Psychological Impact

Many writers in the area agree that hate crimes have an impact on the victim above and beyond that of simply the criminal act (Ardley, 2005; Boeckmann & Turpin-Petrosino, 2002; Iganski, 2001).  Although many of the reactions listed in this section are reactions that any crime victim might have, researchers studying victims of hate crime have identified these reactions as being particularly important. These reactions may simply be a reasonable reaction to the extraordinary stress of being targeted by the perpetrator and harmed because of characteristics beyond the victim’s control (Bryant-Davis & Ocampo, 2005; Craig-Henderson & Sloan, 2003). There is evidence that victims of multiple hate crime events show more severe mental health symptoms than victims of a single incident (Mitchell et al., 2020), and this extends to those who have experienced multiple traumas throughout their life. Of note, support workers may also want to be aware that there can be gender differences in response to hate crimes or prejudice (Abu-Ras & Suarez, 2009), highlighting the need to focus on the victim’s report rather than general research findings.

Similar to research on all victims of crime, research specifically on victims of hate crimes or those who face repeated prejudice indicate that they often:

Differences from Other Victims

There are some differences between hate crime victims and victims of non-hate crimes. The following results are from research that directly compared victims of hate crime to similar (i.e., same culture) victims of non-hate crimes to note differences in reaction. Note that in most cases the response is like what is seen in any victim of crime, but the negative impact seems to be greater in those who have experienced hate crime.

In comparison to non-hate crime victims, hate crime victims are more likely to:

Support workers will want to pay close attention to these and other issues that they are accustomed to seeing in any crime victim. One explanation for the more severe reaction in hate crime victims is that the perpetrator targeted the victim because of their hatred toward how the victim appeared to them (Blake, 2001; Craig-Henderson & Sloan, 2003; McDevitt et al., 2001). The reaction is related to the victims’ feelings of marginalization. Thus, it makes it more difficult for victims to (re)build a feeling of a safe world. Furthermore, after the hate crime, victims are still likely to encounter other bias and prejudice that will re-emphasize that some in society do not accept them (Ardley, 2005; Chahal, 2017; Garnetts et al., 1990; Herek et al., 1997; Willis, 2004).

Identity Issues

Support workers will note that many clients who are victim of hate crimes will have issues involving how they see themselves, others, and their relationships. Identity includes: a) feelings of belonging to the group, b) group-specific behaviours and practices, and c) exploration of and commitment to the group (Dubow, Pargament, Boxer & Tarakeshwar, 2000). Several authors indicate that those victims who have a strong cultural identity and define themselves by that identity can be at greater risk for developing mental health symptoms after being a victim of a hate crime (Dubow et al., 2000; Janoff, 2005) or any prejudicial acts (Gutiérrez, 2022; Moradi & Risco, 2006). This may be because the victim has experienced an attack on both themselves and how they see themselves (Blake, 2001; Kaysen et al., 2005; Staub, 1996). Others point out, however, that those who do not have strong bonds to the identity characteristics targeted in the crime may be more likely to blame themselves, feel they are worthless, and not report the crime (Boeckmann & Liew, 2002). Support workers need to assess how important group identity issues are to the victim. By knowing whether a victim highly identifies with their group, support workers might better predict the types of problems the victim might face and be able to refer them to appropriate supports.

On the other hand, researchers also note that those who have a strong cultural identity can also look to teachings and people from their group for ways to cope (Adams et al., 2006; Dubow et al., 2000). They are also more likely to have social support within the community which can help them make sense of what has happened (Blee, 2005; Jackson, 2017; Janoff, 2005; Miville et al., 2005). Furthermore, they may be more likely to report the crime, seek help and strengthen their cultural identity (Boeckmann & Liew, 2002). In fact, research on diverse ethnic and cultural groups indicates that many people use group status and identity as a way of understanding themselves and their world (Alvarez et al., 2006; Chen et al., 2006; Miville et al., 2005; Wester et al., 2006). This understanding can have a major impact on how the person makes meaning about their victimization. Support workers should encourage those victims that have a strong sense of cultural identity to access supports within their community, as well as other supports. This will also help them make meaning that fits both their relationship to their culture and the dominant society (Craig-Henderson & Sloan, 2003; Dunbar, 2001).

The main goal in working with crime victims is helping them move on from the crisis of the criminal victimization and rebuild their life. If needed, this process includes helping them gain new understanding about how they now fit into their cultural group as well as to the dominant culture (Dunbar, 2001). With multi-racial victims or victims from different identity groups (e.g., black, Catholic, gay), healing may also include helping them access strengths and identity from several different cultures (Miville et al., 2005). Rosenwasser (2000) describes a group process called cooperative inquiry wherein people work together to develop their identity in the face of challenges. The process includes elements that help members build a healthy cultural identity with respect to their group and society in general. It appears this embracing of one’s cultural identity and setting boundaries around dealing with the dominant culture helps people move forward in a healthy manner.

Although this chapter has not generally focused on one group, there is an issue specific to 2SLGBTQI+ clients that is worthy of note. Several researchers have reported that 2SLGBTQI+ clients may react to being attacked by questioning their decision to be “out” (Cheng, 2004; Garnetts et al., 1990; Janoff, 2005; Stermac & Sheridan, 1993). Thus, support workers may find that victims may want to again hide their sexuality and may be confronted with issues similar to those they had faced when they came out (Janoff, 2005). Several other authors also discuss internalized homophobia, wherein the person adopts the negative view of the greater society on homosexuality (Herek et al., 2009; Kaysen et al., 2005). Although this is a specific issue raised around sexual orientation and gender identity, it is easy to see that any hate crime victim may have a similar response of trying to minimize any apparent differences they have, to better “fit” into general society (e.g., choice of dress, wearing identifying religious symbols). Victims and others from the group may also choose to highlight apparent differences in a show of defiance against hate crime perpetrators and self-advocacy.

Issues Involving Support Networks

As noted above, hate crimes involve waves of victims and affect all community members. We need to work with victims to help identify key people in their support networks that can help them make meaning of the crime. This is especially true if you as the support worker are not from the same identity group as the victims. Further, support workers may also need to partner with those in the victims’ support networks who may need to come to terms with their reactions to hate crime, possibly dealing with their own victimization history and reactions (Garnetts et al., 1990; Hansen et al., 2018; Klinic Community Health Centre, 2013). Victims must strike a balance that allows them to access support, but not overwhelm their network. Of note, survivor guilt often occurs in victims’ support networks or in others from the same group (Bryant-Davis & Ocampo, 2005). Thus, support workers need to educate victims about possible reactions of their network and help them succeed in reconnecting.

I wanted to end this section before we move on to treatment issues by pulling together what the above research means for victims who are seeking services. Perry (2008) highlighted this point around Indigenous victims of hate crime by noting the history of colonization, continued limitation of rights, the day-to-day dealing with prejudice, and the psychological impact of victimization when one sees the system is part of the problem. These points are very salient with Indigenous victims of hate crimes, but they are also salient to any victim of a hate crime who faces marginalization as part of their victimization or in their daily life. I would like to invite support workers to re-examine the potential psychological impacts of hate crime victimization and consider how you might feel dealing with these issues within a context of marginalization and prejudice. Now imagine dealing with the buildup of repeated instances of prejudice and marginalization that trigger and re-trigger earlier victimization; possibly contributing to concerns about future victimization. Within mental health, we acknowledge the cumulative nature of traumatic events as we diagnose and treat Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. What struck me about Dr. Perry’s point is that much of the literature is focused on hate crimes that are single events, possibly due to the criminal justice system focus on the definition. From a support perspective, we would serve our clients much better by realizing that hate crime victims who are willing to ask for help in the context of continued rejection and marginalization are showing courage, hope and a desire to take charge of their life. This also speaks to why many hate crime victims might seek out support in organizations not focused on criminal victimization, but in organizations that work with their group. This speaks to the importance of partnerships between victim services and various cultural entities to ensure a greater understanding of both the cultural issues and victim issues.