Evidence of meeting #107 for Status of Women in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was children.
A recording is available from Parliament.
11:55 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Shelby Kramp-Neuman
Thank you very much for that.
Next is Sonia with the Liberals. You have five minutes.
May 7th, 2024 / 11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON
Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to all the witnesses for their important testimony and the work they are doing for all women.
My first question is for Ms. Deepa Mattoo.
Ms. Mattoo, I know we had a conversation before and you have appeared in the committee before. I know the work you are doing in the GTA.
An important component of this study is the experience of other jurisdictions in dealing with coercive behaviour. Scotland and the United Kingdom have already criminalized coercive control. We also know about the experience of Hawaii, where coercive control is in the definition of domestic abuse.
Do you think we should follow that path? What are your views on that?
11:55 a.m.
Executive Director, Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic
One challenge we have, looking at the example of England and Scotland, is that in England, coercive control was criminalized in 2015. In Scotland, it was criminalized in 2018. The research coming out of both of those jurisdictions is that it has not had any significant impact on the rates of domestic abuse. One of the bigger challenges is securing convictions for coercive control, because that has been extremely challenging.
In fact, Scotland's model is seen as a gold standard, if a country has to choose to criminalize coercive control. Their coercive control-specific offence is seen as a gold standard of legislation on domestic violence.
However, a recent study coming out of Scotland that interviewed survivors reveals that many felt that the final sentence, in their case, did not reflect their whole experience. It found that in terms of psychological abuse and control, which is the biggest piece we are talking about today, the survivors' experience was that when the accused was sentenced, their experiences were never taken into full consideration by the court. Only a small aspect of the abuse that they endured was revealed during the trial.
I think that is at the crux of the challenge of thinking about criminalizing coercive control without changing the attitude of our justice system and the misogyny within the justice system.
This solution of criminalizing an offence might actually trigger a situation in which we will see survivors, like Maria in the story I shared with all of you, finding instead that it is they who are criminalized in the system and facing the challenge, instead of the real perpetrators actually facing the consequences and the accountability we want.
11:55 a.m.
Liberal
Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON
My next question is for Sunder Singh.
You talked about a youth mental health strategy. You also talked about the role of social media. This week is mental health awareness week. In this budget, the amount of $500 million has been allocated to youth mental health. What recommendation can you give the committee on how this federal funding can best respond to the needs and educate and support youth mental health?
Noon
Executive Director, Elspeth Heyworth Centre for Women
Again, I have to bring to the attention of the standing committee the fact that constant, regular, continuous education for young people, and at the same time their parents, is very important. You wouldn't see the results overnight. It would take an entire generation, maybe, to see the results, but the work that is being done by the federal government to create awareness through mental health programs is critical. The funding has to be allocated to the educational system and community organizations and be done in a very proactive and active manner. People need to understand both that this is a problem in this country and what we need to do to change the system.
Noon
Liberal
Sonia Sidhu Liberal Brampton South, ON
Thank you.
My next question is about cultural sensitivity. How do you ensure that the information you share with the victim is culturally sensitive? How can we train frontline staff on cultural sensitivity when dealing with coercive control?
Noon
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Shelby Kramp-Neuman
I'm very sorry, Sonia, but we don't have enough time for the witness to answer. Perhaps they could include that somewhere else. I apologize for that.
Perhaps all the members can be mindful of the 30-second reminder, just for the benefit of everyone.
Andréanne Larouche, you have two and a half minutes, please.
Noon
Bloc
Andréanne Larouche Bloc Shefford, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
This is an extremely sensitive issue, and a continuum of services should really be considered. Clearly, criminalizing coercive control wouldn't fix everything, but it could be part of our thought process to try to help victims more.
Ms. Singh, you spoke at length about human trafficking, another scourge that I am concerned about as a member of the All‑Party Parliamentary Group to End Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking. We have also conducted a study on this issue here in the Standing Committee on the Status of Women.
I would like you to tell us about the link that can be made between coercive control and the trafficking of women and girls.
Noon
Executive Director, Elspeth Heyworth Centre for Women
If I understand your question, you're asking what leads to this kind of coercive behaviour. It starts with the financial struggle that young people face, or the relationship that young people have with their parents. Again, education in school will teach children about respecting the family, respecting their parents and respecting gender. That's where it all starts.
What happens is that children grow up, and teenagers will rebel at home. They will leave their home and seek help from outside. Once they get into that process, they find themselves getting trapped by perpetrators who are spread all over the country. They are in schools, they are in universities and they are in colleges. They can be found everywhere. They are great at targeting. They know who the vulnerable people are who can be victimized easily. Then the process starts.
It has to start with the human studies that I am suggesting should take place in schools, supported and made mandatory by the federal government and for the provincial governments to add to the curricula. Children in schools, at the start of the day, must be educated. They must understand respect for human beings and what they need to do to keep themselves safe.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Shelby Kramp-Neuman
Thank you so much for that.
Leah, with the NDP, you have two and a half minutes.
Thank you.
12:05 p.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you so much.
Very quickly, because I have only two and a half minutes, I want to see if I understood what you said, Madam Mattoo.
Do you feel that one of the issues with putting in a law on coercive control is that it could, in fact, potentially be used against the person who's actually the victim? Answer yes or no.
12:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic
Yes, absolutely. That's my concern.
12:05 p.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Okay. Thank you.
The other question I have for you builds on what my colleague MP Sidhu was talking about. One of the things we've talked about is the critical need for individuals fleeing violence to have culturally relevant places to go to. How important is that?
I know you've done a lot of work with newcomer families. Do you feel there's a gap right now, and how important is it to fill that gap?
12:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic
The service design for all services from the state, including the front line, should be extremely trauma-informed and culturally sensitive.
I don't believe in the concept of cultural competence, because there is no such thing as being competent with cultures. This is because cultures evolve, move and change, and no two people from the same culture can have the same cultural experience.
Therefore, cultural sensitivity requires having all of those good elements of being trauma-informed, anti-racist and antioppressive, and listening carefully and thoughtfully. Unfortunately, because of the gender-specific bias of misogyny and patriarchy that exists in the system, we see time and again that the state response is not sensitive.
Cultural sensitivity is definitely required, but I don't necessarily agree that it can be provided only in spaces that are designed only for particular cultures, because that breeds the homogenization and othering of the communities.
I think what really needs to happen is that all spaces need to learn what it means to be trauma-informed and culturally sensitive.
12:05 p.m.
NDP
Leah Gazan NDP Winnipeg Centre, MB
Thank you so much.
To finish, we don't want to other groups, but you believe we need to make sure that all spaces are, first of all, reflective of the populations they're serving and are always culturally relevant to the people using their services.
12:05 p.m.
Executive Director, Barbra Schlifer Commemorative Clinic
Yes. I agree with you.
12:05 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Shelby Kramp-Neuman
Excellent.
That will conclude our first panel. On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank our witnesses for their testimony.
We will suspend for about five minutes to transition to our second panel.
Because we didn't get to a third round, is there consensus to commence with Dominique and then Anita on your side? We'll just continue.
Perfect. We'll suspend for five minutes.
12:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Shelby Kramp-Neuman
The committee will resume our meeting and the study of coercive behaviour.
We are now here to welcome our second panel of witnesses, but first I would like to make a few comments for their benefit.
Before speaking, please wait until I recognize you by name. For those participating via video conference, click on the microphone icon to activate your mic, and please mute yourself when you're not speaking. For those in the room, your mic will be controlled by the proceedings and verification officer.
You may speak in the official language of your choice. Interpretation services are available. You have the choice of either floor audio, English or French for your earpiece. If interpretation is lost, please let me know right away.
I would like now to welcome our witnesses.
From the National Association of Women and the Law, we have Suzanne Zaccour, director of legal affairs; and from Sagesse Domestic Violence Prevention Society, we have Andrea Silverstone, chief executive officer, and Carrie McManus, director of innovation and programs, who are both joining us by video conference and will be sharing their time.
Each group will have five minutes for their opening remarks followed by a round of questions.
I would like to give the floor to Suzanne to start for five minutes.
Thank you.
12:15 p.m.
Suzanne Zaccour Director of Legal Affairs, National Association of Women and the Law
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I wish to thank the committee for inviting me to appear today.
My name is Suzanne Zaccour. I have a Ph.D. in law and am the director of legal affairs at the National Association of Women and the Law.
The National Association of Women and the Law, or NAWL, is a feminist law reform organization that, in 2024, is celebrating 50 years of legal leadership to advance women's rights.
Coercive control is a serious and often life-threatening form of violence against women, characterized by severe entrapment and liberty deprivation. The response to this violence can take the form of a new crime as a way to recognize the persistent gaps in how the criminal justice system addresses intimate partner violence. At the same time, the ability of the criminal justice system to deliver justice to survivors of intimate partner violence has been called into question. Importantly, many survivors, including some of the most marginalized, choose not to engage with the police or the criminal justice system. These survivors should also be protected by our society and our institutions.
I'd like to focus on how, when there are children involved, coercive and controlling partners can enlist the family justice system to further their entrapment of women.
Two days ago, as I was preparing for this testimony, I received an email from a victim who herself—not her abuser—is facing fines and eight days of incarceration. If she doesn't return her kid to her violent ex, she'll be found in contempt.
The women who contact us all tell us the same story, save for a few details: They left their spouse, got bogged down in the family justice system and had their child entrusted to the abusive father, first through shared custody and then exclusively.
How do courts come to entrust children to violent fathers? They base their judgment on a pseudo‑scientific theory that has taken hold in our courts, that is, the theory of parental alienation.
Parental alienation is a theory that suggests that when a child doesn't want to see their father, it's the mother's fault. In practice, this concept is being used in family courts across the country to punish mothers for disclosing family violence. Rather than being listened to and validated in their experience of abuse or neglect, children are told their feelings are not appropriate. Children are being forced to spend time or even live with their father, even when they greatly fear him.
The concept of parental alienation and its dramatic interventions, such as children being prevented from having any contact with their primary caregiver, is not supported by credible science. It relies on myths and stereotypes about family violence and is causing extreme harm to mothers and children. This is why the National Association of Women and the Law and 250 other feminist organizations across all provinces and two territories in Canada are calling for the federal government to ban parental alienation accusations from being used in family court. This demand echoes a recent report by the UN special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, which called on all countries to legislate to prohibit the use of parental alienation concepts in family law. Spain has explicitly prohibited through legislation the use of this pseudo-concept. Canada needs to be next.
There can be no justice or safety for victims of coercive control if they are deterred from leaving or denouncing a violent partner due to the fear of losing their children because of family courts relying on harmful myths and stereotypes. To protect victims and free mothers and children from enduring coercion and control, we ask this committee to echo our call to the Minister of Justice by including in its report the recommendation to ban parental alienation accusations from being used in family court.
Thank you for your attention.
I'll be happy to answer your questions and talk more about the situation in other countries.
12:15 p.m.
Conservative
12:15 p.m.
Andrea Silverstone Chief Executive Officer, Sagesse Domestic Violence Prevention Society
Thank you so much for inviting us to speak on this important topic.
Domestic abuse is far more than a black eye or broken bone, but all too often we focus on instances of physical abuse, since that's what our laws commonly recognize, leaving the 60% to 80% of survivors who experience non-physical forms of abuse to go unvalidated and unsupported.
I'm hopeful that with this study you agree that we must stop this epidemic of violence by seriously considering legislation to prevent and intervene in cases of coercive control.
Many jurisdictions around the world have taken steps to address coercive control, which we define as a pattern of behaviour that removes personal agency.
As was already mentioned, England, Wales and Scotland have enacted coercive control legislation. In addition, legislation to address coercive control within domestic violence has been enacted in Ireland, Australia, three U.S. states with three more pending, and South Africa. There, they've established domestic violence courts that require police to refer victims to appropriate supports, and they have enacted provisions for the financial support of survivors.
France is the only country that has coercive control legislation that governs both domestic violence and cults and groups that use mental manipulation.
While there are many things that we can learn from these jurisdictions, the greatest thing that we want to emphasize today is that coercive control is a framework that allows victims to see their experiences recognized and validated. They are then empowered to share their stories and seek help.
Three years before the United Kingdom criminalized coercive control, they changed their definition of domestic violence to include coercive control. Their Home Office began talking about it in this way, and the social sector talked about it as coercive control as well. In those three years, domestic abuse calls to the police increased by 31%.
In addition, research from the College of Policing in the U.K. found that once enacted, the law enhanced the police response to domestic abuse, allowing for earlier and more effective intervention. It also found that there have not been any identified issues with charges laid against victims. This radical change spotlights the power of changing the public discourse and the legislation around coercive control and abuse.
With that, I'm going to turn it over to my colleague, Carrie McManus, who's our director of innovation and programs.
12:20 p.m.
Carrie McManus Director, Innovation and Programs, Sagesse Domestic Violence Prevention Society
Thanks, Andrea.
Today, I want to talk about what we have heard from people impacted by coercive control.
I cannot emphasize enough that the way we talk about abuse today has a very personal impact on how survivors view themselves, how they understand and contextualize their experiences and the steps that they take to get support.
For many, coercive control is like an invisible cage. They feel its effects but have trouble defining it in their own lives. Too often at Sagesse, we get calls from survivors downplaying their own abuse, even though they've had the ability to make decisions in their own best interest stolen from them. They're not sure that they deserve or need our help.
I had a client once who shared a story with me of an ex randomly popping up, showing up, including when they were out and running. They never exchanged a word, but the client was terrified, even as they were told, or they told themselves, that it was a coincidence and they weren't in any danger.
This doubt and questioning often happens when survivors bravely face social stigma and shame to share their stories with their friends, family and colleagues. That's why any move to address coercive control must include these informal supporters, who are pivotal to eradicating violence.
Eighty per cent of people who experience abuse tell a friend or family member first. If they have a positive conversation in which their experiences of coercive control are taken seriously, they are more likely to seek out formal support and have positive outcomes.
One example of this comes to mind from an unlikely informal supporter. He worked as a banking associate. He provided a unique window into the personal lives of these customers, including those impacted by coercive control. Over a few months, he developed a friendly relationship with a customer who was a newcomer to Canada. One day, when the client came in to set up a bank account, they seemed to be particularly distracted, checking their phone every few minutes. When asked if everything was okay, the customer shared that things had been stressful at home and their partner was tracking their location throughout the day. Having had other clients disclose similar situations—particularly newcomers who didn't know where else to go for help—he was happy to direct them to Sagesse.
This is one of many examples of regular Canadians empowered to intervene because they understand coercive control and the terrible impact it has on individuals, families and communities.
To turn the tide on abuse, we must do more. This includes employing a coercive control lens in drafting legislation, helping every Canadian to recognize and talk about abuse, and increasing support for survivors and their supporters, who will be empowered to seek out help in far greater numbers.
Thank you for your time today and for your attention to this dangerous form of abuse.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Shelby Kramp-Neuman
Thank you, all, for your opening remarks. At this point, we will move to our rounds of questions. I'd like to start with Dominique.
The floor is yours for six minutes.
12:25 p.m.
Conservative
Dominique Vien Conservative Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
I would like to say that all of us around the table are old enough to know that coercive control doesn't necessarily affect only young women or women in precarious financial situations. I think it particularly affects women, of course, and can affect almost all women.
My first question is for Ms. Silverstone or Ms. McManus, since they are both from the same organization.
You raised the element of family, of community as well. I think these are bulwarks, or at least sentinels, who should exist and be able to speak out against these situations.
In your opinion, are there any particular characteristics of someone who exercises coercive control?