2. A Review of the Socio-Legal Literature (continued)
While there has been little systematic research on the effects of stalking on victims[18] , common sense and anecdotal evidence suggests that to live in fear for one's life from an obsessed individual must have devastating effects on one's emotional and physical well-being[19] . The terror must be that much greater for victims of previous violence by former intimates, who thereby already know the brutality of their predators. There is some evidence that victims who live in fear for their lives and for the lives of those around them can suffer long term emotional trauma[20] . There is also evidence that some victims suffer post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), or at least some of its symptoms. In severe cases, victims may "experience reactions other than PTSD such as depression, substance abuse, phobic anxiety, generalized anxiety, obsessive-compulsive behaviours, and dissociative disorders."
[21]
Given the vast difference in, for example, criminal harassers who are erotomaniacs (who seldom act on their delusions)[22] and those who are former spouses (who treat their victims as personal possessions and often act violently on their obsessions and inabilities to accept separation)[23] , it is perhaps unfortunate that the media[24] and the politicians view them both through a single lens. There are few systematic studies on how to change the behaviour of criminal harassers. The conclusions of those who work with them is that generally the prognosis for erotomaniacs, love obsessionals, and sociopaths is quite grim[25].
Perpetrators who criminally harass former intimates are, in many respects, similar to those who engage in violence when they are still living with their partners; criminal harassment often continues the "relationship"
beyond its natural life. Treatment techniques for both is the same, since the personalities and defence mechanisms of the two groups are similar[26] .
- [18] Cooper's otherwise comprehensive bibliography does not address this issue.
- [19] Murray, J. of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench stated that Parliament, in enacting the legislation,
"recognized the self-evident risk of substantial harm such behaviour is capable of causing"
. R. v. Sillipp (1995), 99 C.C.C. (3d) 394 (Alta. Q.B.) at 415.
- [20] Guy, Robert A.,
"The Nature and Constitutionality of Stalking Laws"
(1993) 46 Vand. Law Review 991 as cited in Ellen F. Sohn, "Antistalking Statutes: Do They Actually Protect Victims?"
(1994) 30(3) Criminal Law Bulletin 203 at 205.
- [21] Kathleen G. McAnaney, Laura A. Curliss, and C. Elizabeth Abeyta-Price,
"From Imprudence to Crime: Anti-stalking Laws"
(1993) 68 The Notre Dame Law Review 819 at 850-853.
- [22] This is the conventional wisdom of clinicians, however there is little research on this issue. See the discussion by Mary Cooper, Criminal Harassment and Potential for Treatment: Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography (Vancouver: BC Institute on Family Violence, 1994) at 10-12.
- [23] A review of the literature was done by Mary Cooper, Assessing the Risk of Repeated Violence Among Men Arrested for Wife Assault: A Review of the Literature (Vancouver: BC Institute on Family Violence, 1993). Her review of the literature was used to develop a Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide (SARA)
"to assess the risk of future violence in men arrested fro spousal assault."
P. Randell Kropp, Stephen D. Hart, Christopher D. Webster, and Derek Eaves, Manual for the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide (Vancouver: The British Columbia Institute on Family Violence, 1994) at 1.
- [24] The media portray stalkers as obsessed and pathological. See for example, Rosemary Cairns Way,
"The Criminalization of Stalking: An Exercise in Media Manipulation and Political Opportunism"
(1994) 39 McGill Law Journal 379 at 385. Efforts to pathologize those who criminally harass others are seen in the work of Dr. Park Eliot Dietz, a forensic pycho-therapist in the United States, who has characterized all stalkers as abnormal--"There is something wrong with each and everyone of them"
--quoted in Nannette Diacovo, "California's Anti-Stalking Statute: Deterrent Or False"
(1995) 24(2) Southwestern University Law Review 389 at 392. This characterization has the (perhaps unintended) side effect of identifying the harasser as "different"
from the "rest of us,"
and as different from most people we know, when in fact most victims of harassment will know their perpetrators.
- [25] Mary Cooper, Criminal Harassment and Potential for Treatment: Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography (Vancouver: BC Institute on Family Violence, 1994) at 13-24; Nannette Diacovo,
"California's Anti-Stalking Statute: Deterrent Or False"
(1995) 24(2) Southwestern University Law Review 389 at 393-395; Kathleen G. McAnaney, Laura A. Curliss, and C. Elizabeth Abeyta-Price, "From Imprudence to Crime: Anti-stalking Laws"
(1993) 68 The Notre Dame Law Review 819 at 853-859.
- [26] Kathleen G. McAnaney, Laura A. Curliss, and C. Elizabeth Abeyta-Price,
"From Imprudence to Crime: Anti-stalking Laws"
(1993) 68 The Notre Dame Law Review 819 at 856.
