking cases. Research reveals that police officers are sometimes forced to charge perpetrators with less serious offences in order to provide protection to the victim sooner rather than later (Willis & McMahon, 2000), and Society members have personally listened to the frustration voiced by police officers who currently feel that their hands are tied. The Society has the following recommendations concerning additional features that a new stalking Protection Order could consider: Stalking Protection Orders could take into consideration the possible online aspects of stranger stalking and consider how restrictions/blocks can be placed on online activities that may be linked to further stalking of the victim. Stalking Protection Orders should take into consideration both genders as potential victims and acknowledge that either gender can be stalked by either gender. This may be useful in identifying the kinds of different behaviours that could be triggers for identifying the early stages of stalking, as research has demonstrated that including only behaviours traditionally recognized as male stalking behaviours can skew perceptions of a stalking case (Langhinrichsen-Rohling, 2012). As noted above, there are some stalking situations and perpetrators that may be effectively managed by way of early intervention; such is offered by a Stalking Protection Order. However, the stalking typology research base suggests that such interventions should be used carefully, will not be effective in all cases, and may in fact increase the risk posed in some circumstances. Thus whilst such orders are likely to enhance the range of options available to the victim and the police, they should be used with caution and only following an assessment of stalker type. This should be stated in the paperwork that supports any Stalking Protection Order. 3

4 What restrictions should it be possible to place on a perpetrator to help protect victims through a civil order (new or existing)? 4. The Society recommends that any useful order must have a degree of flexibility so that it can be used to prevent the perpetrator from engaging in whatever types of unwanted intrusive behaviour he or she is engaged in. It must be noted that stalkers are a particularly resourceful set of offenders who have demonstrated themselves as able to effectively bypass many forms of legal and other restrictions and obstacles. Stalkers have been known to continue their campaigns from prison and will frequently recruit third parties (wittingly or unwittingly) to aid them (Mullen et al., 2009). Restrictions should include actual or attempted: physical contact/approach, any form of communication, any form of monitoring, any form of impersonation, contacting family/friends/colleagues of the victim, and engaging other individuals to carry out any of these forms of activity. What positive requirements, if any, could be placed on a perpetrator to help break the fixated nature of their offending at an early stage that could be included in a Stalking Protection Order? 5. The Society recommends the following positive requirements that cover two primary areas: I. Psychological assessment and intervention, including support from specialist personality disorder services where appropriate. Given the problems that arise in applying antistalking laws, legal provisions should not be relied upon at the expense of acknowledgement and consideration of the personality and psychological factors underpinning the behavior (Mullen et al., 2006). It is important that the complexity of stalking behavior is understood and addressed via suitable therapeutic and behavioral interventions, in light of the differences in motivation and the different domains of risk and potential harm that stalking covers. II. Mental health assessment and intervention. It has been suggested that mental health provisions should be included in all anti-stalking legislation (Mullen et al., 2009) and even that all stalkers should undergo mental health evaluations (Stocker & Nielssen, 2000). This may be particularly relevant here given that stranger stalkers, for whom the protection order is designed to target, are those most likely to present with psychiatric disorders. In Mohandie et al. s (2006) study of 1,005 stalkers, the majority of stranger stalkers were male and mentally ill. Very few abused drugs/alcohol or had violent criminal records. It should be noted that many stranger stalkers may not be previously known to the police, further underling the requirement for assessment and possibly a mental health intervention. Mohandie s data revealed that among this group, one third were violent towards a person or property. However, the violence tended to take place following many other stalking behaviours. This offers another strand of evidential support for early and appropriate intervention. 4

5 If we were to introduce a Stalking Protection Order, what should the penalty be for breaching such an order: should it be punishable as contempt of court and/or as a criminal offence? 6. The Society has no comment to make. Do you think any existing civil order in another area would be a useful model for any Stalking Protection Order? 7. The Society has no comment to make. Should any new order specifically protect victims of harassment as well as of stalking? 8. Although harassment and stalking are separated within legal fields, they are less distinct in the minds of psychology researchers and practitioners, who tend to view stalking as a subtype of harassment. There is a large literature on how stalking should be defined, given that it is not easy to do so. Stalking related activities are thought to exist along a continuum of behaviours, ranging from innocuous courtship behaviours, to intrusive and harassing behaviours, to stalking (Lambert, et al., 2013; Langhinrichsen-Rohling, et al., 2000; Yanowitz, 2006). What is legally understood to represent harassment (e.g. sexual harassment, harassment following a dispute among neighbours) can quickly evolve into stalking. As such, it would only be necessary to specifically protect victims of harassment if the operation of the new order somehow excluded victims of harassment. What are the main challenges in identifying cases of stalking at an early stage (as opposed to harassment)? 9. We are aware that stalking is a complex phenomenon, incorporating a wide range of behaviours that vary in intensity and severity, and as such it proves a difficult task to define and code stalking behaviours without being overly prescriptive (McEwan et al., 2007; Sheridan et al., 2003). Training for frontline staff would seem key in enabling them to effectively identify a course of conduct as stalking. The Society welcomes the recent uptake of stalking training by police officers around the UK. It is also important that victims are able to self-identify as such, that family and friends are supportive rather than dismissive, and likewise that the police are supportive rather than dismissive. Only then will it be possible for any new order to be implemented as intended, prior to the perpetrator becoming entrenched in their fixation on the victim. The increasing use of internet technologies offer additional challenges with regard to the early identification of stalking cases as perpetrators have the ability to indirectly monitor their victims. A great deal of work may have taken place before the victim becomes aware of the situation. This activity may have been persistent, may have formed a pattern, but may not have come to the attention of the victim, yet it forms the basis for further, more intelligent stalking. 5

6 Other challenges include: Victims may not record instances of behaviour that contribute to the overall pattern and persistence of that behaviour during the early stages of stalking as it may be perceived as something else (romantic interest, coincidence, there being some other possible explanation) other than stalking or pre-stalking behaviour. Stalking may have its roots in an interaction between perpetrator and victim, and in some cases the victim inadvertently contributes to the perpetrator s goal, fantasies, delusions, and/or perceptions. This is not to blame victims, but rather to understand that sometimes stalking may only develop in particular circumstances where a victim responds in particular ways to the stalker. In other cases, no previous interaction will be necessary to trigger the stalking. Triggers for stalking are myriad and very difficult to predict. As stalking is defined largely by the victim and the impact on the victim it is not easy to have a standardised criminal threshold so as to recognise when an individual is about to become a stalker or when they have just passed a legal or moral threshold. What more could be done to support the effective gathering of evidence to bring stalking charges? 10. It is important that the victim keep a record (e.g. a diary) of the stalker s activities, together with any supporting documents (e.g., s, text messages etc.), however offensive these may be. Stalking may be described as chronic, and many other forms of interpersonal violence can be described as acute. In more acute acts, it is easier to identify when a crime has been committed (e.g. an assault has occurred, a bag has been stolen) and often just one instance of the problem occurs. In the case of stalking, many individual stalker activities comprise the phenomenon and the victim must record these in one place in order to be able to present a full picture of what is occurring. Piecemeal reporting to different authorities and different members of staff (e.g. at a police station) do not create a convincing case. Reporting systems need to allow the collation of stalking activities (some of which may only be recognised as part of the stalking in retrospect). Victims need to understand that behaviours that are on the face of it innocuous and lawful (e.g. the offender walking past their house, the offender asking the victim s friends or family about them), are reportable as problematic when experienced within a case of stalking. The Society also recommends that a greater understanding is required among professionals as regards what is meant by fear and distress. This would help them identify individual victims who are being stalked at a level where intervention is necessary. For example, professionals need to recognise there are certain kinds of fears (fear of being alone, fear of going outside), and that there is differential impact of these fears (e.g., behaviour change, relationship change, health change). Professionals also need to be able to identify what are the signs of distress that would be considered threshold for an individual, and how would these be determined. Finally, the Society recommends that relevant professionals be aware of the phenomenon of group-stalking, or gang-stalking, where individuals believe that they are being targeted by carefully orchestrated groups. A significant number of people who complain of being stalked by strangers are delusional individuals who can present convincing stories concerning being targeted by co-workers, government bodies and other agencies, telephone companies and practically any other organisation. A recent study by Sheridan and James (2015) concluded that group-stalking appears to be delusional in basis, but complainants suffer marked psychological and practical sequelae. This is important in the assessment of risk in stalking cases, early referral to psychiatric services and allocation of police resources. 6

7 References Baum, K., Catalano, S., & Rand, M. (2009). Stalking victimisation in the United States (NCJ ) Washington, DC. U.S Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Benitez, C. T., McNiel, D. E., & Binder, R. L. (2010). Do protection orders protect? Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 38, Lambert, E. G., Smith, B.., Geistman, J., Cluse-Tolar, T., & Jiang, S. (2013). Do men and women differ in their perceptions of stalking: an exploratory study among college students. Violence and Victims, 28, Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J. (2012). Gender and stalking: Current intersections and future directions. Sex Roles, 66, Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Palarea, R. E., Cohen, J., & Rohling, M. L. (2000). Breaking up is hard to do: Unwanted pursuit behaviors following the dissolution of a romantic relationship. Violence and Victims, 15, MacKenzie, R., & James, D. V. (2011). Management and treatment of stalkers: Problems, options, and solutions. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 29, McEwan, T. E., Mullen, P. E., & MacKenzie, R. (2007). Anti-stalking legislation in practice: Are we meeting community needs? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 14, McEwan, T. E., Mullen, P. E., & MacKenzie, R. (2009). A study of the predictors of persistence in stalking situations. Law and Human Behavior, 33, Meloy, J. R., Cowett, P. Y., Parker, S., Hofland, B., & Friedland, B. (1997). Domestic protection orders and the prediction of subsequent criminality and violence toward protectees. Psychotherapy, 34, Mohandie, K., Meloy, J. R., McGowan, M. G., & Williams, J. (2006). The RECON typology of stalking: Reliability and validity based upon a large sample of North American stalkers. Journal of Forensic Sciences, 51, Montesino, B. (1993). I ll be watching you : Strengthening the effectiveness and enforceability of state anti-stalking statutes. Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Journal, 13, Mullen, P. E., Mackenzie, R., Ogloff, J. R., Pathé, M., McEwan, T., & Purcell, R. (2006). Assessing and managing the risks in the stalking situation. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online, 34, Mullen, P. E., Pathé, M. & Purcell, R. (2009). Stalkers and their victims. Cambridge University Press. Pathé, M., Mackenzie, R., & Mullen, P. E. (2004). Stalking by law: damaging victims and rewarding offenders. Journal of Law and Medicine, 12, Sheridan, L., Blaauw, E. and Davies, G.M. (2003). Stalking: Knowns and unknowns. Trauma, Violence & Abuse: A Review Journal, 4,

8 Sheridan, L. and Boon, J.C.W. (2002). Stalker typologies: Implications for law enforcement. In J.C.W. Boon and L. Sheridan (Eds.). (2002). Stalking and psychosexual obsession: Psychological perspectives for prevention, policing and treatment (pp ). Chichester: Wiley. Sheridan, L. P., & James, D. V. (2015). Complaints of group-stalking ( gang-stalking ): an exploratory study of their nature and impact on complainants. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 26, Stocker, M., & Nielssen, O. (2000). Apprehended violence orders and stalking. Paper presented at the Stalking: Criminal Justice Response Conference. Sydney. Willis, J., & McMahon, M. (2000). Stalking: intervention orders. Paper presented at the Stalking: Criminal Justice Responses Conference. Sydney. Yanowitz, K. L. (2006). Influence of gender and experience on college students stalking schemas. Violence and Victims, 21, End. 8