GLBT Hate Crime Prevention


Published on

Published in: Education, Travel, Business
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

GLBT Hate Crime Prevention

  1. 1. Hate Crime Victimization: Implications for Mental Health Practice Edward Dunbar, Ed.D. Pacific Psychological Associates and University of California, Los Angeles Tracy Marsh, Ph.D. Walden University
  2. 2. What We Will Discuss <ul><li>Incidence of hate crimes in California and the US </li></ul><ul><li>Crime scene and rap sheet data on hate crime offenders who target GLBT victims </li></ul><ul><li>Help-seeking activity of GLBT hate crime victims </li></ul><ul><li>Clinical practices to treat victims of bias aggression and hate crimes </li></ul>
  3. 3. Hate Crimes Reporting <ul><li>In 1990, the Hate Crimes Statistics Act was enacted “ to collect data on crimes committed because of the victim's race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity.” </li></ul><ul><li>Statistics differ based on source (national, state, local, research-based). </li></ul><ul><li>The Department of Justice estimates significant underreporting of GLBT hate crimes by as much as 24x -28x </li></ul>
  4. 4. Hate Crimes Legislation Orange = Hate Crimes Laws Include Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Yellow = Hate Crimes Laws Include Sexual Orientation White = No Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity Hate Crimes Law
  5. 5. 12% 14% 20% 16% 1 6% 14% 1 7% 1 6% 16% 14% 16% (percentage of all hate crimes reported) National: Total Offenses
  6. 6. Prevalence Trends <ul><li>Upwards of 75% of the GLB population have reported verbal harassment due to sexual orientation. </li></ul><ul><li>Roughly 25% have been the victim of actual or attempted crimes against their person. </li></ul><ul><li>Gay men are the most frequently targeted, followed by lesbians, and then bisexual men and women. </li></ul><ul><li>Very little data collected on hate crimes against transgender men or women. </li></ul>
  7. 7. California: <ul><li>GLBT hate crimes increased 7% from 2006 to 2007. </li></ul><ul><li>GLBT hate crimes represent 18% of all reported hate crimes state-wide. </li></ul><ul><li>Gay men are the most frequently targeted GLBT victims (50%). </li></ul><ul><li>Crimes against transgender men and women nearly tripled from 2006 to 2007 (25 total incidents). </li></ul>
  8. 8. Los Angeles County: <ul><li>Hate crimes targeting GLBT victims increased 9% in 2007. </li></ul><ul><li>Total incidents against GLBT represent 15% of all hate crimes. </li></ul><ul><li>Gay men most frequently targeted (92%) </li></ul><ul><li>Latino most frequently targeted (42%), followed by Caucasian (38%) and Black (14%) </li></ul><ul><li>Crimes due to gender orientation represent 2% of total, but more than doubled from 2006 to 2007. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Offenders of Sexual Orientation Bias Crimes <ul><li>Who are these people and what do they do? </li></ul>
  10. 10. Tell me what is the ‘Hate Crime Thing?’ <ul><li>Dunbar: “Tell me what is the ‘hate crime thing?’ </li></ul><ul><li>Howard: “I robbed a homosexual on Santa Monica, I had been doin’ it all night on … getting a lot of those guys …. I was with 5 other guys when we picked him. I had robbed lots of homosexuals because they have the money…I know all of them … </li></ul><ul><li>____________________________ </li></ul><ul><li>Dunbar: “So do you feel bad about the guy you beat up being disabled?” </li></ul><ul><li>Dan: “No… I am upset that I won’t get a job now.” </li></ul>
  11. 11. Composite Offender Profile: Sexual Orientation Bias Crimes <ul><li> Mean 25 th % 50 th % 75 th % </li></ul><ul><li>Offender Age 28.3 19 25 33 </li></ul><ul><li>Offender Gender Men: 90% Women: 10% </li></ul><ul><li>Offender Race/Ethnicity: </li></ul><ul><li>African-American 19% </li></ul><ul><li>Euro-White 30% </li></ul><ul><li>Latino 42% </li></ul><ul><li>Los Angeles City 2000 hate crime offenders (n=163) </li></ul>
  12. 12. Crime Scene Indicators: Offenders of Sexual Orientation Hate Crimes <ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Mileage: home to crime scene: 71% less than 1 mile (Mean 3.2 miles) </li></ul><ul><li>10% more than 10 miles </li></ul><ul><li>Offender number 58% single offender </li></ul><ul><li> 42% multiple offenders </li></ul><ul><li>Robbery/Burglary motive 5% property motive reported </li></ul><ul><li>95% no property motive </li></ul><ul><li>Frequency of offense 85% single incident </li></ul><ul><li> 15% serial/recurring crime </li></ul><ul><li>Offender psychological symptoms 1% bizarre symptoms/behavior </li></ul><ul><li> 99% no identified symptoms </li></ul><ul><li>Offender intoxication 11% clearly intoxicated </li></ul><ul><li>89% no evidence of intoxication </li></ul><ul><li>Drugs/alcohol at scene 7% substances found </li></ul><ul><li>93% no substances reported   </li></ul>
  13. 13. Offender Criminal History <ul><li>Criminal History Mean Frequency </li></ul><ul><li>Juvenile Charges: .78 20% had 1 or more juvenile charges Misdemeanor Convictions: 1.11 37% had 1 or more adult charges Felony Convictions: 1.50 32% had 1 or more adult convictions </li></ul>
  14. 14. Violence Risk Characteristics of Offenders of Sexual Orientation Hate Crimes <ul><li>History of prior violence 59% clear evidence / 9% probable prior violence </li></ul><ul><li>Age at first violent act 58% violent prior to age 20 / 31% violent between 20-30 </li></ul><ul><li>Employment problems 74% significant problems / 21% marginally employed </li></ul><ul><li>Substance abuse problems 55% significant problems / 40% some problems </li></ul><ul><li>Serious psychopathology 32% severe disturbance / 52% less severe disturbance </li></ul><ul><li>Early childhood problems 61% significant childhood problems / 33% less severe   </li></ul>
  15. 15. Offenders of Sexual Orientation Hate Crimes: Bias Indicators <ul><li>Hate language 90% clearly present </li></ul><ul><li>Hate symbols/icons present 5% clearly present </li></ul><ul><li>Hate gang/group member 6% group member </li></ul><ul><li>Expressed hate ideology 24% clearly present </li></ul><ul><li>Prior hate aggression 11% strong indication </li></ul>
  16. 16. “ Group Risk” Hypothesis <ul><ul><ul><li>Outgroup persons face greater risk of hate victimization than dominant cultural group persons </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Victim help-seeking behavior is mediated by worldview assumptions of their social ingroups </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>which may be contrary to dominant culture mores </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Institutional response to hate violence is contingent upon dominant culture assumptions concerning the victim’s social ingroup(s). </li></ul></ul></ul>
  17. 17. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder <ul><li>“… development of characteristic symptoms following exposure to an extreme stressor…” </li></ul><ul><li>“ The disorder may be especially severe or long lasting when the stressor is of human design”. </li></ul><ul><li>Must be present for more than 1 month following the event, and involve impairment of social, occupational or other areas of functioning. </li></ul><ul><li>Severity, duration and proximity of the event are most important determinants of likelihood for developing PTSD. </li></ul>
  18. 18. PTSD: Criteria <ul><li>Persistent re-experiencing of the traumatic event </li></ul><ul><li>Persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with trauma. </li></ul><ul><li>Numbing of general responsiveness. </li></ul><ul><li>Persistent symptoms of increased arousal. </li></ul>
  19. 19. PTSD: Common Symptoms <ul><li>Hypervigilance / startle response. </li></ul><ul><li>Impaired affect modulation </li></ul><ul><li>Self-destructive / impulsive behavior </li></ul><ul><li>Dissociative symptoms </li></ul><ul><li>Somatic complaints, difficulty sleeping </li></ul><ul><li>Feelings of ineffectiveness, shame, or guilt </li></ul><ul><li>Despair, hopelessness, irritability, outbursts </li></ul><ul><li>Hostility, social withdrawal </li></ul><ul><li>Feeling permanently damaged </li></ul>
  20. 20. PTSD: Prevalence <ul><li>Prevalence in the ‘general’ population: 5-10% </li></ul><ul><li>GLBT victims of hate crime show increased rates of depression, anxiety, anger, and PTSD (Herek, 1997) </li></ul><ul><li>31% of a GLBT sample who had experienced a hate crime experienced PTSD (full, partial, or symptoms): this is 3-4x the rate for non-GLB population (Dillon, 2001). </li></ul><ul><li>9% of a UK sample of adults showed signs of PTSD from victimization suffered in school as a child/adolescent (Rivers & Cowie, 2006) </li></ul>
  21. 21. GLBT Hate Crime Victimization: Herek’s Sacramento Study <ul><li>Nearly one-fifth of women and more than one-fourth of men had experienced a sexual orientation hate crime during their lifetime. </li></ul><ul><li>Hate crime victims had higher levels of depression, stress, and anger for as long as 5 years after their victimization occurred. </li></ul><ul><li>Hate crimes were less likely than other crimes to be reported to the police (33% vs. 57%). </li></ul>
  22. 22. GLBT Hate Crime Victimization Patterns: <ul><li>Factors of Victim Impact and Reportage </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What behavioral characteristics of hate crimes are </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>predictive of GLBT victimization? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Do specific hate crime acts mediate help seeking behavior? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Does victim gender and race/ethnicity mediate </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>help seeking behavior of GLBT hate crime </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>victims? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>What are the implications for victim assistance? </li></ul></ul></ul>
  23. 23. CEU Quiz <ul><li>What does The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) tell us about: </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Racism? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Homosexual panic? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Hate crime victimization? </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Pathological bias? </li></ul></ul></ul>
  24. 24. CEU Quiz: Answer <ul><li>Nothing! </li></ul>
  25. 25. Help-seeking and Hate Crime Victimization <ul><li>Help-seeking: The victim’s effort to secure assistance for legal, medical, psychological, and economic problems related to crime victimization. </li></ul>
  26. 26. Client Help-Seeking: <ul><li>Seeking personal/crisis counseling. </li></ul><ul><li>Speaking with a religious person. </li></ul><ul><li>Seeking legal advice/representation. </li></ul><ul><li>Prayer or meditation. </li></ul><ul><li>Victim support group participation. </li></ul><ul><li>Advice from mentor or family member. </li></ul><ul><li>Attending a workshop on how to deal with harassment. </li></ul><ul><li>Third party mediation. </li></ul><ul><li>Talking with friends. </li></ul><ul><li>    </li></ul>
  27. 27. Severity of Impact Estimates for Diverse Categories of Bias Motivation <ul><ul><ul><li>Crime Categories: N Impact Estimate </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>______________________________________________ </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Race/Ethnicity 808 68.43 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Religion 167 62.72 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Sexual Orientation 551 80.55 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>______________________________________________ </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>F-Value = 14.53 p<.0001 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>LA County 1994 to 1997 </li></ul></ul>
  28. 28. Logistic Regression Results of Hate Acts Predictive of Sexual Orientation Versus Other Hate Crime Attributes <ul><ul><li>Variable B Wald Sig R Exp(B) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>_____________________________________________________ </li></ul><ul><li>Assault .0091 9.48 .0021 .06 1.01 </li></ul><ul><li>ADW -.0146 23.74 .0001 -.11 .98 </li></ul><ul><li>Sexual Assault .0415 16.75 .0001 .09 1.05 </li></ul><ul><li>Sexual Threat .0552 6.02 .01 .05 1.05 </li></ul><ul><li>Hate Speech/V -.0049 32.38 .0001 -.13 .97 </li></ul><ul><li>Hate Speech/P -.0649 40.90 .0001 -.14 .93 </li></ul><ul><li>Hate Graffiti -.0668 41.93 .0001 -.14 .94 </li></ul><ul><li>Stalking .0529 4.17 .0411 .04 1.05 </li></ul><ul><li>_____________________________________________________ </li></ul><ul><li>Chi Square = 26.5 <.0001 Accuracy of Prediction: 69.81% </li></ul>
  29. 29. GLBT Hate Crime Victimization: Law Enforcement Reportage <ul><ul><ul><li> Reported to Reported to </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Gay/Lesbian Law Enforcement </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Population Service Center (LAPD - Sheriff) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>________________________________________ </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Gay Men 24% 76% </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Lesbians 35% 65% </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>LA County Human Relations data 1994-1997 </li></ul></ul>
  30. 30. LA County Human Relations: Help-Seeking of Hate Crime Victims <ul><li>  Hate crimes against African-American men and GLBT persons were more severe than crimes against other victim groups. </li></ul><ul><li>Multiple-offender crimes (62%) were significantly less likely to be reported to law enforcement than were single-offender crimes (90%). </li></ul><ul><li>1994-1997 (n=2,330) </li></ul>
  31. 31. Relationship of Perpetrator Number to Law Enforcement Reportage <ul><li> Single Multiple Unknown </li></ul><ul><li>Status Offender Offenders Offender </li></ul><ul><li>Did Report 90% 68% 92% </li></ul><ul><li>Did Not Report 10% 32% 8% </li></ul><ul><li>Severity of 70.12 85.4 73.37 </li></ul><ul><li>Impact Score </li></ul><ul><li>1995 to 1999 LA County data </li></ul>
  32. 32. Hate Crime Severity of Impact Estimates for GLBT Victims by Race/Ethnicity <ul><ul><ul><li>Race/Ethnic Groups: N Impact Estimate </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>___________________________________________ </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>African-American 50 67.70 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Asian-Pacific 26 56.65 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Euro-White 297 66.37 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Latino 124 71.30 </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>___________________________________________ </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>F-Value = 1.80 p<.15 </li></ul></ul></ul>
  33. 33. LA County Human Relations: Help-Seeking of Hate Crime Victims <ul><li>Victim Gender- Cormier-Lang Offense Severity </li></ul><ul><li>Race/Ethnic Person Property Functional Report Law </li></ul><ul><li>N Crimes a Crimes Impact Enforcement b </li></ul><ul><li>Euro-White 237 4.25 2.58 72.34 81%  </li></ul><ul><li>Gay Men </li></ul><ul><li>Euro-White 62 5.40 2.56 70.26 71% </li></ul><ul><li>Lesbians </li></ul><ul><li>Gay Men 189 5.06 2.26 72.43 66% </li></ul><ul><li>of Color </li></ul><ul><li>Lesbians 51 7.49 2.32 73.90 52% </li></ul><ul><li>of Color </li></ul><ul><li>A F (3, 488) = 2.93, p < .03 b χ² = 15.57, p < .0008 </li></ul>
  34. 34. HLR Model: Predicting Law Enforcement Reportage of Sexual Orientation Hate Crimes <ul><li>Step Variable B Wald R Exp(B) </li></ul><ul><li>1. Cormier-Lang Offense Severity -.10 8.97 -.12** .90 </li></ul><ul><li>Category One: Person Crimes </li></ul><ul><li>Cormier-Lang Offense Severity -.04 .27 -.02 .96 </li></ul><ul><li>Category Two: Property Crimes </li></ul><ul><li>2. Severity of victim impact -.01 .86 .01 1.01 </li></ul><ul><li>3. Victim race and gender -.32 10.18 -.13*** .70 </li></ul>
  35. 35. LA County Human Relations: Help-Seeking of Hate Crime Victims <ul><li>GLBT hate crimes revealed distinctly different rates of law enforcement reportage: white men (91%), white women (82%), men of color (64%), and lesbians of color (42%). </li></ul><ul><li>  More violent hate crimes (e.g. sexual assault) were predictive of under-reportage, whereas property offenses (graffiti) predicted to higher-reportage to law enforcement. </li></ul>
  36. 36. Treatment Failures with GLBT Hate Crime Victims <ul><li>Victim of chronic workplace harassment </li></ul><ul><li>Chronic persecution of professional </li></ul><ul><li>Victim/litigant of chronic hate stalking </li></ul><ul><li>Police harassment victim </li></ul>
  37. 37. Recovery from Acute Gay Bashing: Erin’s Story <ul><li>Assaulted by 8 to 10 young men while with your partner on public street outside a neighborhood bar </li></ul><ul><li>Very slow PD response; “take a self-defense class” </li></ul><ul><li>Your partner is an undocumented resident and has a concussion. </li></ul><ul><li>Your Dad says “it is your lifestyle” </li></ul><ul><li>You have midterms, no insurance, and your angered </li></ul><ul><li>friend has a baseball bat and is looking for the </li></ul><ul><li>offenders… what are you going to do? </li></ul>
  38. 38. A Model of Psychotherapy Treatment with Victims of Hate Crimes <ul><li>The five treatment tasks are: </li></ul><ul><li>Event containment and safety </li></ul><ul><li>Assessment of client-event characteristics </li></ul><ul><li>Addressing diversity in the counseling alliance </li></ul><ul><li>Acute symptom reduction </li></ul><ul><li>Identity recovery and reformation </li></ul>
  39. 39. SGCS Task 1: Event Containment and Safety <ul><li>1 . Risk of continued victimization </li></ul><ul><ul><li>A. Does perpetrator know victim’s: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>- Place of residence   </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>- Workplace/school </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>- Place of worship   </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>- Frequent public “haunts” </li></ul></ul><ul><li> B. Means to communicate with victim </li></ul><ul><li>(telephone number or e-mail) </li></ul>
  40. 40. SGCS Task 1: Event Containment and Safety <ul><li>C. Has perpetrator been identified? </li></ul><ul><li>- Is perpetrator incarcerated/detained?   </li></ul><ul><li>- Are there co-perpetrators?   </li></ul><ul><li>2. Is event on-going/recurring NOW?   </li></ul><ul><li>3. Has victim filed report/complaint with appropriate agencies? </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>4. Has victim’s daily routine/lifestyle been modified? </li></ul>
  41. 41. SGCS Task 1: Event Containment and Safety - Re-Victimization Risk <ul><li>What is the: </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>A. Objective Risk of recurring perpetration </li></ul><ul><li>  Very High High Moderate Low Cannot Determine </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul><ul><li>B. What is Objective Risk of recurring perpetration </li></ul><ul><li>  Very High High Moderate Low Cannot Determine </li></ul>
  42. 42. SGCS Task 2: Assessment of Client-Event Characteristics <ul><li>a. Analysis of event (e.g. legal criteria, traumatic triggers). </li></ul><ul><li>b. Determine client history of traumatic events. </li></ul><ul><li>c. Assess client's ingroup identity attitudes. </li></ul><ul><li>d. Define history of intergroup contact experiences. </li></ul><ul><li>e. Assess pre- and post-event psychological symptoms ( e.g. PTSD symptoms, depression, alcohol abuse) . </li></ul>
  43. 43. SGCS Task 3 : Addressing Diversity in the Counseling Alliance <ul><li>Core tasks: </li></ul><ul><li>(a) Practitioner determination of cultural </li></ul><ul><li>competence and credibility. </li></ul><ul><li>(b) Address practitioner and client counseling- </li></ul><ul><li>damaging behaviors. </li></ul><ul><li>(c) Assess role of worldviews upon counseling </li></ul><ul><li>process. </li></ul><ul><li>(d) Articulate themes of ingroup resilience and </li></ul><ul><li>coping. </li></ul>
  44. 44. SGCS Task 4: Acute Symptom Reduction <ul><li>a. Establish treatment goals and options. </li></ul><ul><li>b. Skills training in stress inoculation. </li></ul><ul><li>c. Exposure de-sensitization in vivo to critical event. </li></ul><ul><li>d. Re-frame trauma-induced ideation and attributions. </li></ul><ul><li>e. Skills training in anger/affect management. </li></ul><ul><li>f.  Measure and educate about PTSD symptoms of intrusions, arousal, and avoidance. </li></ul><ul><li>g. Engage in dialogic problem confrontation. </li></ul><ul><li>h. Monitor symptom change. </li></ul>
  45. 45. SGCS Task 4: Acute Symptom Reduction <ul><li>Goal of this phase of treatment is establishment of effective somatic desensitization skills to trauma triggers and the initiation of a cognitive re-structuring of affects and “automatic thoughts” associated with victimization and outgroup contact experiences. </li></ul>
  46. 46. SGCS Task 4: Dialogic Recovery <ul><li>Writing about recall of the event(s). </li></ul><ul><li>Identifying traumatic triggers (used in mental imagery exposure work). </li></ul><ul><li>Journal writing about reactions to event , practices of staying safe, and perceptions of the offender. </li></ul><ul><li>Identifying ‘stuck points’ and re-structuring of beliefs – Action – Belief – Consequences. </li></ul>
  47. 47. SGCS Task 4: Psycho-physiological Issues <ul><li>Higher levels of cortisol – short term impacts poor sleep status and working memory problems. Long term – hypercortisolimia hypothesis. </li></ul><ul><li>SSRIs may help reduce acute rumination; NE acting drugs may enhance intrusive recall of distal trauma. </li></ul><ul><li>CNS depressants – e.g. alcohol, marijuana and benzodiazepines - may be abused by crime victims. </li></ul><ul><li>Somatic/desensitization treatments can reduce sympathetic NS response and increase parasympathetic NS response to trauma triggers. </li></ul>
  48. 48. SGCS Task 5: Identity Recovery <ul><li>Core task: repair ingroup identity and improve </li></ul><ul><li>intergroup contact skills. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>(a) Cognitive re-framing of intrusive thoughts </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>of victimization </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(b) In situ desensitization to benign contact </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>experiences </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(c) DBT/WISE Mind practice of intentional outgroup contact </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>(d) Engage in healthy ingroup experiences. </li></ul></ul>
  49. 49. Identity challenges and Hate Crime Victimization <ul><li>Regressive </li></ul><ul><li>Status Quo – healthy denial </li></ul><ul><li>Ingroup idealization/cocooning </li></ul><ul><li>Ingroup/outgroup inclusiveness </li></ul>
  50. 50. SGCS Task 5: DBT/WISE MIND “FAST” Script <ul><li>Be F air </li></ul><ul><li>Do not A pologize </li></ul><ul><li>S tick to your values </li></ul><ul><li>Be T ruthful </li></ul>
  51. 51. SGCS Task 5: Identity Recovery via Contact <ul><li>Contact Hypothesis (Allport, 1953): </li></ul><ul><li>The role of interpersonal experience with outgroup </li></ul><ul><li>persons to create favorable or unfavorable attitudes. </li></ul><ul><li>This can also allow for increased physiological </li></ul><ul><li>relaxation in benign inter-group interactions. </li></ul>
  52. 52. In Summary ….. <ul><li>Hate crimes are infrequent offenses that are often under-reported by GLBT victims. </li></ul><ul><li>Under-reportage may be greater for multiple minority persons and victims of more violent hate crimes. </li></ul><ul><li>Recovery from hate crimes involves reduction of acute trauma symptoms, recovery of a healthy ingroup identity, and development of intergroup competence. </li></ul>
  53. 53. Contact <ul><li>Edward Dunbar: </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li>Website (under construction): </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul><ul><li>Tracy Marsh: </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul>