Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sapc - RE: hypotherical situation

Subject: Discussion List for campus-based and allied personnel working to end gender-based violence on campus.

List archive

RE: hypotherical situation


Chronological Thread 
  • From: "Sarah Holdwick" <>
  • To: <>
  • Subject: RE: hypotherical situation
  • Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 15:01:54 -0500

Hi Eva,

 

My guess in this hypothetical situation is that one person is telling the truth and the other is trying to manipulate your program in order to intimidate his/her victim.  I agree with the other comments on learning more about primary aggressor status so that you can identify who’s who in this situation.  While there is always the rare ambiguous case, abusers typically give themselves away.  What my agency does in cases where we can’t tell immediately or if a judge has mandated the abuser (incorrectly thinking s/he is the victim) go to our program for services, is to meet with both parties separately to assess them.  We then inform the abuser that we cannot provide services to him/her and make a referral elsewhere (i.e.- Batterer’s Intervention).

 

While many abusers have experienced abuse themselves, in my experience the attempt to seek services through the same program is almost always a power play on the part of the assailant acting as a victim.  Obviously it is a conflict of interest to serve a survivor and her/his abuser in a victim-services program.  It not only diminishes your credibility as a victim-services professional to fall for it , but sends a message that there is nowhere the survivor can go where the abuser can’t access.  As a victim-services professional, your responsibility is with the survivor, not to be fair with an abuser.  There is a lot at stake here because abusers are accustomed to manipulating professionals and systems to get what they want at the expense of the survivor.  Abusers need help, but a victim-services program is not the place to get it, period. 

 

Hope this helps! 

 

Sarah Holdwick-Pelkey, BA

Sexual Assault Advocate

Underground Railroad, Inc.

P. O. Box 2451

Saginaw, MI 48605

Phone: (989) 755-0413 ext. 1205

Fax: (989) 755-3006

E-mail:

 

NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you have received this communication in error, please do not print, copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also, please indicate to the sender that you have received this communication in error, and delete the copy you received. Thank you.

 

Please consider the environment before printing this email.

 

From: Heskin, Jessica R [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 12:52 PM
To: Eva Suzanne Ball;
Subject: RE: hypotherical situation

 

I am a one-person shop, so to speak, so I don’t have another advocate to assign them to.  This situation has happened to me a couple times before.  In my opinion it is a conflict of interest. 

 

I work closely with off-campus DV/SA agencies which I refer one of the clients to.  I do advise the advocate from those agencies about our internal processes so that they can work within those protocols.

Hope that helps. 

 

Jessica Heskin, M.A.

Violence and Sexual Assault Support Services

California State University, Sacramento

The Well

6000 J Street

Sacramento, CA  95819-6045

(916) 278-3799

 

From: Eva Suzanne Ball
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2012 8:05 AM
To:
Subject: hypotherical situation

 

I have a hypothetical situation for your consideration:

 

-          Person A identifies as a stalking victim, being stalked by Person B.

-          Person A seeks and receives services from my office (which serves survivors of stalking, relationship violence and sexual assault).

-          Days later,  person B seeks services for relationship abuse, identifies person A as the perpetrator.

 

Other points to consider: My office is staffed by two people. In this hypothetical situation no formal charges have been brought against either person.

 

Would it be a conflict of interest to serve both people (assigning a different advocate to each person)?

Would it go against a victim-centered service model to deny services to either party?

How might you handle this situation?

 

I appreciate your input!

Peace and thanks,

Eva

 

 

 

 

 

Eva Ball, MSW

Coordinator

Sexual Violence Response Services and Advocacy

 

CARE (Center for Awareness, Response & Education)

Addressing Sexual Violence & Promoting Healthy Sexuality

Health Promotion & Wellness

Northwestern University

 

847-491-2054

 

cid:icon_sm_facebook.gif@20ac04be91d56fe121dc10fc3ef071b4Facebook 

cid:icon_sm_twitter.gif@d0bf4b2ffe5ac78f6494bb75a4eac4a8  Twitter

 




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page