The shocking link between women’s mental health and domestic abuse

4 Questions Your Organisation Needs to Consider to Prevent Gender Balance Deteriorating

TW: mentions suicide, mental health, abuse

New research is just out highlighting a shocking link between women’s mental health, specifically suicide attempts, and domestic abuse.

Commissioned by Agenda Alliance, an group consisting of 100 organisations such as Oxfam, Women’s Aid and Mind, the research shows that women subjected to domestic abuse are three times more likely to attempt to end their lives than their peers. When sexual abuse occurs within a relationship, the number shoots up to over seven times higher. When it comes to self-harm, women suffering violence from their partner are three times more likely to hurt themselves.

It is suggested that all professionals who come into contact with women struggling with their mental health should, as a high priority, be asking about their personal safety, especially if a woman discloses suicidal ideation.

Given that at least one quarter of all women will experience domestic abuse (DV) -  emotional abusive, coercive control and/or physical violence - this is an important factor for workplaces to be considering when it comes to supporting their women with mental health, avoiding long term mental health sick leave and retaining their staff. The cost of staff who are on long term mental health sick leave is enormous, £42-45 billion annually in the UK alone; the impact of domestic violence is a proportion of this.

Consequences for Gender Balance Within Organisations

Here are 4 things what you/your company need to be thinking about from an HR and DEI perspective, loosing women means upsetting your gender balance:

1) How can you absorb the implications of this research into its mental health policies and practices?

2) Make your mental health first aiders aware; can they gently enquire about personal safety if they are supporting women with spiralling mental health, self-harm issues or suicidal ideation, since these could be signposts to a lack of safety at home?

3) Know where to get support for your women. Have info ready with helplines, refuges and relevant organisations. Consider safeguarding requirements for children and pets. The Dogs Trust has a fostering program called The Freedom Program specifically for this situation. Women don’t leave if they will have to leave children or pets behind.

4) Consider hosting a training day on the psychology of victim blaming, to help all staff supporting women and to be better allies if domestic abuse is disclosed; any notion that they will be blamed may deter disclosure and keep women unsafe. I am accredited by VictimFocus to facilitate this training. Learn more here.

Ultimately, staff are a company’s greatest asset. Being able to support staff to stay well, be safe and be able to continue to do their job is of enormous benefit all round. Companies must create enough safety that their women can talk about what’s going on, and not be afraid to ask if someone is safe at home if their mental health deteriorates. Organisations should be working to prevent gender balance deteriorating, including loosing women to DV related absence.

Why Victim Blaming Matters for Allyship and Equality in the Workplace

Recently, I delivered a one day training on the psychology of victim blaming of women and girls subjected to male violence. It is a powerful day sharing evidence based theory designed to create shifts through critical thinking. 

While it didn't come as any surprise to see the Daily Mail put out an irresponsible headline about the murder of Emma and Lettie Pattison, it is blatant victim blaming. The insinuation is that her career and success was the reason he felt angry enough to murder them. 'Women! Don't be too successful or it might get you killed!'

I also saw a police officer over the weekend commenting on Twitter that Sarah Everard should have got a taxi home instead of walking the night she was murdered, as if it was her decision that was the cause of her murder. In another headline, a man who had murdered his wife got a light sentence because he said she had been 'nagging him' - which is misogynistic language to start with - let alone the idea that if a man is in any way criticised he then deserves a lighter sentence if his response to the criticism is to violently end the life of the woman criticising him. 

It is never the woman's fault. What we wear, where we walk, whether we get taxis or not (taxi drivers are sometimes rapists and murderers too), what we say, deciding to leave a relationship that isn't going well - none of these are the cause of violence against women. 

A perpetrator deciding to commit a criminal act is the sole cause. 
This kind of victim blaming language not only diverts attention from the real cause of the violence and excuses the perpetrator, it also undermines women's confidence and keeps us questioning ourselves and the reality of the situation. 

How might victim blaming play out in a less overt way in the workplace? 

Imagine a woman complains of sexual harassment and she is blamed for wearing a short skirt or because she is generally attractive: what kind of impact will that have on her confidence and sense of safety at work? How will this impact the culture and how other women feel in that workplace? How emboldened might the other men feel to behave inappropriately if they can blame a tight dress? . 

How about when a woman doesn't get a promotion and a man does who is less experienced, and she's told it's because of her communication style. Her communication style is direct and assertive, but is perceived negatively because of unconscious bias about how women 'should' communicate: she is seen as bossy or aggressive. Data shows that less than 5% of men receive negative feedback in formal appraisals about their communication, whereas around two thirds of women do. 

We have to stop blaming women for inequality and making it women's sole responsibility to fix it. We need to look at the bigger picture, at patterns and the lens of stereotyping that informs people's perception of women vs men. Victim blaming has to stop, on every level. 

We need to talk about p*rn and allyship. Can men really be allies in the workplace if they watch p*rn privately?

We need to talk about p*rn. 

Yes, p*rn. 

We cannot talk about DEI, allyship and all of that good stuff without talking about p*rnography, the sex industry and the huge impact it has on how women are viewed and treated, even subconsciously. It has a well researched negative impact, increasing feelings of misogyny for those who view porn regularly, and contributes hugely to the objectification or dehumanising of women, and how women are viewed as worth less than men, and only valued for their looks. 

Of course this spills over into the workplace, how could it not??? Yet I don't hear people talking about how secret p*rn habits are holding back workplace DEI efforts or people's ability to be genuine allies. And we need to. 

Today, the Children's Commissioner Dame Rachel de Souza released a report into the impact p*rnography has for children on their body image, relationships and self-esteem, as well as highlighting children's exposure to p*rn. 

No prizes for guessing that it has a damaging impact, with an rising percentage of boys expecting girls to enjoy and want violence as part of intimacy because it's so normal in p*rn. They don't check with girls that this is true before they try it out on them, and girls are being strangled, beaten and more in a misguided attempt to turn them on as boys emulate.

79% of young people have seen violent p*rn before the age of 18, (degrading behaviour, coercion or pain-inducing acts), and the report highlights that frequent viewers of porn are more likely to engage in these kinds of acts themselves. 

Andrew Tate's misogynystic version of masculinity is insanely popular; his videos have been viewed 11.6bn times on tiktok alone, the equivalent of every man globally seeing his content 4 times. Misogyny and objectifying women is popular. 

The vast majority of p*rn shows women in a dehumanising and negative light. Objects to be used and abused. Objects to be ridiculed, humiliated and looked down on. The degradation of women is the main product of the p*rn industry, and it is highly linked to human trafficking. The demand for p*rn fuels trafficking of women and children. 

It isn't possible that anyone who consumes p*rn, is a true ally to women and views women as equal to them, as people of value and people worth listening to. In p*rn the women are genuinely being violated, hurt and abused, it's not acting, what you see on screen is what is actually happening to the women. 

Watching p*rn for 'entertainment' privately, then pretending to be an ally to women at work, is incongruent at best, and certainly deluded.

It's not an easy conversation, but it's one that needs airing. I would like to see all people, especially men, that consider themselves genuine allies to women, denounce all pornography and the sex industry, and call out their friends who consume it. Let's create social pressure to make p*rn as socially unacceptable as domestic violence. 

Be loud, make some noise

I’ve been quiet on the Depp/Heard trial online, for many reasons. Most of all for my own sanity. The whole thing was very triggery for me. On the night the verdict came out I felt shaken up, tearful and most of all, I worried for what this meant for women for the future. More on this worry later. 

Why was it all so triggery? I can relate to Amber’s plight of being threatened with being silenced and with legal action by someone who doesn’t want you to talk about what went on in the relationship that may not show them in a positive light. Her recollections of what went on were also resonant with some of my experiences long ago. 

Emotional and/or physical abuse is as much about control as than blows that are inflicted. It involves destroying the other person’s confidence, support structures, reputation and finances, including their ability to earn. It often doesn’t end after the relationship ends, as that is when the perpetrator feels that they have lost control and don’t want to relinquish it. Hence why the most dangerous time for a woman in terms of the possibility of serious violence in an abusive relationship, is when she is leaving. 

In my training with Dr Jessica Taylor on the psychology of victim blaming of women subjected to male violence, and in my reading of her and other’s research, I have come to understand several key points that are relevant when it comes to the case and the situation out there for women in general. 

There is no such thing as the perfect victim. Even when a stranger leaps out from the bushes in broad daylight somewhere crowded, threatens you with a weapon and assaults you, even when you were wearing a boiler suit rather than, god forbid it, something that shows your figure, and even if you were stone cold sober, a prosecution and conviction is not guaranteed. Less than 2% of reported rapes result in a prosecution in this country (UK), and about 80% of the time when a girl or woman tells her own parents she has been raped, they blame her. Only last week the police here started saying they would stop investigating a victim’s personality, history and so on as a way to discredit her testimony, and instead focus on the perpetrator.  Violence against women is the only time when it is far more normal for the accuser to be immediately under the microscope, instead of the accused. 

Amber Heard was far from the perfect victim. She stood up for herself and sometimes got angry, which is known as reactive abuse. Perhaps if you were abused regularly, you would fight back at some point. Every single person I know who grew up in an abusive household or who has been in an abusive relationship, has seen the victim lose their temper, shout back, or even hit back occasionally. If a victim doesn’t, then the question is asked of why they didn’t fight back? Damned if you do, disbelieved if you don’t.

Amber had clear, extensive evidence, confession and witnesses, and had back up from therapists and medical professionals who had treated her throughout the relationship; again you’re damned if you do gather evidence as this is apparently plotting and manipulative, damned if you don’t – ‘there’s no evidence’. 

She also didn’t leave right away, thus failing the ‘why didn’t she leave?’ point. Perpetrators aren’t awful the whole time. They swing between being nice and apologetic, with pleading and promises to change forever, and always being as charming as possible in public, and then being bloody awful again. It keeps you on your toes and living in hope that the nice side will win over, but never knowing when things will kick off again so you tread on eggshells never knowing when things will kick off again. Your behaviour is also controlled in this way. Just don’t rock the boat, don’t speak up, don’t criticise, or it’ll be your fault that they lost it again. 

We like to think we would behave differently if we found ourselves in that situation. 

We like to think that our behaviour can protect us from ever being a victim or stuck in an abusive relationship. This is a core tenet of victim blaming tactics; if the victim’s behaviour is the reason the violence happened, then we can stop ourselves being abused by not behaving like that. This is totally false. Abusers are going to abuse. What you wear, drink, who your friends are, what you say, will not protect you from being abused. 

Victim blaming will start with behaviour, often what the victim was wearing, doing, drinking or saying. Then their character is picked on. Women being put down for being too emotional, hysterical or more has been going on for centuries and is part of the general patriarchal structure that keeps women down and compares them negatively to men. 

Enter stage left psychiatry, and women being given speculative diagnoses, often personality disorders, to discredit them and paint them as unreliable witnesses. We saw this happen to Heard but not to Depp – where were the psychiatrists lining up to analyse and diagnose him despite his well-known addictions, abusive tendencies and more? Men are much more likely to be excused their bad behaviour because of ‘mental illness’ (see every mass shooting in the US for evidence) whereas any sign of mental illness in women is seen as a sign that they cannot be trusted at all. This scenario plays out in family courts the entire time, in a depressingly predictable and horrible way. 

It is vital to recognise that perpetrators will try to convince everyone that they are in fact the true victim. This can be because accountability feels like an attack when you’re not used to facing the truth and consequences of who you are, what you’ve done and the true impact of your behaviour. 

This pattern of a perpetrator attempting to turn the tables and convince everyone they are the victim is described as DARVO – deny, attack the victim, reverse victim/offender perception. Sometimes they might minimise or deny their own actions, play dumb and point to their victim’s reactions, and then act surprised when the evidence of their bad behaviour is laid out. In the Depp/Heard trial, this approach was successfully used by Depp’s team. Amber’s reactive abuse was seen as proof that he was actually the true victim, and the overwhelming evidence and confession of his abuse discounted. I’m not saying she is perfect. But no one has to be perfect in order to be a real victim. Could any of us stand up and say we have always been ‘perfect’? No. And this does not and cannot discount our ability to actually be a victim or our testimony, witnesses and more. 

The efforts on social media especially on Fb and TikTok to discredit Amber and mock her were enormous. Vast amount of money was poured into swaying public opinion, and the jury were not required to stay off social media in the evenings. They were not making their decision based on only the evidence in the court room, but also on extensive and disgusting propaganda. What kind of society mocks a woman’s distress when she describes serious sexual assault? The fact that the trial was televised is in itself abusive, and part of the ongoing control of her entire life, career and future. 

What the trial was really about was the silencing of women who speak up about abusive men. Depp has been an icon for decades because of his acting success, and this seems to have blinded many to the possibility that he could also be abusive. Many of his exes going as far back as Jennifer Grey, Winona Ryder and so on have talked about his temper and controlling tendencies. Their staff saw it going on and testified. His friendship with Marilyn Manson, who has talked openly about his disdain for women, desire to hurt them and so on, and the language Depp used about Heard describing his desire to physically abuse her, are also not up for debate. They are undisputed facts. True victims do not express these kinds of desires. Not in banter, not privately. This is the language of a misogynistic, controlling abuser, pure and simple. 

We have seen this pattern before many times with powerful, wealthy men paying off accusers and making them sign NDAs. Trump, Epstein, Weinstein et al. Research shows that 97% of the time when women say they have been raped or sexually assaulted, they are speaking the truth. False accusations are the exception, not the rule. 

Remember that Heard was much younger than Depp when they met, and she was relatively unknown and he was already a mega star. The power dynamic was already set up from the start. 

In the UK trial, 12 of the 14 counts of abuse were found to be true. The Sun newspaper was found to have been right to call him a wifebeater. The US case was about Amber’s right to speak up about it, and in a massive blow for freedom of speech, it would seem that she has been silenced and cannot speak up. Apparently, it’s ok that millions of people are talking about it all online, but she mustn’t.  She is still being controlled. 

The implications for this trial are huge. Women without such good evidence or any witnesses may be more hesitant to come forward, putting themselves and children at risk of further abuse. Some may even die. Abuse can and does ender in murder; a woman is murdered every 3 days in this country alone by a man, and the majority of the time it is domestic violence, not a stranger or random attack. The fear of being sued for defamation is more real than ever, and this threat has become an effective way to silence women and stop them reporting abuse, and thus ensure they experience more of it. The possibility of being publicly torn apart is as likely as ever, which is a continuation of the abuse. 

Refuge, the domestic violence charity, stated that ‘the verdict sends a chilling message to many survivors of domestic abuse that their experiences are invalid and open to public scrutiny.’

It is time for women to be believed, especially imperfect victims because we are all imperfect. It is time for rich, powerful men to stop getting away with whatever they can pay their way out of. The erosion of women’s rights has to stop and move forwards again. Looking at you, the US in particular, not just the extreme restrictions in Afghanistan and so on. 

It is time for judges in these cases to be properly trained in domestic violence patterns and nuances as well as victim blaming tactics, so that they can see through all this bullshit. No future trials should be televised. Juries must be kept away from all social media and the internet during trials. Speculative psychiatry as a mechanism of discrediting women must end and be seen for the nonsense that it really is. It must be made safe for women to speak up, and to keep themselves and their children safe; the policing and legal systems must become trauma informed so that victims are never retraumatised by the process of trying to bring their attackers to account.

All of this must be seen within a framework of patriarchy, systemic misogyny and sexism, women being seen as inferior, and men’s opinions being seen as the gospel truth while women’s testimony being questionable and up for debate right from the start. 

Don’t let what has happened stop you from speaking up. Don’t let it stop you reporting. Don’t let it discourage you from fighting for change. Let your anger, despair and disappointment become fertiliser for action to create change. The whole point of the case was to keep women quiet. 

So be loud.

Make noise. 

Support other women speaking up. Stick together. Stand up for truth, justice and a world where women are valued, believed and safe. Support others doing it. I know I will be. This piece is just the start.