The vicious cycle of secondary and repeated victimization of mothers and children who experience domestic violence, and the role of Patriarchy in maintaining and reinforcing it

In patriarchally structured societies, such as Greece, women hold a lower status and children an even lower one. And this happens by default (by definition, axiomatically). Among the many other tasks assigned to us women, and which we take on, is that of building a good father-child relationship (and many women-survivors do this for many years…). We do it for our child's sake, we believe… so as not to break up our family… we do it because that's how we were raised… and because we don't know what else to do… And so, we end up being required to keep doing it even after separation, after divorce… otherwise we now risk (since Law 4800/2021 came into force) being accused of being alienators, of ABUSING our own child ourselves… and therefore being deemed unfit to exercise parental responsibility.

These gender stereotypes run horizontally through society and, therefore, it does not surprise us that we encounter them ALSO in judges, police officers, and even social workers and mental health professionals… to whom, however, the Justice system may assign expert (forensic) assessments and social investigations.

It does not surprise us when they infiltrate the Laws and procedures that are supposedly drafted to protect and support victims of domestic violence and to reduce discrimination… It does not surprise us because we understand why it happens, but that does not mean we accept it — it means exactly the opposite… WE DO NOT ACCEPT IT because we know it does not happen by accident… but with specific intent… In these patriarchally structured societies, we have an even greater need for International Conventions, Directives, why not even a Regulation? But we need their implementation, not their mere existence on paper… We need them more because in patriarchally structured societies things like the following occur:

Some of the most common (and painful) forms of domestic violence are NOT criminal offenses, or are criminal offenses but are not prosecuted, or not prosecuted as domestic violence:

1. extreme control (coercive control) – psychological abuse
2. verbal abuse
3. economic violence
4. exposing children to the abuse of their mother

We are making — in 2021 — laws that ensure the preservation of paternal power at all costs, granting joint custody by default and communication and physical contact rights to ALL parents for at least 1/3 of the child's time (unless the parent doesn't want it), disregarding the interest of the child itself — and this is because in our patriarchally structured society:

• children are considered property and not holders of rights…
• we consider domestic violence a crime only after femicide… but even in that case,
  • parental responsibility is almost never removed from the femicide perpetrator…
  • and no prosecution was ever brought against the femicide perpetrator for the abuse of the child itself — who is considered a victim of domestic violence under our law (Law 3500/2006)… not even in Caroline's case, where her murderer placed the 11-month-old infant on top of the dead mother until the Police arrived
• it really seems that we believe a man who abuses his wife can be a good father… and we have now reached the point where court decisions give children to abusers…

In patriarchally structured societies, like the Greek one, we DO NOT HAVE a Distinct Child Protection System (CPS – Child Protection Services) — the existing system concerns only children living in institutions and not the general population of children, whose fate will be handled by a Prosecutor… perhaps… if informed… if informed in time… and if the mother herself has managed to sufficiently document the abuse each child has suffered and/or the danger they face…

Of course we do not have the institution of supervised visits… when deemed necessary, this too is assigned to the mother…

In patriarchally structured societies, like the Greek one, we approach the survivor with distrust, suspect false allegations, blame her by seeking her own responsibility in her abuse… AND in the abuse of her children… that's why we force her to participate in mediation procedures (civil and criminal): because we consider her equally responsible, we consider domestic violence a couple's quarrel, and we fail to perceive the power imbalance and the danger to which we expose mothers and children…

The same does not happen with the perpetrators; we do not treat them with the same distrust even though they weaponize the judicial system against the survivor AND HER CHILDREN:

• Criminal Law: after the survivor's complaint of domestic violence, the perpetrators file counter-suits for domestic violence, defamation, false reporting, child abduction, and endangerment. In addition, they file complaints against her family members and witnesses who try to help her. This tactic is increasing so rapidly that it resembles SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation), and therefore measures need to be taken, such as investigating and punishing false allegations
• Civil/Family Law. The systematic use of the term "parental alienation" and other related terms is combined with accusations of filing a false report of domestic violence in pleadings and court decisions. "Parental alienation" is a conceptual construct deliberately linked to the reporting of domestic violence because, together, the two create the perfect circular argument… a logical fallacy that cannot be disproven, and works as follows: I report domestic violence which I and/or my child suffer
  • if I ask for a suspension or restriction of contact, I am considered an alienator and it is concluded that my report is false
  • if I continue to hand the child over to the father (by default I am now obligated to do so, under Law 4800/2021, so as not to be accused of poor exercise of parental responsibility), they consider that the child is not being abused (otherwise I wouldn't hand them over, what kind of mother would I be otherwise?), and therefore my report is false, and I made it because I am an alienator… and I have implanted in my child the belief that his father is an abuser

In cases where there is domestic violence (even suspicion), it is proposed that the following be prohibited:

• the use in courtrooms, in pleadings, and above all in LEGISLATION, of the term "parental alienation" and all related ones — "rupture of the parent-child relationship" and "disturbance of the child's emotional relationship with the other parent and their family," as it is now called in Greece, in Law 4800/2021.
• the issuance of court decisions for joint custody and/or alternating residence

In patriarchally structured societies, in order for the survivor to gain access to (whatever inadequate) support, we set strict conditions — especially for support that costs money (decent living conditions and expenses for access to justice). Moreover:

• We DO NOT monitor the safety of victims [NOR of children]
• We DO NOT take immediate protective measures (risk reduction)
• There is NO coverage whatsoever of the urgent needs of survivors and children
• There is NO coverage whatsoever of the long-term needs of survivors and children

If all of the above do not function immediately and effectively, secondary victimization occurs, and survivors' access to Justice is obstructed, since they will not come forward if there is no protection and support for the practical matters of housing, subsistence, and legal representation. This secondary victimization, apart from further victimizing the victims, makes it easier for the perpetrator of domestic violence "to continue his work undisturbed," since his threats — that she can do nothing against him and that no one will help her — are indeed being realized in practice.

And the vicious cycle will indeed continue, because the tools that perpetrators of domestic violence use to maintain control over their victims' lives are their children (their status as a parent), the power imbalance with which they intimidate survivors (money, connections, social standing), and, unfortunately, the Justice system.

If we took all of these away from them, no woman and no child would be forced to keep living in a home with domestic violence because they have no money to live on, to hire a lawyer who will protect their rights, their life and wellbeing, and/or because they are afraid — and unfortunately they are right to be afraid — that if they dare try to leave, the situation will get worse — they will have no protection, and the perpetrator will manage to carry out all his threats — which are to take her children and/or her life or the lives of the children. This is exactly what secondary victimization is:

• not daring to ask for help out of fear…
• or, even worse… being told "Speak up, don't be afraid!," meaning having the responsibility placed on you for the continuation of the domestic violence — which your children also suffer — and when they convince you to speak up, finding that there is almost nothing out there… nothing systematic to help you escape step by step…

Perpetrators know this, and they use it to their advantage!!! And it is our responsibility not to allow them to do so!

Intersectoral response to domestic violence

The only way to begin taking away the perpetrators' tools of control and to reduce the secondary victimization of women and children, in order to eventually eliminate it, is to start building robust intersectoral cooperation among ALL the systems involved [Art. 7 of the Convention]: that is, the simultaneous activation of Police-Justice-Support Services (specialized AND general) in order to respond IMMEDIATELY & IN A COORDINATED MANNER, with the primary goal of Protecting victims — and this includes covering the needs of victims of domestic violence (children and mothers).

Intersectoral cooperation, in addition to Protocols, also requires a professional acting as the survivor's point of reference (Art. 55.2 of the Convention provides for something similar), who will activate and coordinate the intersectoral cooperation and maintain two-way communication with the survivor. Since February 2022, the European Network Against Violence has been attempting to design and pilot intersectoral cooperation among the four sectors involved (Police – Justice – Specialized & General Support Services); however, progress is very slow and encounters strong resistance from State agencies.

Ex officio prosecution of domestic violence should truly be ex officio — meaning a case file should be opened however the Authorities are informed… In the most recent femicide, the media rushed to place blame on the victim who "did not wish for his criminal prosecution." Could it be because she knew she risked being killed if she said she wanted it? And it was neither the Police's nor the Justice system's job to detect her fears and provide her with some protection…

Children need to be visible AT ALL TIMES

• A case file should be opened ALSO for the abuse of the child who has been exposed to domestic violence of any form, even when the child has not been physically or sexually abused
• Children, as victims and witnesses, should testify ONLY at the Children's House (Barnahus model) and ONLY once

Emergency protective measures should be ordered IMMEDIATELY after the report (i.e., restraining conditions such as those in Arts. 52 & 53 of the Convention)

• removal of the perpetrator from the family home (so that children are not forced to change all their routines in order to run and hide) and
• a restraining order against approaching the home, the survivor, the children, etc.

The request for the issuance of restraining conditions should be able to be submitted not only by the survivor but also by:

• family members or other people close to her
• child protection services
• specialized support services (NGOs or state-run)
• social services
• Police and Prosecutor (even without the survivor's consent, when there is a suspicion that she will not submit a request because she is afraid of the perpetrator or is unable to do so for another reason (e.g. Law 4800/2021 on mandatory joint custody)

Monitoring of violations of restraining orders, injunctions, and court decisions

• Digital recording of reported violations: by the survivor AND/or by her designated point of reference
• Documentation of reported violations by the Police (e.g. geolocation of the perpetrator via phone signal, SOS button, ankle monitor) and by the support services (communication with the counselor-point of reference and/or the professional supervising the children's contact or the perpetrator)
• Sanctions: to be imposed immediately — through direct connection with the competent judicial authority

Strict deadlines should be established for the implementation of all of the above and applied universally (i.e., in all domestic violence cases involving children), especially in countries that:

• apply joint custody by default to ALL children and/or
• DO NOT have a Distinct Child Protection System

Civil Courts should be required to apply the provisions of Art. 31 of the Convention, in order to ensure that:

• when determining custody and visitation rights of children, incidents of domestic violence must be mandatorily taken into account
• the exercise of visitation or custody rights does not compromise the rights and safety of the victim or of the children

Necessary preconditions for the strict application of Art. 31 are

• the establishment of flexible and swift procedures for monitoring and holding judges accountable, which will not depend exclusively on the survivor's ability to file a report
• the creation of safe spaces for supervised contact between the child and the perpetrator/suspected-perpetrator parent of domestic violence. Supervision should be carried out by specially trained professionals, who monitor the safety of the child and the abused mother and, having direct connection with the judicial authority, put forward proposals to modify contact and/or impose sanctions (such as those included in Art. 45 of the Convention) on the perpetrator, whenever they have reason to believe that the best interest of the child is not being served or that there is some danger to the child and/or the mother.

Furthermore, if we truly intend to take away the perpetrators' tools of control, we propose:

• Appointing a lawyer for all victims of domestic and sexual violence, with the cost covered by the State, which can then charge it to the perpetrator after his conviction
  • the same should apply to the payment of child support, and possibly to the payment of Compensation: to be paid by the State and charged to the party liable through the Tax Office
• Prohibition of any form of mediation when domestic violence is present, since even encouraging the survivor to participate in settlement or mediation procedures ignores the existing power imbalance between the two parties, exposes the weaker party to greater danger, and moreover, without any provision for monitoring the safety of the victims and/or the violation of the terms of mediation by the stronger party. That is why it is proposed:
  • to abolish criminal mediation under Law 3500/2006
  • to abolish mandatory participation in mediation in family law cases concerning parental responsibility, custody, contact, and child support — this abolition also includes the Mandatory Initial Mediation Session (MIMS)
• Decoupling the provision of support and documentation from the filing of the report (with forensic examination being a prime example)
• Ensuring that ALL cases (criminal and civil) involving the same accused/defendant are sought out and cross-referenced (whether the same or different victims) — domestic and sexual violence are ALWAYS repetitive — we CANNOT afford to realize this ONLY after each femicide… after the murder of a child… after the rape of a child — Only through the cross-referencing of cases could the aggravating circumstances of Art. 46 of the Convention be effectively applied

The problem with European Directives and Conventions is that, when there is no political will, they remain paper shields of protection…

For example:

• Directive 29/2012, on the protection of victims, was transposed into Greek Law with great delay (2017), and today — 6 years later, that is — almost none of its provisions are implemented, without this resulting in any sanctions for Greece…
• The Istanbul Convention came into force in Greece 4.5 years ago, but in practice it has brought no improvement to the daily lives of victims, without this resulting in any sanctions for Greece… We have high hopes from GREVIO's visit…

This creates great dilemmas for us too (professionals and organizations) in informing the general public… What is the point of informing survivors of domestic violence about the rights the law gives them if they cannot claim them in their daily lives? Isn't creating expectations that are, in practice, thwarted, itself a form of secondary victimization?