Australia
Boxall, H. and Morgan, A. (2021) ‘Experiences of coercive control among Australian women’, Statistical Bulletin 30. Sydney: Australian Institute of Criminology.
This study examines the characteristics of violence and abuse reported by 1,023 Australian women who had recently experienced coercive control by their current or former partner.
‘Two in five women who experienced coercive control also reported that their partner had damaged, destroyed or stolen their property in the three months prior to the survey (n416; 43%). Damaging property can be used as a means of intimidation; the abuser’s use of physical strength against an inanimate object (eg by punching a wall) may be used to demonstrate their ability to physically harm their partner. However, these behaviours can often be experienced as a form of financial abuse by women, particularly when they are required to repair or replace the damaged goods at their own expense. This may increase feelings of financial stress and economic hardship’
Douglas, H. (2022) ‘The use of fire and threats to burn in the context of domestic and family violence and coercive control’, Current Issues in Criminal Justice 35(1):27-37, doi: 10.1080/10345329.2022.2095794.
This study examines the characteristics of violence and abuse reported by 1,023 Australian women who had recently experienced coercive control by their current or former partner.
‘Two in five women who experienced coercive control also reported that their partner had damaged, destroyed or stolen their property in the three months prior to the survey (n416; 43%). Damaging property can be used as a means of intimidation; the abuser’s use of physical strength against an inanimate object (eg by punching a wall) may be used to demonstrate their ability to physically harm their partner. However, these behaviours can often be experienced as a form of financial abuse by women, particularly when they are required to repair or replace the damaged goods at their own expense. This may increase feelings of financial stress and economic hardship’
Karystianis, G., Adily, A., Schofield, P.W., et. al., ‘Automated Analysis of Domestic Violence Police Reports to Explore Abuse Types and Victim Injuries: Text Mining Study’ (2019) 21(3) Journal of Medical Internet Research.
The recording of domestic violence-related events by police is an area that requires further investigation. The study aimed to determine if an automated text mining method could identify abuse types and injuries sustained by domestic violence victims. Using data mining to evaluate 492,393 Australian domestic violence police reports, more than one-third noted victim injuries. The most common abuse type was emotional/verbal at 33.46%, followed by punching at 24.58%, and property damage at 22.27%. Bruising was the most common form of injury (29.03%), followed by cut/abrasion (28.93%), and red marks/signs (23.71%). The findings show that text mining can automatically extract information from police-recorded domestic violence events. These findings can be used to support further public health research the purpose of which is to assess the profiling of persons of interest involved in domestic violence events, and to change existing intervention policies for abuse victims.
Mouzos, Jenny, and Toni Makkai, ‘Women's Experience of Male Violence: Findings from the Australian component of the International Violence Against Women Survey (IVAWS)’ (Research and Public Policy Series No 56, Australian Institute of Criminology, 2004).
This paper reports on the findings of the International Violence Against Women Survey (IVAWS), which was conducted across Australia between December 2002 and June 2003. A total of 6,677 women aged between 18 and 69 years participated in the survey, and provided information on their experiences of physical and sexual violence. In this paper the authors describe damage and destruction of property as a form of emotional abuse. The authors find that women whose current partners damaged or destroyed property or possessions, reported levels of physical violence almost eight times higher during the previous 12 months than the average for current intimate partner violence in general (23% versus 3%) (p48).
International
Follingstad, Diane R, et al, ‘The Role of Emotional Abuse in Physically Abusive Relationships’ (1990) 5(2) Journal of Family Violence 107.
This study reports on a qualitative study in which 234 women were interviewed to assess the relationship of emotional abuse to physical abuse. Six major types of emotional abuse were identified. One of the types of emotional abuse identified was damage or destruction of the personal property of the victim. The article provides examples of this form of abuse, including the abuser selecting a favourite personal object belonging to the victim and destroying it or cutting up clothes or tearing up favourite pictures in front of the victim (p109).
Klein, Catherine F, and Leslye E Orloff, ‘Providing Legal Protection for Battered Women: An Analysis of State Statutes and Case Law’ (1992-1993) 21 Hofstra Law Review 801.
This comprehensive article overviews American statutes and case law in relation to domestic violence civil protection orders. While the law is not relevant here, there is a useful discussion of property damage as a form of domestic and family violence (at p872-874) explaining that perpetrators often damage the victim’s property in order to ‘terrorise, threaten and exert control’ over the victim. This article reports on a number of cases where protection orders were issued in circumstances where perpetrators have: destroyed furniture; broken windows and skylights; chopped holes in the roof with an axe; driven a truck through a garage wall; damaged the victim’s car; destroyed household property; destroyed pets (a form of property) and destroyed items of sentimental value to the victim.
Pollet, Susan, ‘Economic Abuse: The Unseen Side of Domestic Violence’ (2011) 83(2) New York State Bar Association Journal 40.
The article focuses on economic abuse as a form of domestic violence perpetrated against women, commonly, by their intimate partners or ex-partners. The article describes damaging, or destroying property as a form of economic abuse in those cases where it has implications for the victim’s autonomy.
Sanders, Cynthia K, ‘Economic Abuse in the Lives of Women Abused by an Intimate Partner: A Qualitative Study’ (2015) 21(1) Violence Against Women 3.
This article presents research from a qualitative study involving 30 interviewees. The study examined the role of financial issues and economic factors in the lives of women who have experienced domestic and family violence. ‘Stealing and Destruction of Property’ is considered at p20-21 as a form of abuse. Interviewees gave examples including the destruction of a motor vehicle which was the victim’s form of transport and destruction of furniture and children’s toys. Victims also spoke of having to hide property including documents to ensure they were kept safe.
A perpetrator of domestic and family violence may engage in a range of behaviours to exert control over or induce fear in the victim. Damaging property may intersect with other behaviours such as emotional or psychological abuse, economic abuse, physical violence or harm, and sexual or reproductive abuse to produce a complex pattern of violence, the seriousness of which may intensify as the behaviours combine and escalate. For example, victims experience significantly higher levels of physical violence where the perpetrator has also damaged property.
Instances reported in Australian research demonstrate the various ways perpetrators seek to control, intimidate, threaten, injure, demean or isolate victims by interfering with property, which may in some cases include abuse of pets and assistance animals. They may steal, damage or destroy personal property that is shared between the victim and perpetrator, owned by or in the possession of the victim, or otherwise used or enjoyed by the victim or the victim’s children or other family members. In some instances perpetrators may use fire to burn and damage the victim’s property or home. For example, the perpetrator may steal the victim’s ATM or bank account access card and empty the victim’s account of funds to prevent the victim from leaving the abusive relationship. The perpetrator may break the victim's mobile phone while the victim attempts to call police; or vandalise or wreck household furnishings or personal effects and clothing that the victim has paid for or are sentimental to the victim. The perpetrator may steal, or immobilise or tamper with the victim’s car, or use the car as a weapon, for example to run the victim over so as to injure them or hinder their escape. The perpetrator may also attack the victim’s home by breaking windows, chopping holes in the roof, or driving a vehicle into a wall.
Damaging property may be one aspect of a complex pattern of behaviours engaged in by perpetrators in order to control another person, sometimes referred to as coercive control.
A perpetrator of domestic and family violence may engage in a range of behaviours to exert control over or induce fear in the victim. Damaging property may intersect with other behaviours such as emotional or psychological abuse, economic abuse, physical violence or harm, and sexual or reproductive abuse to produce a complex pattern of violence, the seriousness of which may intensify as the behaviours combine and escalate. For example, victims experience significantly higher levels of physical violence where the perpetrator has also damaged property.
Instances reported in Australian research demonstrate the various ways perpetrators seek to control, intimidate, threaten, injure, demean or isolate victims by interfering with property, which may in some cases include abuse of pets and assistance animals. They may steal, damage or destroy personal property that is shared between the victim and perpetrator, owned by or in the possession of the victim, or otherwise used or enjoyed by the victim or the victim’s children or other family members. In some instances perpetrators may use fire to burn and damage the victim’s property or home. For example, the perpetrator may steal the victim’s ATM or bank account access card and empty the victim’s account of funds to prevent the victim from leaving the abusive relationship. The perpetrator may break the victim's mobile phone while the victim attempts to call police; or vandalise or wreck household furnishings or personal effects and clothing that the victim has paid for or are sentimental to the victim. The perpetrator may steal, or immobilise or tamper with the victim’s car, or use the car as a weapon, for example to run the victim over so as to injure them or hinder their escape. The perpetrator may also attack the victim’s home by breaking windows, chopping holes in the roof, or driving a vehicle into a wall.
Damaging property may be one aspect of a complex pattern of behaviours engaged in by perpetrators in order to control another person, sometimes referred to as coercive control.