[New post] Disability Hate Crime: A ‘hidden’ harm.
thebscblog posted: " The authors discuss Disability Hate Crime and the recent BSC and University of Leicester hosted 'Disability Hate Crime conference: Known harms and future directions' - the first ever international, accessible, Disability Hate Crime Conference. By Dr I" The BSC Blog
The authors discuss Disability Hate Crime and the recent BSC and University of Leicester hosted 'Disability Hate Crime conference: Known harms and future directions' - the first ever international, accessible, Disability Hate Crime Conference.
By Dr Irene Zempi, Dr Leah Burch, Dr David Wilkin, and Laura Nevay
Hate crimes are acts of violence or hostility directed at people because of who they are. In England and Wales, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have agreed the following definition for identifying and flagging hate crimes: "Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice towards someone based on a personal characteristic." There are five centrally monitored strands of hate crime: race or ethnicity; religion or beliefs; sexual orientation; disability; and transgender identity.
Disability Hate Crimes (DHC) target individuals based on the victim's disability or perceived disability. The definition of disability encompasses physical disability (whether present from birth or acquired at some late point in life) and mental disability (including learning disability, acquired brain injury and mental illness). The definition of disability also includes people living with HIV or AIDS. Individuals might have a combination of disabilities whilst some disabilities might be 'hidden'. According to the CPS, some common features in DHC include: (a) Perpetrators are often partners, family members, friends, carers, acquaintances, or neighbours (b) 'Triggers' include access or equipment requirements, such as ramps to trains and buses; perceived benefit fraud; perceived "perks" such as disabled parking spaces; (c) Cruelty, humiliation and degrading treatment, often related to the nature of the disability: for example, blindfolding someone who is deaf or destroying mobility aids. According to the 2020/2021 police recorded crime data, there were 124,091 hate crimes recorded by the police in England and Wales in the year ending March 2021 (Home Office 2020). DHC increased from 8,465 (2019/2020) to 9,208 (2020/2021), which represents an increase of 9%. However, hate crime remains a hugely under-reported crime and these figures are likely to reflect the tip of the iceberg. DHC remains a significant area for concern in terms of under-reporting because of issues around accessibility of reporting, mate crime, victims' lack of confidence, lack of awareness, and previous negative experiences of reporting to criminal justice agencies.
Hate crimes are understood to 'hurt more' than other types of crimes due to their targeted nature. For many disabled people, hate incidents and hate crimes can become a routine feature of everyday life, both within and outside of their homes. The often repeated nature of DHC can have an accumulative impact and can hurt disabled people in a range of different ways. It can also mean that DHC becomes an unwanted, yet relatively ordinary part of day-to-day living. This everyday nature can blur the boundaries between what is and is not a hate crime, and which of these incidents should be reported to the police. DHC can have serious impacts on disabled people's sense of identity. Disabled people report feeling less confident about their own identity and can internalise oppression. This means that disabled people can, over time, locate the problem of hate crime within themselves because they are perceived to be 'different'. Many disabled people also report feeling like they are unable to occupy certain spaces due to the perceived risk of being targeted. In these cases, many people adopt strategies such as changing their routines, avoiding risky spaces at particular times of day, and becoming increasingly isolated within their homes. Common places to avoid are shopping centres, pubs and clubs, and public transport. In this way, DHC can limit disabled people's participation within everyday life and have detrimental impacts upon their physical and mental wellbeing.
Responding to any form of hostility against disabled people must begin with a report of the incident to the police, safeguarding teams, or other authorities. This simply does not happen very often. Disabled people are frequently unwilling to report 'friends' (mate crime), carers or family members to a formal authority. After all, it is these people who supply the disabled person with the most intimate of care and the company that would be sorely missed if a report to the authorities were to be made. Even the supposed 'low level' abuse of constant anti-social behaviour has been enough to drive someone to suicide as revealed in the case of Fiona Pilkington and her daughter Frankie.
Therefore, if there is little faith in reporting, education might supply one answer to raising awareness of ongoing hostility against disabled people. We educate our children to be aware of racism and the rights to equality that we all have. However, this begs the question "How often do our children get taught about the tense, physically demanding life some disabled people have and how that rigour can be magnified by the abuse and hostility that they suffer because of their disability?" DHC damages people's lives, forces social isolation and breeds fear. Shared understanding can only help to overcome resentment, fear and distancing of people seen as 'different'.
To address this, the authors of this blog – with the help and support of the British Society of Criminology (BSC), BSC Hate Crime Network, and University of Leicester – hosted the first ever international, "Disability Hate Crime conference: Known harms and future directions" on 16 June 2022. Specifically, the conference discussed the nature, impacts of, and responses to DHC by bringing together victims, academics, support organisations, practitioners and members of the public. In total, 61 people attended the conference in person. In addition, 158 people attended the conference online in the morning and 131 in the afternoon (via Teams). With accessibility being one of the main focuses when organising this conference, we gave both online and in-person attendees multiple opportunities to inform us of any accessibility requirements. Correspondingly, these are some of the steps we took to make the event as accessible as possible: A fully accessible lecture theatre which included microphones and hearing loops was sourced along with extra rooms for quiet spaces, one of which had a live stream to the conference. Water, chairs, table, and an adjustable lectern were available for speakers, and space at the front was also created for individuals using wheelchairs and those with guide dogs. Volunteers were recruited and made available to those who required extra support along with accessible parking spaces close to the venue. Prior to the conference, attendees received an email with presentations, venue, parking, and safety information in addition to contact details for queries. Regular breaks were incorporated into the agenda and speakers/volunteers wore name badges to be easily identifiable. We hope that future events will consider adopting the above measures and more to make events more accessible and inclusive for all.
The authors
Dr Irene Zempi Nottinham Trent University irene.zempi@ntu.ac.uk @DrIreneZempi
Dr Leah Burch Liverpool Hope University burchl@hope.ac.uk @LeahFBurch
Dr David Wilkin University of Leciester drw25@le.ac.uk @DavidRWilkin
Laura Nevay University of Leicester (Undertaking BA in Criminology and Psychology, Open University) @LauraNevay
This article gives the views of the authors, not the position of the British Society of Criminology or the institution they work for.
No comments:
Post a Comment