Thank you, Madam Chair.
I'd like to thank Mr. Boisvenu for his earlier testimony.
And thank you for having come Mr. Viater, because you also experienced the death of a child.
Ms. Tremblay and Ms. Jeanson, thank you very much. I always hesitate to congratulate you on your strength or your courage, because I'm not sure what you would really like us to retain from your time here. Your testimony about your own experiences was heart-rending, and we are here to listen to you and try to do our best as parliamentarians to change the way people think. It's surprising to hear about the extent to which we are in a period of violence and rising extremism, and how it all impinges on the erosion of women's rights, including instances of coercive violence. That's my impression.
My question is for the three witnesses: Mr. Viater, Ms. Tremblay and Ms. Jeanson.
Sometimes words are important. There are several troubling aspects to these cases of violence. For example, there is the loss of confidence in the system because of concerns about whether anyone will be listening. Then there is the question of conflicting descriptions of what happened, particularly in instances of assault and violence between intimate partners.
We have clearly heard the message about electronic bracelets. However, I'd like to take a broader look at domestic violence. Might it be better to combine the terms "coercive and manipulative violence" and "domestic violence" to enable as many victims as possible to report their abuser without having to wait until they have bruises on their face?