Arif – good question. But I would be very much in favour of women being referred to agencies that can give them confidential assistance and support.

I guess my main beef is that the government is happy to pour money into developing new laws and special prosecutors’ groups, all of which costs a surprisingly large amount of money which I feel would be better spent on beefing up the resources which women actually need to get out of these situations.

The day after this was posted I noticed a NIB in the Times which said that Rape Crisis was having to close half of its centres due to cuts in government funding. It’s difficult to celebrate new rules from the government and new prosecutor’s groups, when the same government is cutting funds to the services that actually help women in abusive situations at the same time.

Doctors also need to know what to do if the patient volunteers the information of marriage pressure they are under, and the guidelines (post #48) seem reasonable, but crucially still depend on having agencies to refer the woman to (or even a man) which are able to keep a referral safe and committed to the empowerment of their clients so that they do not feel decisions are taken out of their control.

How near is this to reality?

I couldn’t have expressed my sentiments any more articulately than you have.

so in that sense, singling out ‘doctors’ doesn’t seem particularly fruitful in this discussion – unless we say everyone – peers, teachers etc. who thinks someone is troubled etc. or in danger of something like kidnap etc. ought to their moral duty in trying to get them to some specialised agency for help.

This is actually the case. These guidelines are just the last installment in a series that includes social workers, teachers and police.

The guidelines again.

The FMU and police are very discreet in their activities and start by trying to contact the individual. They know about the risks, and are mostly professional in managing them. You might say it is a loss of agency in the so-far hypothetical case where an individual is discreetly and privately, with first regard for her safety, contacted by professionals who are available to offer her help if she chooses to take it. I don’t see it that way: I think it is giving a person a last chance to make an informed choice before entering a situation which DK is correct to compare to slavery.

I can’t write any more I am moving house today.

no katy isn’t out on a limb.

Ha!

im not british, im asian im female

HA!

Gizzahug, Sonia.

Excellent point re resources, too.

so in that sense, singling out ‘doctors’ doesn’t seem particularly fruitful in this discussion – unless we say everyone – peers, teachers etc. who thinks someone is troubled etc. or in danger of something like kidnap etc. ought to their moral duty in trying to get them to some specialised agency for help.

it is quite another thing to try and lay ‘blame’ which we know inevitably will happen, and this thing about doctors seems to me to be a convenient grappling around for some sort of ‘solution’ and alighting on something that actually isn’t really going to make much different to anyone at the end of the day. so my worry is people will say well we asked the govt to do something, and the govt said ok lets ask the doctors, and that was the end of that.

given the state of the NHS in this country, i find it amazing that anyone would seriously think this was some kind of solution, rather than a gesture.

until asian kids – yes that’s right -lets get down to the nitty gritty – learn to stand up to their parents, siblings friends who tell them they should only marry xy z then nothing much is going to change.

people can talk about short-term actions if they so choose, it is not impossible to think of doing two things at the same time – one can at the very least, if one is going to say ‘limited funding!to state that long-term action is needed and at least think about that simultaneously.

In any case, I have yet to see implementation level detail being discussed – this seems to me some more ‘waving our arms around shouting kind of thing’. Unless someone explains how they see doctors -who are already struggling – are going to be provided with more resources, or already have within their remit a requirement to direct suicidal patients to secondary care – i’m a bit confused really.

Well!

Don’t do it again!

Kicked about by someone who neither understands the issue nor the legislation, comes here and starts making patronising comments about brown womens groups who don’t understand ‘our culture and our way of life’ without knowing what is being talked about?

It would be best for both of us if you stopped deluding yourself so embarassingly.

Katy:
You said the police should be called where someone is being placed under emotional blackmail by their parents.

I mention the police as an organisation that should be more willing to listen to concerns of women who come to them, and can gather evidence in cases better by being informed of the issues involved and circumstances the victims can be involved in. Involvement of police doesn’t always mean they should come knocking on people’s doors. Maybe I should have made this more clear. Plus, this also involves the CPS, which is now clearly waking up to the problem.

What I am trying to explain is that laws that aren’t clearly defined lead to stupid results.

I’m resigned to the fact that in such an area the law is never going to be easily defined because there are so many fuzzy boundaries where verbal/emotional coercion can lead to depression and/or suicide.

Given the extent of the problem though, and given how many women it affects, I would rather though that some legal/social remedies were attempted to deal with the problem… and see how they work. If they don’t, fine, if they do, even better.

As GB has pointed out, the cases referred to the FMU are the tip of the tip of an iceberg. I also believe it to be a huge underground problem.

I took your idea to its logical conclusion and we both agree that it doesn’t work.

But I never even advocated bringing in legislation on those issues. I merely said the police should be aware of such circumstances, not that there should be a law against parental verbal coercion. I’ve never talked on this thread about new laws.

Now stop being so bloody rude to me.

Sorry!

I’m sorry, but the way to protect womens’ autonomy is not to take it away from them.

That isn’t the aim here. But you nevertheless see it that way. I’m still with GB on this.

And even women who are given the protection that the police can currently offer them are never really safe

I mean, in the sense that absolute safety can never be guaranteed as long as we are in a world where everyone can travel freely and you never know where you might run into someone you know.

Would it be wrong, for example, to contact the FMU if said patient was scared of going abroad and didn’t want to go because she/he was to be forced into marriage and then disappeared off the face of the earth?

Yes. You and I both know that a woman who escapes this sort of situation the woman effectively lives in hiding and in fear for the rest of their lives. Where whole families are involved the imprisoning of a few family members is never the end of it. Domestic violence cases generally, both in and outside of the Asian community, are never really resolved in court, are they? And even women who are given the protection that the police can currently offer them are never really safe. When a woman in this sort of family defies the will of her family she puts herself in real danger and that danger is only marginally reduced by the imprisonment of the ringleaders in the family. It is a brave woman that does that and she deserves all the support that the state can give her – but it’s a lie to say that women in that situation can be guaranteed the protection and support that they need at the moment, because despite the best efforts of the police and groups like SBS they can’t. And I am sorry – but when the choice is between a forced marriage and the possibility of being the victim of other members of the family in revenge, it is NOT for anyone but the woman herself to decide whether she wants to take that risk.

That is exactly what happened in the case of Heshu Yunes. At its heart, it isn’t even about confidentiality, although that is obviously part of it. It’s about the fact that her teachers didn’t have enough respect for her as a thinking human being to sit down and talk to her about what was wrong.

And that is why I believe that the way to deal with this is not to deprive women of the security of knowing that they can trust their doctor not to put them in danger. I do believe that the best way to help women in these situations is to work towards proper resources being in place to help them if they decide to get out, and to give them the security of knowing that there is someone they can go to who will listen to them without forcing their hand until they are ready.

I’m sorry, but the way to protect womens’ autonomy is not to take it away from them.

DK, I really think you come here only to waste my time.

I do. And I also love seeing you getting kicked and then watch you vacillating. It makes me laugh.

You said, quite patronisingly and stupidly,

Unfortunately, they live in Britain, where we tend to frown on abduction and slavery. So much so that we, y’know, made both things illegal.

Kindly read this thread and STFU.

Hmmm, how is that patronising? I may have put it badly, but what I meant is that in some countries, forced marriage seems to be acceptable (as, indeed, is slavery): however, in this country, the things that lead to a forced marriage have been criminally illegal for hundreds of years. Okey doke?

As for time-wasting, well, so the forced marriages bit is a civil remedy. As Katy pointed out on that thread:

Roger is right. Kidnap, false imprisonment, assault, blackmail and threats to kill are all illegal. The problem with this legislation will be the same as those associated with prosecuting domestic violence: generally speaking, people don’t want to drag their families into court, no matter how badly they have been treated.

And then, when you still didn’t get it…

If all of the methods that are used to force someone into getting married are criminalised, then forced marriage isn’t allowed!

… which is more or less what I said.

As for your last reply:

Here we are only talking about educating the police and doctors to look out for vital clues.

And my concern is that you see absolutely no problem with this, at all. Extraordinary.

Anyway, I don’t have the time or the inclination to argue with someone who so obviously isn’t interested so I shall, indeed, shut the fuck up.

DK

Heshu Yunes’ grades were dropping and she seemed miserable, concerning her teachers. If they had provided a sympathetic ear and discovered that she had suffered physical abuse from male family members, that she had a secret boyfriend, and that she was promised to her cousin, they could have understood her situation and taken action: possibly arranging for a risk assessment from police and then a shelter or foster home. Instead they called her mother and asked if Heshu was having problems in school because of trouble with her boyfriend. You know how Heshu’s story ends.

This is the kind of confidentiality breach we worry about in reality.

Katy: I completely take your point about manipulation and psychological pressure from a legal POV, but can you not see how that pressure feeds the high depression/suicide rate for Asian women?

The FMU recieve 5000 calls per year, and take on 300 cases. But this isn’t just the tip of the iceberg; this is the tip of an iceberg on top of another iceberg, because the FMU is part of the Foreign Office and only deal with those individuals who have been taken abroad through force or deception and forced into marriage. They don’t deal with domestic FM: and the fact is, since FM is not a specific crime, no figures exist for its prevalence.

No, Sunny, I’m reading yours.

If persistent harassment and emotional blackmail by parents pushes a girl towards self-harm / suicide then yes I’d like to have the police involved.

So if a child is being abused we expect social services to get involved regardless, because we assume they cannot help themselves. I’m not saying this applies across the board for Asian women, but I know of many who are simply incapable of standing up to the bullying of their parents, and they need outside support.

I don’t believe a line can be drawn between mental / verbal coercion and non-coercion.

I’m reading what you are saying and trying to work out what exactly you are saying should happen. You said the police should be called where someone is being placed under emotional blackmail by their parents. YOU said it. The reason I think that you’re going to be calling the police in at every turn is because YOU keep talking about calling them in. Forgive me for thinking that you were suggesting that emotional blackmail should be criminalised.

And I am not conjuring up extreme circumstances. What I am trying to explain is that laws that aren’t clearly defined lead to stupid results. So, for example, you say that in a case where parental emotional pressure to get married is leading a child to self-harm or suicide, the police should be called in. Now, the culpability lies in the behaviour of the parents, doesn’t it? The emotional blackmail which leads a child to thoughts of suicide or self-harm? So what I tried to do was take your example of parental emotional pressure to get married, and apply it to other situations in which children feel emotional pressure that leads them to self-harm: for example, parents who put emotional pressure on their children to diet, or who put emotional pressure on their children to pass exams, as a result of which the children are pushed toward suicide or to self-harm. And I asked you whether you thought, in those circumstances, the police should be called.

You see? I took the principle that you had identified, and I applied it to other situations, and asked you if you thought that was reasonable. And you correctly replied that it was bizarre, or outlandish, or ridiculous… but you blamed me. Well, it wasn’t my idea, Sunny, it was yours. I took your idea to its logical conclusion and we both agree that it doesn’t work. Now stop being so bloody rude to me.

You said, quite patronisingly and stupidly,

Unfortunately, they live in Britain, where we tend to frown on abduction and slavery. So much so that we, y’know, made both things illegal.

Kindly read this thread and STFU.
http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/1030

Katy:
GB, I think my basic position on this topic generally is that there’s not much point in raising consciousness on the part of abused women if you don’t back that up by providing them with a safe, viable escape route and protection thereafter.

That’s my position too. No one has argued against that. But both efforts are being made – raising consioucness with social services, added legislation and support to women’s groups.

I am not saying that it is not a bigger problem for Asian women than for white women but to suggest that the only cause of Asian female depression is forced marriage cannot be right.

Why can it not be right? Talking about depression is taboo across the board. And it cannot all be inherited can it?

Look, I don’t care if they think it’s a good idea or not. It obviously isn’t.

Well, that’s your opinion. I’m hoping the FMU had spoken to a few womens group about this too and consulted this idea around. Anyway, I think its worth trying. You don’t. I’m still not convinced by your argument.

their “village mentality” mitigated against that (which, incidentally, is a little patronising of you to them, isn’t it?).

Yup, I’m happy to accept I’m patronising towards people who decide to force their daughters into a marriage against her consent.

Are you saying that if I were to say to my 18 year old child, “If you marry that man I’ll never talk to you again”, that the police should be called?

No, I’m saying that because emotional/verbal pressure is very subtle, it is difficult to draw a line on where the police should step in. It doesn’t make the situation any easier of course.

Thus the police and doctors should be made aware of circumstances or clues that give them further insight into a person’s life.

I am all for forced marriages being illegal but if you are suggesting that trying to introduce someone to a preferred guy should be criminalised, or that nagging your daughter about when she’s going to meet a nice Muslim/Jewish/Hindu/Sikh boy should be some sort of criminal offence… that’s nuts

Oh sheesh. When did I ever bring criminalising of all this into the equation? Are you reading some other blog?

The only legislation I support is actually criminalising forced marriage as was suggested in the earlier bill. I’m happy to see if the civil remedies bill works, but even SBS know that they’ll have to wait and see.. and if it doesn’t then we move to full criminalisation. I’ve not suggested more legislation than that.

Here we are only talking about educating the police and doctors to look out for vital clues. I’m quite exasperated by your insistence in conjuring up extreme scenarios and then saying I’ll be calling the police in at every opportunity.

Look, I’m sorry but that cuts across all cultures to a greater or lesser extent and whilst it is undoubtedly manipulative it is not the same as coercion. Any situation in which an adult can walk away freely without being physically harmed is not coercion. If your parents don’t want to talk to you because you don’t like the man they want you to marry then both you and your parents have a tough choice to make. But it is a choice. I know plenty of non-Asian people who don’t speak to their parents because their parents don’t like their partners. And I repeat: when parents and children are all adults, the parents are entitled not to speak to or support their children if they don’t want to.

There is such a thing as making a choice and taking responsibility for it. If you decide that it’s more important to stay onside with your parents than to marry your first choice, then that’s your choice. If you decide that actually you want to marry the man you want and you don’t care what your parents think, that is also your choice. And if your parents say “If you do that I’ll never speak to you again” that’s their choice.

I am all for forced marriages being illegal but if you are suggesting that trying to introduce someone to a preferred guy should be criminalised, or that nagging your daughter about when she’s going to meet a nice Muslim/Jewish/Hindu/Sikh boy should be some sort of criminal offence… that’s nuts. Sorry.