The website of the Crime Research Centre in Western Australia (http://www.law.ecel.uwa.edu.au/crc/) provides reports on rates of crime and domestic violence in Western Australia. However, a search reveals there are no documents available that relate to women with disabilities.
A search into published reports and journal articles on the topic of women with disabilities who have experienced family and domestic violence, also reveals the lack of relevant research that has been undertaken in this area. In particular there is a paucity of research undertaken on the extent and nature of family and domestic violence and women with disabilities.
What has been determined from some of the overseas research conducted in recent years is that women with physical disabilities are at similar or greater risk of abuse than other women and that their unique experiences of abuse require specialised services (Gilson, Cramer et al., 2001; Gilson, DePoy, & Cramer, 2001). Hassounch-Phillips & Curry (2002) also found that not only do women with disabilities experience abuse at similar or higher rates than women in general, they are at greater risk from multiple offenders.
It is also suspected that 'intimate partner violence' is a common and serious problem for women with intellectual disabilities. Women with intellectual disabilities interviewed by Carlson described being physically abused by an intimate partner, often repeatedly and severely enough to require medical attention. They also described being threatened with severe harm, controlled, insulted, and having their property taken or destroyed (Carlson, 1998).
An American study found that 40% of women who sought help had become disabled due to the abuse they suffered (Gilson, Cramer et al., 2001). These same researchers, in another study, found that women who are abused by an intimate partner are at greater risk of being disabled or suffering an illness that affects their activities of daily living (Gilson, DePoy et al., 2001). They also experience worse consequences than non-disabled women, for example, greater levels of poverty, social isolation, discrimination, stereotyping, low self-esteem, increased mental and physical health problems, depression and suicide (Curry et al., 2001; Gilson, DePoy et al., 2001).
Women with disabilities tend to experience abuse for longer periods of time and have fewer escape options because of their greater economic dependence, their need for assistance, environmental barriers and social isolation (Centre for Research on Women with Disabilities, 1999; Payne, 1994).
Another US study on violence against people with disabilities found that the majority of victims were women. However, the majority of reports they received did not come from the women themselves. The researchers suggested that the reasons for this non-disclosure were that the women were fearful no one would help them, they would be forced to move or they would lose their caregiver. This study also found that 60% of the alleged abusers were caregivers, with 40% of abuse occurring inside the family home (White, 1995).
Gilson, Cramer and DePoy (2001), found that women with disabilities are often over-protected by their relatives and carers. They are taught to comply with the requests and demands of others. This over-protection and compliance training may leave women ill-equipped to handle an abusive relationship and may in fact, make them more vulnerable to abuse.
Sceriha presented a paper to the National Domestic Violence Forum, Canberra in 1996. She spoke of the myths that make women with disabilities invisible to society, such as women with disabilities are "childlike, passive, helpless, somewhat sad human beings" while other myths create an image of "frightening, dangerous and asexual creatures who are best avoided" (Sceriha, 1996). Other researchers write about the myth created around women with disabilities that says that no one would ever abuse a women with a disability (Young, Nosek, Howland, Chanpong, & Rintala, 1997).
Chenoweth explores some of these myths as well as the paradoxes they present, through the stories of women with disabilities themselves, their mothers and other workers. For example, the paradox that women with disabilities, although having little voice, are overprotected, segregated, and taught to be compliant; and that women with disabilities are seen simultaneously as asexual and yet promiscuous. These paradoxes increase the incidence of abuse and violence rather than prevent it (Chenoweth, 1996).
Other researchers have studied violence against women with disabilities within the broader contexts of culture, politics and disability itself. Disability already positions women at great disadvantage in the social context and the impact of poverty, isolation and discrimination are all increased when a woman with a disability experiences domestic violence (Curry et al., 2001). A Canadian study explores the experiences of Canadian Aboriginal women within the context of, for example, culture, the Christianisation of indigenous religion, Western medicine, gender, sexuality, alcohol and abuse. The paper includes personal stories that demonstrate the complexity of life as an indigenous woman with a disability, living in a society that is still struggling to come to terms with generations of colonialism (Francis, 1992). The parallels for indigenous Australian women with a disability are obvious.
Cultural values and religious beliefs can also militate against recognition of violence. If the beliefs and practices of a cultural or religious group devalue women and confine them to stereotyped and subservient roles, they can be made more vulnerable to domestic violence and accept it as an inevitable aspect of being a woman (Buchmueller, 1996). If a woman from these backgrounds also has a disability she will be doubly disadvantaged.
Ryan evaluates the status of women with disabilities in a political context, in matters of equity and access (both physical and attitudinal), self-determination and the achievement of leadership position in the community. She argues that the burden of poverty prevents women with disabilities from interacting in the community (Ryan, 2002). She outlines a number of strategies, from local to federal government, to address the inequities experienced by women with disabilities.
One of the issues to emerge from the literature (Nosek, 1999) is that women with disabilities often do not report instances of abuse to their doctor for a number of reasons, including, fear of retribution, feelings of shame or believing she deserved the abuse.
Another paper poses questions a health professional might ask in order to identify women with disabilities who are victims of abuse (Diaz-Olavarrieta, Campbell, Garcia de la Cadena, Paz, & E Villa, 1999). The authors highlight the reluctance of doctors to talk about suspected abuse with their patients because of a lack of training in the area of abuse. The article concludes with a sobering reminder that abuse can be fatal and that patients who have experienced abuse should be responded to as seriously as if they had a heart condition. Another study comes to the same conclusion, calling for the same attention that is given to people with physiological disorders to be given to people with psychiatric disorders (McMullen O'Brien, 2002).
Focht-New (1997), writes that people with disabilities are at risk of misdiagnosis of serious illnesses because their ways of communicating may be misunderstood. Gestures and behaviours may be assumed to be signs of temper or anxiety rather than calls for help. The author describes the institutionalisation and the dehumanisation and labelling of people with disabilities that increases their vulnerability to abuse and points to prevention as a key element in assessment, intervention and treatment.
Gilson, DePoy and Cramer (2001), claim that there has been a misapplication to women with disabilities of theory, policy and practice that was developed to address abuse in non-disabled populations. Because women with disabilities experience greater risks and worse complications from domestic violence, existing strategies are inadequate. The researchers propose a model of abuse assessment specifically tailored to meet the needs of women with disabilities who have experienced domestic violence, and stress the importance of keeping statistics on incidences of domestic violence experienced by women with disabilities.
One of the first projects in Australia to formally link the areas of 'disability' and 'violence' was a study, which considered how women with disabilities who are subjected to violence, access necessary support services and processes (Cattalini, 1993). This project was part of a range of research commissioned by the National Committee on Violence Against Women. Consultations with service providers and groups of women revealed that support and legal services generally have failed to respond adequately to women with disabilities who are subjected to violence.
In more practical terms, the Australian "It's Not OK - It's Violence" information kit has been developed to inform women with disabilities of their rights and options if violence occurs (Partnerships Against Domestic Violence, 2000) and the US-based website Claiming Our Bodies Internet Resource Kit has a good deal of information online for women with disabilities, including information on abuse, rights, articles and personal stories (Doe, O'Toole, & Kafer, 1999).
Go to next section of Silent Voices Report
Return to Silent Voices Report Contents Page
This site was developed by Carolyn Frohmader for Women With Disabilities Australia.