Beyond "Witnessing": Childrens Experiences of Coercive Control in Domestic Violence and Abuse

Children’s experiences and voices are underrepresented in academic literature and professional practice around domestic violence and abuse. The project “Understanding Agency and Resistance Strategies” (UNARS) addresses this absence, through direct engagement with children. We present an analysis from interviews with 21 children in the United Kingdom (12 girls and 9 boys, aged 8-18 years), about their experiences of domestic violence and abuse, and their responses to this violence. These interviews were analyzed using interpretive interactionism. Three themes from this analysis are presented: (a) “Children’s experiences of abusive control,” which explores children’s awareness of controlling behavior by the adult perpetrator, their experience of that control, and its impact on them; (b) “Constraint,” which explores how children experience the constraint associated with coercive control in situations of domestic violence; and (c) “Children as agents,” which explores children’s strategies for managing controlling behavior in their home and in family relationships. The article argues that, in situations where violence and abuse occur between adult intimate partners, children are significantly affected, and can be reasonably described as victims of abusive control. Recognizing children as direct victims of domestic violence and abuse would produce significant changes in the way professionals respond to them, by (a) recognizing children’s experience of the impact of domestic violence and abuse; (b) recognizing children’s agency, undermining the perception of them as passive “witnesses” or “collateral damage” in adult abusive encounters; and (c) strengthening professional responses to them as direct victims, not as passive witnesses to violence.

A Slow March from Social Evil to Harm Reduction: Drugs and Drug Policy in Vietnam

The suppression of drug consumption and trade is high on the Government of Vietnam’s agenda. To accomplish this goal, Vietnam employs repressive policies that often contravene international human rights law. Among the most detrimental and problematic policies are the incarceration of drug users in compulsory treatment centers, and the stigmatization and abuse of consumers by the police. That said, Vietnamese drug policy is slowly changing in the face of one of Asia’s worst ongoing HIV epidemics. While the Communist Government of the early-1990s designated illicit drugs as a “social evil” to be eradicated through punitive and often repressive means, the recent implementation of harm reduction approaches have reduced the level of needle sharing, and thus HIV transmission. This briefing will explore the current trends in drug consumption, production, and trafficking before looking at the key harms and threats associated with drugs in Vietnam. This will be followed by a summary of Vietnam’s drug policies, including the country’s approach to drug treatment, harm reduction, and illicit opium suppression—Vietnam is one of a small number of states to have suppressed illicit opium production, an intervention that centred upon coercive negotiations with limited alternative development. The briefing will conclude with some tentative recommendations for reform and thoughts on what could be expected from Vietnam during the Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly on the World Drug Problem (UNGASS 2016).

Security trumps drug control: How securitization explains drug policy paradoxes in Thailand and Vietnam

This paper investigates the paradoxes inherent in Thai and Vietnamese drug policies. The two countries have much in common. Both are ultra-prohibitionist states which employ repressive policies to contain drug markets. Their policies have, however, diverged in two key areas: opium suppression and harm reduction. Thailand implemented an effective intervention to suppress opium farming centred upon alternative development, whereas Vietnam suppressed opium production through coercive negotiation with nominal alternative development. Vietnam has embraced elements of harm reduction, whereas Thailand has been slow to implement harm reduction policies. This paper hypothesises that these two differences are largely a product of their perceived relationship to security. The two cases demonstrate how once an issue is securitized the ultra-prohibitionist rules of the game can be broken to allow for more humane and pragmatic policies.