Latest news with #IPV
CTV News
17-06-2025
- General
- CTV News
Intimate partner violence calls surge in Greater Sudbury
Calls related to intimate partner violence in Greater Sudbury have increased by 63 per cent since 2023, police reported this week. Greater Sudbury Police say they are receiving an average of 50 to 65 calls a week related to intimate partner violence, a substantial increase compared to last year. And statistics show Sudbury police responded to 2,857 IPV calls in 2024, a 38 per cent increase from 2023 and 63 per cent increase compared to 2022. IPV stats Statistics show Sudbury police responded to 2,857 IPV calls in 2024, a 38 per cent increase from 2023 and 63 per cent increase compared to 2022. (File) Police are working with community partners to address IPV and help victims who want to leave abusive relationships. 'We might be informing the community better, so maybe those victims that were hesitant before are now proactive in reporting these incidents to police,' said Det. Sgt. Adam Demers, IPV coordinator for Sudbury police. Marlene Gorman, executive director of YWCA Sudbury, said she's not surprised that IPV reports are increasing. Gorman said Genevra House gets about 28 calls a week from women leaving abusive partners, and quite often the 32-bed shelter is at capacity. 'Our shelter is full every day,' Gorman said, adding it's disheartening when staff have to turn away women and their children because the shelter is full. Sudbury IPV Greater Sudbury Police say they are receiving an average of 50 to 65 calls a week related to intimate partner violence, a substantial increase compared to last year. (Photo from video) 'We know we're failing women who need us at their most vulnerable time,' she said. Gorman said it's not more shelters that are needed, it's more affordable housing. There's often an increase in demand for help at this time of year, she said, when the school year ends. Plan to leave abusive relationships 'Sometimes moms will wait until their children have completed school,' Gorman said. 'Around this time, they're looking at a plan to leave an abusive partner so they're not taking their children out of school and disrupting them in that way.' There's also often an increase around the holidays or just after the holidays. In an email the CTV News, Sudbury & Area Victim Services (SAVS) said it has seen an increase in referrals related to family violence and intimate partner violence occurrences. 'We know we're failing women who need us at their most vulnerable time.' — Marlene Gorman, executive director of YWCA Sudbury 'On average, SAVS is receiving between 20-45 new referrals per week through police, community agency referral or self-referral,' the email said. SAVS works with victims and survivors of IPV to do safety planning and connect them to services and support. Demers said police who work with the IPV unit are trauma-informed and victim-based. Part of the process is to continue contact with victims through follow-ups. 'We do have a lot of recidivism, the breaches, the calling, the harassing phone calls,' he said. 'By reaching out to (the victims), we get that information, but we're also getting their feedback on the process as well, which we share with our community partners.' It's that connection with community partners that Demers said helps victims feel more comfortable about reaching out to the police. 'It creates a bigger team and obviously the team works better if we have those relationships,' he said. 'All those partners working with us -- actually with the community -- maybe takes the edge off going to police.' He said IPV investigations start with police. From there, police reach out to community partners for assistance. That could be housing, supplies, shelter or safety. Community partners also step up when IPV cases lead to criminal charges. Another way Sudbury police is addressing the increase in IPV cases is through a one-year pilot project. Starting at the end of June, four police officers will be specifically designated to IPV cases. In Ontario, 95 communities have declared IPV an epidemic. There continues to be a push to have the province make a similar declaration.
Global News
13-06-2025
- Health
- Global News
N.B. legislature says gender-based violence an epidemic in unanimous vote
Clarification: The N.B. legislature says gender-based violence is an epidemic, not the government of New Brunswick, after a motion was supported by all provincial MLAs last week. The New Brunswick legislature says gender-based violence is an epidemic. The motion, introduced by PC MLA Tammy Scott-Wallace, was unanimously adopted in the legislature on Thursday. This comes after more than 20 organizations wrote an open letter calling on the province to make the declaration. Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy 'Naming a crisis an epidemic is not symbolic, it is strategic, so people can get the resources we need,' said Scott-Wallace. 'It is putting a proper name to a problem that needs to be addressed.' According to the most recent available data from 2023, New Brunswick has the third highest rate of intimate partner violence reported in the country. Story continues below advertisement The province saw an almost 40 per cent increase over a 12-year period, with rural communities being particularly affected. Nova Scotia is the only province in Canada that has officially declared gender-based violence is an epidemic. The government of New Brunswick must still officially declare IPV an epidemic to match what Nova Scotia did.
The Guardian
09-06-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Domestic violence can affect victims' brain health for life, study suggests
Women who are victims of domestic violence are at a higher risk of traumatic brain injury and mental health conditions for many years after the abuse has ended, a study has found. Almost one in three women around the world experience domestic violence, and researchers say the impact on mental health – such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) – can last for decades. The study, by the University of Glasgow and published in the journal BMJ Mental Health, explored the mental health consequences associated with domestic violence and traumatic brain injury. The paper – Intimate partner violence, traumatic brain injury and long-term mental health outcomes in mid-life: The Drake IPV study – looked at data from 632 participants aged between 40 and 59. Fourteen per cent reported having a history of domestic violence with physical abuse. Compared with unexposed participants, those with a history of intimate partner violence-physical abuse (IPV-PA) were associated with a higher exposure of traumatic brain injuries (TBI) and a higher lifetime and ongoing diagnoses of depression, anxiety, sleep disorders andPTSD. The analysis also found that even after an average of 27 years since exposure to IPV-PA, the risk of mental health disorders remained just as high. The study concluded: 'Among those reporting exposure to IPV-PA, the majority reported a history of repetitive blows to the head and mild TBI. A history of TBI, in turn, was associated with evidence of adverse mental health outcomes. 'These observations offer initial insights into the potential lifelong brain health consequences of intimate partner violence with physical abuse. 'Given the global prevalence of intimate partner violence, particularly among women, these findings highlight a pressing need for further research in this field, as well as for targeted interventions to raise awareness among policymakers and medical professionals about the potential impact of intimate partner violence with physical abuse on health outcomes across the lifespan.' The work was funded by the Drake Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Medical Research Council, NHS Research Scotland, the Alzheimer's Society, and the Alzheimer's Association. Prof Willie Stewart said: 'Given its prevalence, these findings highlight domestic violence as a public health issue with potential for long-lasting impacts on brain health. Our work also reinforces the need for more research in this previously neglected area.' Dr Graciela Muniz-Terrera, a co-author of the report, said: 'This study highlights the importance of including questions about domestic violence in population research to advance our knowledge about its long-term effects.' In the UK, call the national domestic abuse helpline on 0808 2000 247, or visit Women's Aid. In Australia, the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the US, the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines may be found via
Vox
09-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Vox
There's a name for what Diddy allegedly did to Cassie — but you won't hear it at trial
writes about pop culture, media, and ethics. Before joining Vox in 2016, they were a staff reporter at the Daily Dot. A 2019 fellow of the National Critics Institute, they're considered an authority on fandom, the internet, and the culture wars. Sean Diddy Combs, who went by P. Diddy, and Cassie Ventura, his girlfriend at the time, attend the Heavenly Bodies: Fashion and the Catholic Imagination Costume Institute Gala at the Metropolitan Museum of Art on May 7, 2018 in New York Huffington Post Among all the lurid details and allegations that have surfaced in Sean 'Diddy' Combs's trial on federal charges, including sex trafficking and racketeering conspiracy, one potential aspect of the music mogul's relationships has flown under the radar. What we haven't heard on the witness stand is a concept crucial to understanding intimate partner violence and how individual incidents can form a pattern of abuse over time. That pattern, described by sociologists as 'coercive control,' may have played a major role in Diddy's relationships — but it won't play a major role in the trial. Generally speaking, 'coercive control' is a pattern of controlling behavior, manipulation, and emotional abuse over time. It is criminalized in the UK, and seven states have passed laws that say coercive control is a form of domestic violence, though how they're applied varies by state. US courts have been slow to adopt the concept, and Judge Arun Subramanian, overseeing Combs's trial in New York City's federal district court, blocked the prosecution's expert on domestic violence, or intimate partner violence (IPV), from testifying specifically about coercive control. That leaves the prosecution and all witnesses walking a very interesting line in their presentation of the evidence against Combs, who has pleaded not guilty. While 'coercive control' isn't a widely recognized legal concept in the US, 'coercion' as an individual act is. Typically described in the US legal code as being compelled, forced, or threatened to act in a specific way, it's a crucial pillar of several of the legal charges being brought against Combs. Additionally, if the jury can't hear testimony about the impact of long-term abuse and toxic environments on survivors over time, will they be able to understand why so many of the people testifying against Combs now spent years, even decades, working for him and/or entertaining positive relationships with him? The case serves as a reminder that, despite having been known to IPV prevention researchers for decades, 'coercive control' is still a little-known term to the public. While it's an important concept for expanding how we think about intimate partner abuse beyond acts of physical violence, some experts say its highly murky legal status is warranted. That ambiguity, however, makes it hard to talk about ways an alleged abuser might exert control over survivors that aren't always obvious. Many of those methods have surfaced in the Combs trial. That gives us a major opportunity to understand what coercive control is — and the ways in which it's being tried and tested in court. What even is 'coercive control'? The term 'coercive control,' reportedly first coined and promoted by the late social worker Susan Schechter, has existed in the fields of domestic violence prevention and feminist circles since the '80s. 'There is no single word to describe the full range of controlling behavior,' Schechter and her co-author Ann Jones wrote in their 1993 book When Love Goes Wrong in a section indexed as 'coercive control.' They write that many controlling abusers 'never use force' and note controlling behaviors, such as 'deliberately throwing a partner into mental confusion and anxiety, and tearing a partner down emotionally.' If you or anyone you know is struggling with intimate partner violence (IPV), there are people who want to help. Contact the National Domestic Violence Hotline at 800-799-7233 (or text BEGIN to 88788). Since the late 20th century, the phrase 'battered woman syndrome' has been used in court to describe the psychological effects of IPV on women, which can include trauma and cognitive defects. While still in wide use in courtrooms as a legal defense, the concept has long been a source of debate, with many experts framing it as part of general PTSD or using the gender-neutral phrase 'battering and its effects' instead. Legal advocates have argued for decades for a better descriptor, one that emphasizes nonphysical forms of abuse as well as physical abuse. Enter 'coercive control.' Experts like Schechter and the late Evan Stark have helped mainstream the phrase as an alternative concept, one that more clearly acknowledges the ways abusive partners often use nonviolent abusive tactics, such as emotional abuse, gaslighting, manipulation, threats, and unpredictable behavior, to influence and control their situations. Research has shown that coercive control is present in up to 58 percent of relationships where IPV occurs, and even nonviolent coercive control engenders PTSD, depression, and ongoing fear in survivors. Understanding that such patterns exist helps us understand intimate partner violence, especially in answering questions like 'why didn't the victim just leave?' when 'just leaving' is not so simple. But because coercive control is coercive, and coercion is often hard to pin down, it's also a somewhat slippery legal concept. There's not much precedent in the US court system for a discussion of coercive control as an ongoing pattern of abuse. There's also debate among experts about whether trying to codify it is ultimately helpful or harmful — manipulation and gaslighting can be harder to identify than physical abuse or explicit threats as well as easier for abusers to turn around and use to accuse their victims. What 'coercion' — and 'coercive control' — have to do with the Diddy trial The charges against Combs are a bit tricky, which isn't unusual for a racketeering case. Combs is charged with two counts of sex trafficking, two counts of transporting people across state lines for sex work, and one count of 'racketeering conspiracy,' which is a broader charge than racketeering itself and merely requires the guilty party to have agreed to participate in any of a litany of crimes that fall under the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization ACT, commonly known as RICO laws. In this case, those alleged crimes include forced labor, kidnapping, arson, bribery, sex trafficking, and obstruction of justice — all acts that witnesses have testified to having seen Diddy commit or experienced themselves while with him. In all three charges, the legal concept of coercion plays a major role. It's part of the criteria that must be met to prove illegal sex trafficking: Per the federal statute under which Combs is charged, any use of 'force, threats of force, fraud, [or] coercion' to induce people to engage in sex work violates the law. Similar wording and logic apply to the transportation charge. If Combs used coercion to get people to travel across state lines for the purposes of sex work, he could be guilty. But an understanding of coercion can be very different based on different contexts. In the case of this trial, Judge Subramanian seems to be allowing discussion related to alleged individual moments of actual physical coercion, violent coercion, or the implied threat of physical harm to a target or others close to them. The prosecution's domestic violence expert, clinical and forensic psychologist Dawn Hughes, was able to discuss elements of IPV on the witness stand, such as trauma bonding and reasons why survivors stay with their abusers — but she was prohibited from discussing how long-term coercive control can impact them and their reasoning. 'There's so much physical violence in this case, and I think it's easy to extrapolate how fear of physical violence could coerce somebody into making choices,' Courtney Cross, who runs a law clinic for abuse and IPV survivors at the University of Nevada Las Vegas, told me. 'But coercive control itself as a dynamic is way less about the physical violence and so much more about that web of nonphysical tactics of abuse.' Since testimony in the case kicked off May 12, we've already heard plenty of evidence pointing to physical coercion or the threat of it. Combs's ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura, played an inadvertent role in jump-starting the federal investigation into Combs when 2016 surveillance footage surfaced in 2023 showing Combs violently beating her in a hotel hallway. Ventura testified over several days on the witness stand that during their 11-year relationship, Combs frequently physically assaulted her, threatened her with violence, and dangled the possibility of leaking filmed sex footage of her to the public (which might be considered 'revenge porn' or a form of image-based abuse). Multiple witnesses have corroborated Ventura's testimony with their own accounts of having seen or heard Combs abuse Ventura. Bryana Bongolan, a friend of Ventura's, testified that Combs once threatened her in Ventura's 17th-story apartment by hoisting her to the balcony ledge. After yelling at her, he allegedly threw her into the balcony furniture, causing wounds and bruises to her legs. What's perhaps even more striking, however, is the bigger picture that emerges from all of this witness testimony: an environment, in both Combs's working relationships and his intimate ones, of fear, paranoia, and unpredictable outbursts of temper. One longtime staffer, Capricorn Clark, testified that Combs issued a death threat to her on the first day she worked for him, physically assaulted her, and at one point kidnapped her, forcing her to come with him to track down Ventura's boyfriend. (The boyfriend was musician Kid Cudi, whose Porsche Combs is also accused of firebombing.) She as well as another former staffer have each testified to having been required to take polygraph tests by Combs to keep their jobs. Another former staffer, testifying under the pseudonym Mia, recounted being pressured to reside mainly with Combs at his residences, where she said she was then not permitted to lock her bedroom door or leave the property. At one point, she alleged on the stand, Combs began a pattern of intermittently sexually assaulting her over the eight years she worked for him. The physical abuses that Combs allegedly inflicted are covered in the trial and are on their own horrific enough. But what's left unexplained is the mental and emotional anguish that a pattern of coercive control creates. Having rules about where and how to live, the implicit invasion of privacy that comes with a forced polygraph test or not being allowed to lock a door; these things could add up to a sense that a person does not have agency over their own life. All of these moments arguably create a pattern of abuse and manipulation by Combs — the hallmarks of coercive control that the witnesses seem to have lived with and experienced, even if they can't refer to it by name in the courtroom. 'Coercive control' has a long history but a tricky legal status — perhaps for good reason So far, the only area of the legal system where coercive control has made inroads is the family court system — and the few states that do have laws on the books often have harrowing stories that put them there. Take Jennifer's Law, for instance, the 2021 Connecticut law criminalizing coercive control. It was named in part for Jennifer Magnano, a mother of three who was shot and killed in 2007 by her estranged husband. The murder occurred shortly after a judge ordered Magnano, who had fled the state, to return with her kids for a custody hearing, ignoring her claims of having experienced over a decade of abuse. The Connecticut law now defines coercive control and increases protections for people experiencing it while ensuring they don't have to testify in person before someone they are being protected against. Yet even with these stiffer types of legal protections in place, problems abound. To someone experiencing coercive control, it's often the nonphysical meanings of 'coerce' that can exert the most power and have the longest-lasting psychological effects. But courts may fail to recognize highly individualized acts of coercion because they're looking for signs of physical violence or threats. Additionally, just as abusers often use DARVO tactics (in which an abuser paints themselves as the wronged party using a strategy of 'deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender') to get authorities on their sides, coercive control patterns can be used against survivors in similar ways. Abuse victims can and often do react to their abusers with self-defense, or reactive violence. Their abusers will often use this reactivity to their advantage with authorities, rendering abuse victims vulnerable to being targeted by the same laws put in place to protect them. Think of it like a zero-tolerance policy in a school that punishes the bully and their victim equally without questioning who has the power and who is the target of abuse. Related Diddy was hiding in plain sight Cross has argued against passing laws criminalizing coercive control in favor of expanding resources to empower survivors who are trying to escape abusive situations. She points out that, unlike the UK, the US lacks a system of robust resources, rigorous risk assessment, and training around the issue that could help authorities identify it when they see it — and seeing it at all is the first challenge. 'You would need professionals to be able to see it differently in different people and validate that and understand how to respond to that,' Cross said. Rather than the courts trying to address coercive control after it's already established as a pattern, Cross explained what we need is 'a wholesale societal reorganization to be able to take care of people.' And most of all, what we need is money. 'People are trying really hard to meet this massive demand, but there aren't nearly enough supportive resources for anybody, including DV survivors, especially the most marginal DV survivors,' she said. One thing that makes coercive control particularly complicated, Cross said, 'is that to recognize and respond to it, we have to see it in ourselves' — and culturally, many of the traits that often comprise an abusive personality begin as highly lauded attributes, such as confidence, forcefulness, or invulnerability. 'We don't want to see that sometimes we do shitty and manipulative things and that maybe that crosses a line,' Cross said. 'We don't want to see that we may have and take advantage of power differentials with our partners and people we love. I think to really understand coercive control, we have to be willing to look inside of ourselves, and people don't want to do that.' Cross pointed out that while coercive control isn't under discussion on the witness stand, it is on full display throughout the Diddy trial itself. 'There is such an obvious analogy to me between the idea of this enterprise and the way that it relies on power and control and using fear to regulate and enforce the enterprise,' she said. 'It may not be fraud, extortion, and bribery per se, but the emotional and psychological abuse amounts to a pretty similar outcome on an interpersonal level.'
Cision Canada
05-06-2025
- Health
- Cision Canada
Unifor encouraged as N.B. government declares Intimate Partner Violence an epidemic
"We are thankful for Minister Boudreau's participation in our Symposium and for participating in a conversation on the importance of the language of the motion," said Unifor Atlantic Regional Director Jennifer Murray. "Naming IPV as an epidemic is in line with the Mass Casualty Commission's recommendations, aligns with legislation in Nova Scotia, and reflects advocacy efforts in other provinces. "Most importantly, it signals the urgency needed to address violence in our communities. This is an important first step and we look forward to working with the Minister and frontline service providers on the introduction of legislation." The accepted motion signals the government's growing understanding, shared by the labour movement, community partners and frontline service providers, of the overwhelming need for funding, education and supports for those experiencing, fleeing and recovering from violence. New Brunswick has among the highest incidences of reported IPV across the Atlantic Provinces. "As workplace representatives, Unifor Women's Advocates are often the first point of contact for someone experiencing violence and are well-informed on what supports exist in the community to support members and where critical gaps exist," said Murray. "We hope and expect that government's next steps will be to bring Unifor and frontline service providers together to build an informed and effective response." Murray and delegates at the Unifor Intimate Partner Violence Symposium took their call for action on IPV to the steps of the New Brunswick legislature earlier this week. Watch their video message here. The passing of today's motion reflects Unifor's broader efforts to have Intimate Partner Violence formally recognized as an epidemic in every province and territory. In September 2024, a bill was introduced in the Nova Scotia legislature and, with Unifor's support, was passed immediately and unanimously —demonstrating the growing momentum behind this call and the importance of political will in addressing gender-based violence. Unifor has written to every premier, urging them to declare Intimate Partner Violence an epidemic. Unifor is Canada's largest union in the private sector, representing 320,000 workers in every major area of the economy. The union advocates for all working people and their rights, fights for equality and social justice in Canada and abroad, and strives to create progressive change for a better future.
