GLBT Hate Crime Prevention

  • 1,368 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Education , Travel , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,368
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
23
Comments
0
Likes
1

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

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