Status of Women Committee on Sept. 18th, 2024

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

I call the meeting to order.

Welcome to meeting number 120 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women.

Before we begin, I would like to ask all in-person participants to read the guidelines written on the updated cards on the table. These measures are in place to help prevent audio feedback incidents and to protect the health and safety of all participants, including the interpreters.

I'd also like to remind all members of the following points. Please wait until I recognize you by name before speaking. All comments should be addressed through the chair.

Members, please raise your hand if you wish to speak, whether participating in person or on Zoom.

Before we begin, I'd like to acknowledge that we have Madeleine back in the room. We didn't appropriately say goodbye to Madeleine when she moved on to another committee.

[Marc Serré, Liberal, Nickel Belt, ON]

She's gone to official languages.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Thank you, Madeleine. You were fantastic in welcoming me and then guiding me through my first little while as chair.

Now we welcome Tina. Welcome aboard. I think we're in good hands, so thank you very much.

Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2) and the motion adopted by the committee on Monday, November 27, 2023, the committee is continuing its study on coercive behaviour.

I have a trigger warning before we welcome our witnesses. We will be discussing experiences related to violence and coercive control. This may be triggering to viewers with similar experiences. If you feel distressed or need help, please advise the clerk.

For all witnesses and members of Parliament, it is important to recognize that these are very difficult discussions, so let's try to be as compassionate as we can in our conversations.

At this point, it's my pleasure to introduce our witnesses.

In the room, from the Coalition of Families Victims of Post-Separation Abuse, we have Julie Rioux. Thank you.

Joining us by video conference from Little Warriors, we also have Wanda Polzin-Holman, clinical director.

From the Safe Centre of Peel, we have Shelina Jeshani, director of strategic partnerships and collaboration, also joining us by video conference.

From the Women's Habitat of Etobicoke, we have Carla Neto, executive director, joining us by video conference.

You will each have five minutes for opening remarks, followed by rounds of questions.

Ms. Rioux, we will begin with you. We'll allow five minutes for your comments. Thank you.

[Julie Rioux, Coalition of Families Victims of Post-Separation Abuse]

Good afternoon.

The Coalition of Families Victims of Post-Separation Abuse is composed of survivors, along with allies such as lawyers, medical professionals and mental health professionals. Our mission is to give survivors a voice, as we felt unheard.

Today we want Canadians and this committee to know that leaving does not stop the abuse. In fact, it often escalates it. Coercive control is the gateway to domestic abuse, post-separation abuse, parental alienation allegations and legal abuse, and at times it ends in femicide and filicide.

Our social and judicial professionals and institutions are often leveraged by abusers to continue to perpetuate abuse. At times, these professionals are complicit.

Femicide occurs every two and a half days in Canada, and 62% of perpetrators were either a current or former partner.

In the name of youth protection and judicial independence, the Charter rights of families are violated.

I'd like to start with an example in Atlantic Canada.

A father has been convicted of raping the mother. Child protective services confirmed the abuse of all four children by the father. Child protection services removed its supervision services, resulting in the father's criminal undertakings being modified. However, supervision remained at the mother's request, despite pressure from the family court.

Meanwhile, the perpetrator is requesting spousal support and fifty-fifty parenting time at the family court trial, and he will likely be incarcerated at the time of trial.

The victim, a health professional who regularly sees victims of domestic violence, worries about recommending that women leave an abuse situation, as she is cognizant that leaving the relationship to protect herself means she may not be able to protect her children.

In Quebec, the programme sociojudiciaire is co-authored and managed by the Quebec youth court judges and the DPJ. It states that protective parents, usually the mothers, exhibit alienating behaviours since they often have a personality disorder or mental health problems. This same document states that alienation is a type of psychological abuse, which they refer to as

a “severe separation conflict” or a “loyalty conflict.”

Thus, survivors are faced with systemic discrimination and with judicial bias about mental health. For example, a father is charged with four counts of aggravated assault and two counts of sexual assault. The mother loses custody as she is seen as attacking the father and is labelled as “alienating” due to the children disclosing the abuse to police. A five-day criminal trial occurs. In case of conviction, the DPJ is planning an alternative placement as the mother is unsuitable as she continues to maintain that the father is dangerous.

Let's be clear: These “attacks” they're speaking about are the mother going to police and testifying in criminal court. Cases like this are rampant. They are further complicated as they are seized by Quebec youth court, and the Quebec Court of Appeal does not hear appeals from parents. Children placed in youth centres, whose intent is to improve their lives, are routinely confined to cell-like concrete isolation rooms and abused by staff. When girls run away, they are strip-searched upon their return. Our children are not convicted felons, yet they are being treated as such.

In Ontario, a mom discovered evidence that her teen son was being sex trafficked in foster care. She brought the evidence to police and CAS. In retaliation, CAS accused the mom of sex trafficking her younger children and cut off her parenting time, yet the police laid charges and convicted the person of drugging and assaulting her son. This mom has video evidence of fentanyl on the table, with dad with the kids nearby, and dad's girlfriend shooting up, along with countless videos taken by concerned neighbours.

Also in Ontario, there is an issue with Superior Court judges, as they are routinely ordering custody reversals due to alienation allegations, and ordering reunification therapy without consent and reunification camps. The camps occur in Ontario, but children are also sent to the U.S.A. This violates charter rights and the Canada Health Act as they pertain to consent to medical treatment and the child's right to have a say, as per the UN declaration of rights.

In western Canada, a father maintained fifty-fifty custody after being charged with assault. He had strangled the mother while the baby was in her arms. He pleaded to a lesser charge. He continues to have unsupervised access and has continued his teaching career.

Clearly, courts are not prioritizing the child's or the mother's right to safety under section 7 of the charter.

In conclusion, many women feel they will only be free once murdered by their abuser. The voices of too many children are being silenced by death. Despite jurisdictional challenges, we implore the House of Commons and the government to make legislative changes to prioritize children and victim safety, along with stronger implementation of the charter.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

You were right on five minutes. Thank you kindly for your testimony.

Next, I welcome Ms. Polzin-Holman. You have five minutes.

[Wanda Polzin-Holman, Clinical Director, Little Warriors]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

My name is Dr. Wanda Polzin-Holman, and I'm the clinical director at Little Warriors. On behalf of the vulnerable children and caregivers we work with, I want to thank the committee for providing the opportunity to participate in this important study. Within my testimony today, I will focus on Little Warriors' perspectives and on the problem of coercive control, the need for reforms and ways to better protect survivors.

Little Warriors is a not-for-profit national charitable organization focused on the awareness, prevention and treatment of child sexual abuse. Since 2008, our team at our centre outside Sherwood Park, Alberta, has created programs that have transformed the lives of thousands of children, adolescents and families from across Canada who have experienced child sexual abuse.

Little Warriors' evidence-based, trauma-informed treatment program at the Be Brave Ranch is the only program of its kind to offer intensive, specialized, multimodal treatment to children between the ages of 8 to 17 who have been sexually abused and are survivors, as well as their caregivers. As the needs in this area of child sexual abuse unfortunately continue to grow, we also have an evidence-based educational workshop, Prevent It!, that was created in conjunction with researchers at the University of Alberta with the aim to teach adults about child sexual abuse.

We continue to research areas of mental health, trauma treatment, addiction and adverse childhood experiences as these issues relate to child sexual abuse. At Little Warriors, we work with various stakeholders as well as a scientific and clinical council to ensure healthy outcomes for the children and families with whom we work.

We consistently demonstrate high, reliable change and recovery rates, highlighted by our ongoing third party independent outcome measurements. Research relating to our programs demonstrates a social return of an investment of 11:1 as this crosses systems of child and family services, education, health, crisis prevention and criminal justice. Research highlights that upwards of one in four girls and one in six boys experience an unwanted sexual act before they turn 18, and recent reports indicate that over the past five years, online sexual luring of Canadian children is up 815%.

We define issues around coercion in the context of child sexual abuse, obviously highlighting that children cannot provide consent for any type of online or in-person sexual abuse.

Coercion occurs when children are encouraged or manipulated and forced to do something for sexual access. Of note, this coercion occurs in the hands of adults as well as other children and youth at times. At Little Warriors, we unfortunately see children who've been harmed through intrusive, exploitative and traumatic sexual activities. We see this in various forms, including online, where there is a lack of clear controls and where sites encourage children to become involved with potential offenders and perpetrators. This happens in person as well; research shows that 90%-plus of the time, their offender is someone who is well-known to them.

Some recommendations that we would like to have considered are barrier-free supports across the continuum of care for children who have been sexually abused. Ironically, clinical supports are sometimes more easily accessed for offenders than for survivors.

A second recommendation is revisiting laws that continue to protect offenders, such as non-disclosure agreements and minimal sentencing. Short sentences without accountability often allow for reoffending, and data shows that approximately 29% of child sexual abuse offenders are reconvicted of a new offence in adult court within five years of their original conviction.

As well, we recommend laws that require accountability for social media and online predatory websites.

Fourth is an increased earlier intervention relating to awareness of child sexual abuse and coercion as well as human trafficking of children and youth. More awareness and support are needed for marginalized individuals and communities where there are higher percentages of people impacted.

Fifth is for the government and parliamentarians to ensure that survivors of coercion have full access to support through victim services programs. This can be done by making it easier for individuals to donate to charitable organizations and by providing financial support to organizations—like Little Warriors—that invest in prevention efforts and work with survivors of coercive abuse.

Thank you for your time. I am happy to answer any questions, and I look forward to working with all of you to address these concerns.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Thank you very much, Ms. Polzin-Holman.

Next, I welcome Ms. Shelina Jeshani for five minutes.

[Shelina Jeshani, Director, Strategic Partnerships and Collaboration, Safe Centre of Peel]

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

I would like to convey my gratitude to the standing committee for this invitation and to the survivors who have shared their stories courageously in the hope of creating a safer country for all girls and women.

We know the data on the prevalence of intimate partner violence in our country is overwhelming. We know this is a phenomenon that is under-reported. The number of victims is far greater than we know, especially those who experience coercive control.

My name is Shelina Jeshani and I am the director of the Safe Centre of Peel, which is located in the region of Peel in Ontario. The Safe Centre is an innovative, evidence-based and best-practice model of how a community can work together to respond and provide a safety net for victims of IPV. The centre has been in operation since 2011 because of the commitment of 24 community partners, led by Catholic Family Services Peel-Dufferin. Together they provide an integrated and coordinated service delivery model.

In 2008, our community partners began discussing how we needed to respond differently to IPV in our community. We couldn't continue to work in silos, duplicate services and watch while vulnerable women, with their children, tried to navigate systems we had created. Survivors told us they did not want to have to repeat their stories over and over. They did not want to be told they couldn't bring their children with them to these different services. They often gave up trying to travel from place to place and navigate a complex system they didn't understand. They didn't know where to go for help and what was available for them. We were losing our early intervention opportunities. We heard that it was particularly difficult for victims who didn't speak the language, were new Canadians, had low to no finances, had young children, and had virtually no support system. The Safe Centre of Peel recognizes that cross-sectoral collaboration among human services is vital in responding to victims and survivors of IPV.

We see survivors coming forward with various experiences of abuse and violence. One of the most subtle forms we see is coercive control. This is behaviour that attempts to dominate, intimidate and isolate victims. It involves psychological, emotional and financial manipulation. This can play out as constant tracking and surveillance, threats, isolating victims from their friends and family, and controlling finances and resources. It can be masked by comments such as, “I don't want to share you with anyone else” or, “I will manage the money and let you know how much you can spend.”

At first, the various attempts to maintain control are disguised by the perpetrator's perceived overwhelming worry and concern for the victim, or by their increased dependency on having their emotional needs met by the victim. We hear women sharing how signs of coercive control sometimes began subtly in the early part of their relationship, where he would start exhibiting jealousy and having an over-dependence on the victim to cater to his emotional needs, therefore slowly beginning to isolate and control her.

We know that forms of coercive control increase as the perpetrator feels less and less in control. Research shows that when there is coercive control in relationships, there is a high risk of it escalating to physical violence, including severe assaults and even homicide. For many victims, coercive control creates an environment of fear and entrapment that can quickly deteriorate into more overt forms of abuse.

The effects of coercive control are profound, causing psychological trauma, loss of autonomy and long-term mental health issues for survivors. We cannot forget the impact that living in a home with this type of control and abuse has on children and youth.

The following are some of our recommendations.

There is a need for public awareness campaigns to educate Canadians about coercive control and its impacts. The goal should be to raise awareness to support early intervention and prevention.

Invest in specialized services for victims of coercive control, including access to legal support, safe housing, trauma-informed counselling and financial assistance.

Integrated hubs like the Safe Centre of Peel that have a number of sectors working together should be adequately resourced to support the unique needs of victims experiencing non-physical forms of abuse, in order to provide early intervention support.

Law enforcement and justice need more training on understanding the holistic nature of the dynamics of IPV, which includes coercive control.

Finally, further research and more data on the prevalence of coercive control and effectiveness of various interventions are needed.

In conclusion, recognizing coercive control early and intervening effectively is crucial to preventing potential escalation to physical violence, thereby saving lives. This is where we need the strategy and the investment.

Thank you for the opportunity to share the work of the Safe Centre of Peel and for your commitment to address gender-based violence.

I will be happy to take any questions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Thank you, Ms. Jeshani.

For the last witness testimony, we welcome Ms. Carla Neto. You have five minutes as well.

[Carla Neto, Executive Director, Women's Habitat of Etobicoke]

Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

My name is Carla Neto. I appear before this committee representing Women's Habitat of Etobicoke, a feminist multiservice organization serving victims and survivors of gender-based violence and their children since 1978.

We operate in two distinct service locations: a 25-bed emergency shelter for women and children escaping violence and an outreach centre that works with impacted women, many of whom are still living with abusive partners.

It would be remiss of me if I didn't mention that in recent years we have seen an increase in women escaping intimate partner violence as well as human trafficking. Both locations support women to assess risk, develop safety plans, and offer trauma-informed crisis and ongoing counselling, referrals and advocacy to essential services, such as housing, health care, legal services, and parenting programs, as well as prevention and leadership programming for boys and girls.

We thank you for inviting us to appear as part of this panel of witnesses. We commend you on your efforts to further study this matter of coercive behaviour.

Historically, much emphasis has been placed on physically aggressive acts in intimate partner violence. In doing so, we lack the broader context of relationships and miss the opportunity to see the role and impact of non-physical violence. Although we can't say that coercive control and behaviour will always eventually result in physical abuse, it is fair to say that in our experience in working with victims and survivors of abuse, all physical abuse was preceded by and will continue to include coercive behaviour.

Coercive behaviour occurs within the context of complex dynamics in intimate partner relationships when one partner exerts power and control over the other. Coercive behaviour is action taken to force, manipulate or intimidate someone into doing something against their will. It is harder to identify by family and friends, and it involves the use of threats, pressure and force to control another person's actions. Unlike overt physical violence, coercive behaviour can be subtle and often involves emotional, psychological or social manipulation. That is the reason we often regard coercive controlling behaviour as being invisible chains that restrain victims of both intimate partner violence and human trafficking.

Some victims and survivors of coercive controlling behaviour describe their experiences as living under a constant, never-ending threat. Others describe feeling like captives trapped in plain sight. Those of us who are survivors of war recognize some of the same psychological effects and impacts in the victims and survivors of coercive controlling behaviour.

Coercive controlling behaviour in intimate partner violence has two main components: the coercion and the control. Coercion can be the use of force or threats of physical aggression to alter the victim's behaviour. Control is used to compel obedience by the victim by monopolizing vital resources, dictating preferred choices, limiting options and depriving the victim of essential supports needed to exercise a level of independence. Some of the examples include threats of intimidation, isolation, manipulation, monitoring, surveillance, control of finances and emotional abuse.

Coercive behaviour is often used in abusive relationships, workplaces and other power dynamics where the goal is to dominate and reduce the victim's autonomy.

Finally, we assert that strategies and efforts to address coercive behaviour require a comprehensive multi-level approach that involves various stakeholders, including individuals, institutions and communities. These would include legal protections and enforcement, whereby governments and lawmakers create and strengthen laws to criminalize coercive behaviour; education and public awareness campaigns; supports for non-profit organizations and NGOs; and schools and educational institutions where students can be taught about healthy relationships.

There should also be meaningful funding for services supporting victims and survivors; training for professionals; perpetrator rehabilitation and accountability mechanisms; financial support for victims and survivors; empowerment of communities like religious leaders, friends, families and neighbours; and developing technology and digital solutions that keep victims protected from surveillance, tracking and harassment.

It involves promoting research and developing policy on coercive behaviour to understand its effects and develop evidence-based interventions.

Once again, I express our thanks and appreciation for your invitation to participate in this very important conversation.

I too am available to answer questions. Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Excellent. Thank you, Ms. Neto.

Thank you all for your opening remarks.

We will now move to our first round of questions. I will begin with Dominique.

Mrs. Vien, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Colleagues, it's good to see you again after the summer break.

It's always chilling information. The news is also catching up to us when it comes to violence against women. I took personal notes on the subject. In the last 10 years, violent crime has gone up; sexual assault has gone up; murders have gone up; violent gun crime has gone up. In addition, the number of murders linked to street gangs has exploded. We live in a world where violence is absolutely extraordinary, in the sense that it is beyond comprehension.

Ms. Rioux, since the committee began this study, I find myself somewhat stunned by examples we hear of women—it quite often concerns women—who are victims of violence. Even when they have evidence, videos and witnesses, at the end of the day, they are the ones who bear the blame and are accused of being responsible for these situations.

You mentioned that the courts of appeal are rejecting appeals from lower courts. There is an ignorance or lack of recognition of what is happening in women's lives. We don't understand the problems. Ultimately, women are simply not believed.

How do you explain that? Which of the legislative changes you mentioned should be put forward?

[Julie Rioux]

That question contains several others.

With respect to legislative changes, there should be an in-depth review of judicial independence in comparison with Charter rights. Faced with a case, judges often use their judicial independence to make decisions that they believe are in the best interests of the child, even if it puts the woman or children at risk.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Could you give us an example of what you're trying to illustrate?

[Julie Rioux]

For example, a woman may have obtained a protection order from a criminal court. A criminal court judge might conclude that there is sufficient evidence to say that this woman's attacker cannot come into contact with her or her children. However, a Youth Division judge or a provincial Superior Court can lift that order to facilitate access rights. So, in order to avoid requiring the use of services to supervise access rights and transfers, the condition prohibiting the aggressor from approaching the victim will be removed, but only for the right of access. Even if there was a protection order for the children, it will be removed to facilitate access rights. In some cases, it might be concluded that access rights were complicated by applying for a protection order, and then the father will be granted 50% custody.

[Lisa Hepfner, Liberal, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

That is unbelievable!

[Julie Rioux]

Yes, it's incredible. Our lawyers tell us not to ask for a protection order.

As for the higher courts, you alluded to the Court of Quebec, but it's the Chambre de la jeunesse, the youth division. The judges insinuated that part of the socio-judicial intervention program for severe separation conflicts was to refer the case to the youth division. The Quebec Superior Court can no longer apply the Divorce Act because there are protection proceedings under the Youth Protection Act. The judges say it's an exceptional law that takes precedence over everything else. The criminal court is supposed to enforce the charter, but doesn't give it priority. As for the Quebec Court of Appeal, in 2023, it accepted no appeals from parents regarding a decision by the youth division.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

Ms. Rioux, you alluded to parental alienation. I can see that there's a little bit of that too in what you're raising. We heard testimony on this issue here, which was quite disturbing.

Are you in direct contact with some of the cases?

[Julie Rioux]

In all the cases I've mentioned, except for the example of the youth centres, I have direct contact with the victims. In fact, I asked their permission to present their cases. As for my contacts with youth centres, they were made through an ally.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

How could we solve the problem of parental alienation?

[Julie Rioux]

In my opinion, we should first look at Reem Alsalem's recommendations mentioned in a UN report, and implement them. Then, we'd have to improve the way we select the people who testify as court experts…

Is my time up?

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Yes.

[Dominique Vien, Conservative, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis, QC]

You see how it sneaks up on you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Shelby Kramp-Neuman]

Welcome, Sonia. You have six minutes.

[Sonia Sidhu, Liberal, Brampton South, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, witnesses, for your important testimony.

This is a very important subject. Today we are discussing coercive behaviour against survivors. I want to thank all of you for the work you're doing on the ground.

I'm from Peel and, Ms. Jeshani, I say thank you. You are leading that team, and the work you are doing.... This is not the first time you're here, Ms. Jeshani. I know that in 2022 we invited you to provide testimony on intimate partner and domestic violence in Canada. In 2023 we all visited your centre during another study, a study on human trafficking. You talked about isolating the victim and controlling finances, and your organizations are giving support to women in Peel, with multiple services under one roof.

Can you talk about how you, with these multiple services, are helping women? How are you helping survivors with trauma-informed support?