Part Two of Three: Understanding and Addressing the Complexity of Domestic and Intimate Partner Violence: Barriers to Leaving.

AI generated image with DALL-E 3 by Sherna Alexander Benjamin
Sherna Alexander Benjamin's avatar

Scholar-Practitioner who encourages using business and social work principles and concepts to address socioeconomic challenges. Enhance teamwork and productivity, reduce stress, foster innovation, and advance social sustainability.

Sherna Alexander Benjamin

Why did she stay? Why did she leave? Why did she return?

These are questions that the women and girls who endure unspeakable acts of partnered violence can answer. Some have unearthed the power of their voices and shared why they stayed and the power it took to leave—courageous and powerful women like Sally Khan, a famous fashion designer from Trinidad and Tobago. Tarelle Julien is an educated communications professional and flight attendant. And the popular U.S. talk show host Meredith Vieira. Other remarkable women of grit and power, like Sania Khan from Chicago and Samantha Issacs from Trinidad and Tobago, who dared to challenge their abuser’s control and unhealthy use of power, unfortunately, paid the price for leaving with their blood. And from some, we will never hear the answers, for they took those answers with them to the grave.

Anecdotal stories, women and girls unearthing the power of their voices, the work of frontline community and organizational leaders, and research are some of the ways we can get a glimpse into why women of all social and economic classes and ethnicities stay, leave, or return to violent partners. A lack of understanding of the dynamics of partnered violence can contribute to victim blaming, enabling unhealthy social and cultural norms and inadequate responses to addressing the problem, which can perpetuate the issues that exist. 

Questions and Apathy?

Some of the most popular questions that emerge when information surfaces about a woman or girl killed due to a vicious act of violence, returning to a partner who manifests violence, or remaining in an abusive relationship are “Why is she staying?” or “Why did she return?” and most profoundly the question “Why didn’t she just leave?” Some people may go as far as to say, “She did not leave because she liked the first slap.” then well-meaning women would begin to talk about how they left abusive relationships, moving the discourse from the woman or girl at hand and centering it on themselves as being the saviors of themselves by themselves. How people recount their stories after liberation can either facilitate environments of blame or empowerment allowing others to draw inspiration, hope, and connection. Or be discouraged and step back.

Every woman who leaves violent relationships and lives to share their stories is an invisible leaders who walk among us, and their strength, planning skills, demonstration of resilience, and grit must never be devalued. And society must not categorize based on their violent experiences. They are living examples of what it looks like to live strong in the face of harrowing experiences, and it is a remarkable demonstration and testament of the human spirit to create a value-driven life from the things that happened to them. Every facet of their identities must be honored, centering their successes, power, and leadership, for in their successes lies one of the most hated aspects of every perpetrator. No woman or girl who escaped the deadly clutches of partnered violence did so without some type of external support. Leaving a violent and abusive partner or environment comes at a significant cost. Even with support, it’s a long, daunting, and sometimes lonely road that women and girls trek shouting “freedom” while working to reconstruct their lives with the hopes of embracing a better future.

Others pose questions not because they are uncaring but rather because their questions come from a more profound place of feeling helpless and overwhelmed by the acts of continuous violence they witness or read about. Exposure to repetitive violence within families, communities, organizations, or reading about it in the news can contribute to apathy and questioning trying to make sense of what has happened. Many respond by providing logical reasonings after reading or listening to incidents of violence against women, and logic is good.

However, logical reasoning often exits the room when a gun is staring one in the face when a crisis occurs. When the impact of a loaded fist is felt minutes later, or when one is dragged around a room like a ragged doll, logical reasoning jumps out the door, and shock, fear, fright, flight, passivity, compliance, or flee steps in. I recall speaking with Monique (not her real name) and listening to her state, “Ms. Sherna, I am a professional woman, I have a PhD, I educate others, I train and support corporate companies to realize their goals.” She said, “I had all the logical responses for my friends who talked about their experiences with partners or colleagues who crossed boundary lines. I thought I would have known what to do. After all, I had the information and studied the red flags. I was equipped. Until I met a man who romanced me off my feet. I cannot even recall when the progression of the abuse started or how, but I felt its brutality. Today, after personal and family history mapping, I am in a much better place…” she said with hope in her eyes. 

Leaving Comes with Risks and Staying Enables a Breeding Ground for Violence.

When a woman or girl leaves a violent and abusive environment, they do so at the risk of their life as perpetrators are unpredictable, do not give up control quickly, and will use psychological tactics to influence a woman or girl to return. When women and girls return, perpetrators exact a type of unimaginable vengeful violence and punishment against them for leaving, and the manifestation of violence often escalates and can even result in the death of the woman. Leaving violent relationships is not only a physical act (which many people focus on), nor should it be isolated to a period of exit; it is also a psychological act, and women who experience violence require holistic psychosocial, financial, health, educational, and spiritual responses. 

Issues Related to Leaving Violent Relationships and Accessing Temporary Shelters

When a woman leaves a domestic violence situation and enters a temporary shelter, her stay is short-term, with a minimum of eight weeks to approximately six to 12 months (the latter is in rare cases). Most temporary shelters do excellent work; however, many are overburdened and do not have the human resources, finances, training, or physical space to adequately accommodate and support women and girls on a long-term basis. There are some shelters whose staff perpetuate a different level of violence and abuse against women and girls, which may contribute to women leaving shelters before the time. For countries with small populations, the issue of everyone knowing each other may arise, and the unconscious or conscious breach of confidentiality can lead to perpetrators showing up at temporary shelters and removing women and girls who have sought protection and safety.

Another issue that arises is that many women and girls who seek the services of temporary shelters are unaware of the strict operating and security measures of some shelters. For example, some shelters do not accept children; there may exist no internet or phone usage; women may have to seek permission regarding their movements, or women and girls are unable to leave the physical space for the duration of their stay; thus, if a woman is employed, she would not show up to work for approximately eight weeks, an employer may view her absence as abandonment leading to dismissal. When a woman leaves a shelter if she does not have substantive and responsive support such as housing, education, employment, personal development training, mental health support, mobility mentors, and access to human-centric law enforcement and legal systems to help her reconstruct her life, she will end up in a vortex of violence that may result in femicide or accepting that living in a whirlpool of violence is her lot and resign to herself to it.

Women and Girls Who Experience Violence Must Not be Categorized Using One Aspect of their Identity

When asking questions such as “Why did she stay?” issues related to the identity of women and girls must be considered. Women have various aspects that form their identities, such as socioeconomic class, educational level, race and ethnicity, religious beliefs, health status, invisible and visible disabilities, family, sexual orientation, geographical location, gender and social roles, profession, access to resources, social connections, and support. Women and girls who experience violence must not be categorized using one aspect of their identity. Their experience with violence and history of the same, including the embodiment of their identities, ought to be integrated into dialogues, planning, and support systems. As aspects of a woman’s identity may place her at a higher risk for victimization. Foreign-born women and those who belong to minority and marginalized groups experience higher rates of violence and bear life-long health impacts than women who do not belong to these groups.

Factors that Contribute to Women and Girls Staying, Leaving, or Returning to Domestic and Intimate Partner Violence Relationships

Women and girls who choose to stay, leave, or return to domestic and intimate partner relationships should not be judged, shamed, isolated, or categorized by the broader society. The idea of not judging women does not mean that women and girls should not acquire the skills and knowledge needed to be self-aware and live consciously safe and secure lives, tapping into education to enhance their physical, relational, economic, and psychological self-defense at the same time, they ought to be building solid social capital system. Societies are responsible for establishing a culture of empathy, care, and human-centered social sustainability systems coupled with robust laws and preventative mechanisms to assist women in unearthing their leadership, autonomy, voice, and agency to reconstruct their lives. 

When discourses related to women leaving domestic and intimate partner relationships arise, the following are some of the factors that may act as barriers to their leaving:

  1. Norms Related to Parental Abandonment and Societal Mothering Institutions Many women are faced with thoughts related to parental abandonment when they consider social norms related to the “good mothering institution’ established by society. These norms move many women to compare their own mothering experiences. As such, many women, when considering leaving domestic and intimate partner violence relationships, engage in a self-negotiation process regarding their mothering when thinking about leaving their children behind. They also wonder if the shelter will accept them and their children or if they often endure overwhelming legal processes relating to custody, at the same time thinking about the impact that exposure to violence has on their children. Many also think about the economic lifestyle of their children, school disruption, and their children’s personal goals. Additionally, perpetrators may use their influence to skew children’s view of their mother, and perpetrators can also use their influence externally, presenting their partner as a “bad mother,” thus drawing from widespread social norms related to “mothering institutions.”
  • Public Stigma Dominant groups in society set out rules that place women in boxes related to gender roles. These groups prescribe how women should behave and what is expected of them, policing their bodies, movements, and behaviors, publicly shaming women and girls for not complying with dominant or traditional societal rules. Society has a significant role to play in the prevention of domestic and intimate partner violence and can support women when they leave. Women who are not physically in the home caring for and raising their children are often labeled by many in society as “bad women and bad mothers.” One of the dominant gender roles regarding women is that they must be present in the lives of their children, and they must answer to society regarding anything about their children. For example, if a group sees a young child walking on the street asking for food or if a child manifests unhealthy behaviors in public, one of the first questions is, “Where is your mother?” or “Your mother did not train you well.”
  • Economic Dependency: Many women remain in domestic and intimate partner violence relationships due to a lack of economic security and independence. Financial instability is a crucial factor in why many women stay or return to abusive partners, as they have become financially dependent on their abusive partners. Women may not have a bank account in their name or any savings or investments that they can use as an economic safety net when they leave. Many are unemployed, and some do not have formal education, which they can leverage after leaving. The lack of formal education can make it extremely difficult for women to gain employment after they leave. Economic stability is a primary reason many women remain or return to violent relationships. The establishment of gender-responsive and transformative financial systems, investing in business and entrepreneurship for women, developing financial and business education to strengthen women’s capacity, increasing the minimum wage, and developing social sustainability systems to address poverty are some measures that can help prevent violence against women and support them when they leave.
  • Housing Insecurity, the question most women ask themselves is, “Where do I go?” Generally, women who do not experience violence undergo extreme emotional and economic distress when pursuing housing stability. Rental costs are excessive, and many women are “working poor.” Even though they are in full-time employment, they live below the poverty line as established by many countries. Millions of women live below the poverty line and experience the hardship being under-resourced brings. They cannot meet their monthly commitments or adequately respond to the needs of their family without financial distress and hardship. Women who lack the resources to meet all the requirements for rent, mortgage, and loan applications face a higher chance of being homeless or engaging in serial moving. Sourcing financing for homeownership can be daunting, and the waiting list for government housing often extends into decades. Women who leave a domestic violence relationship require transitional housing support that can provide long-term residential housing for them to stabilize their unstable lives.
  • Family Support: family support plays an essential role in supporting women who leave violent relationships. The lack of such support can act as a barrier; many women who experience domestic and intimate partner violence do not have the support of their families to exit such relationships. The family is one of the bedrock of society. Sadly, we live in societies where many families are fragmented, and healthy relational and social homeostasis is absent. Families with a history of fragmentation, being under-resourced, and residing in marginalized communities may lack the knowledge, tools, and resources to support their family members who leave violent relationships. Social and economic instability of families can act as a significant barrier as family members may also be struggling with substantial issues that adversely impact their lives, their functioning, and their ability to support survivors.

Some women may receive family support even then; navigating those family experiences can be challenging. Some families may not open their doors to relatives who experience domestic violence as they may have a real fear for their safety and security based on the unpredictability of the perpetrator’s behaviors or their threats. Other factors can include maintaining a social reputation within the community that overflows into their professional lives, societal and cultural norms, and religious ideologies, including significant financial constraints, housing insecurity, vicarious trauma, and feeling ill-equipped to deal with the situation.

  • Psychological Dynamics: Domestic violence cuts across women’s educational, social, economic, religious, geographical, and family status; it impacts women regardless of their race and ethnicity or social stratification position. The human mind is one of the most powerful and complex organs in the body and the most vulnerable. At the same time, our mind shapes our thought processes related to who we are, how we see ourselves, and the future we envision. Social environments and experiences also contribute to the way people see themselves. Unhealthy behaviors and adverse childhood and life experiences can contribute to skewed thought processes that build unhealthy thinking pathways about the self and others.

Psychological abuse can adversely affect highly educated women, women of privilege, women from low-income communities, and minority and marginalized women. It contributes to them being utterly co-dependent on the abuser, who in turn controls, manipulates, influences their actions, and punishes or sweeps them off their feet, especially if the abuser feels they are losing control, sense resistance, or perceive external interference. Abusers see women as objects who they own, train, and control. Psychological abuse can be overt or covert, leading to damaging mental health and physical effects. It can take women an extended time to break and overcome the psychological hold even when women leave the physical environment. Exposure to psychological abuse can also lead to various emotional responses, including but not limited to the following:

  1. Trauma Bonding occurs when women experience repeated cycles of abuse followed by positive reinforcement. Trauma bonding may show up differently based on the relationship. It’s the emotional or psychological dynamics that occur, making it difficult for women to leave abusive partners. Exposure to the cyclical patterns of abuse followed by positive reinforcement contributes to the victim forming strong emotional bonds with their abuser, who is causing them immense harm. The abuser follows the pattern of abuse where they shower the woman with praises and gifts, use apologetic words, and sweep the woman off her feet. They may lash out with violent outbursts a few weeks or days later, followed by apologetic words, gifts, and external acts of ‘love.’ Such acts would foster positive reinforcement as the woman internalizes the acts as love and a reward that reduces tension and pain. Positive reinforcement triggers the release of the feel-good hormone dopamine; when coupled with intimacy and physical affection, oxytocinis released, which can further solidify a bonding experience.

Trauma bonding is one-directional, victim to abuser. The victim may even see themselves as the one who needs to change so the abuser can stop their series of violence; they may believe that they can help the abuser change, they may protect the abuser, shower the abuser with acts of love, be compliant, and empathize with the abuser. They may also rationalize the abuse; for example, if the abuser lost their job and violently lashed out, the victim may rationalize that it’s because the abuser lost their job and they are going through a difficult period in their life. After the job loss, the victim may use another issue to rationalize the behaviors of the abuser.

  • Learned Helplessness is when a person repeatedly experiences different forms of violence, is continually exposed to violence (for example, children who constantly witness violence), or experiences highly stressful or adverse situations that are out of their control. For example, there is a constant lack of food and the need to live in a survival mode. They begin to internalize the repeated incidents or experiences as unavoidable and perceive that they cannot control or change the events, thus resigning themselves to the conditions under which they live. If opportunities for help and support present themselves, such individuals can have challenges embracing opportunity as the adverse psychological experience can impair their decision-making. Learned helplessness can contribute to fatalistic thinking, reduced trust, anxiety, depression, low self-worth, and not seeking support.
  • Social Capital Social capital includes the social relationships, shared values, connections, and bonds people have with others within families, communities, clubs, networks, work, school, or church. Social capital facilitates environments and relationships that enable people to connect, access resources, request favors, ask for help, or seek support. Social Capital is an essential part of the human experience and the prevention of domestic and intimate partner violence. It can provide a buffer to assist women to leave and recover from their exposure to violence and abuse.

There are three forms of social capital (bonding, bridging, and linking) that can provide opportunities for women to advance at the micro, meso, and macro levels. Social capital can also present benefits and challenges or be used in unhealthy ways by institutions and groups. When women are in violent relationships, one of the tactics of the perpetrator is to isolate them from their support systems, social circles, and networks. Long-term isolation disconnects people and diminishes social capital, making it difficult for women who experience violence to reach out to social connections they have not communicated with in months or years. There is that adage “out of sight, out of mind.” Thus, maintaining a connection with women, no matter how limited, can act as a bridge and protective buffer, developing pathways for women to reach out when and if they decide to leave.

  • Laws, Law Enforcement, and Legal Systems: while many countries have laws regarding domestic and intimate partner violence, the lack of their operationalization can be problematic, including the absence of monitoring and evaluation to measure their effectiveness and success, which can enable a culture of violence and reduce women and girls trust and confidence in governments, law enforcement, and legal systems to protect them. There is also the issue of antiquated laws that do not address emerging forms of violence against women and girls, like technology-facilitated gender-based violence, human trafficking, organized crime and gang activities, femicide, and violence against women and girls in the context of natural disasters and hazards, and pandemics. 

There continue to be many changes to law enforcement and legal systems that seek to establish units to respond to incidents and reports of domestic and intimate partner violence; such progress ought to be highlighted and commended. Many police and judicial officials provide excellent services despite institutional process challenges. However, women and girls can be re-victimized and re-traumatized when engaging with law enforcement and legal systems. The lack of gender-responsive systems can facilitate institutional barriers, biased attitudes and behaviors, insensitive handling of cases, and skewed investigative and legal processes. 

Limited gender-sensitive training for law enforcement and judicial officials and their lack of understanding of the dynamics of domestic and intimate partner violence can act as barriers undermining women and girls’ trust and confidence in these systems to report. These institutions are also overburdened and under-resourced, and many operate with processes that require reform; these issues can contribute to delayed access to justice and provide inadequate legal protection to women and girls. Delayed access to justice can discourage the reporting of violence and contribute to skewed public opinions about such institutions. It can also lead to high financial and emotional costs for women, reducing their participation in legal processes and abandoning legal matters before the court.

While the abovementioned factors are not exhaustive, they paint a picture of women’s challenges. Domestic and intimate partner violence traps women psychologically, physically, economically, socially, and relationally. Keep women in an insidious prison with open doors. Psychological abuse strips women of their human dignity and self-worth. It facilitates an environment where women’s mental models are continually in survival mode, thus diminishing their hope, aspirations, and vision of a future without violence as they slowly begin to accept their circumstances as their fate.

We can all do better and take action to create nonviolent environments and relationships. Look out for part three, which discusses what we can all do to prevent and respond to domestic and intimate partner violence.

Understanding and Addressing the Complexity of Domestic and Intimate Partner Violence: Barriers to Leaving Part One of Three.

Recommended Citation, Benjamin, A. S. (2024). Part two of three: Understanding and addressing the complexity of domestic and intimate partner violence: Barriers to leaving. https://alexinnasolutions.com/2024/08/02/understanding-and-addressing-the-complexity-of-domestic-and-intimate-partner-violence-barriers-to-leaving-part-two-of-three/

AI generated image with DALL-E 3 by Sherna Alexander Benjamin

Part One of Two: Understanding and Addressing the Complexity of Domestic and Intimate Partner Violence: Barriers to Leaving.

AI generated image with DALL-E 3 by Sherna Alexander Benjamin
Sherna Alexander Benjamin's avatar

Scholar-Practitioner who encourages using business and social work principles and concepts to address socioeconomic challenges. Enhance teamwork and productivity, reduce stress, foster innovation, and advance social sustainability.

Sherna Alexander Benjamin

Violence against women and girls is rooted in controlling and harmful ideological thinking about the bodies, agency, roles in society, and the very existence and identities of women and girls. Such thinking informs the development of systems and structures that guide societal norms within families, communities, churches, and private and public institutions—contributing to ladders of oppression that enable cultures of violence against women and girls within public and private spheres that significantly impede their upward mobility and ability to participate in civic life actively.

Violence also affects women and girls’ mental and physical health and well-being and undermines their economic stability to build household wealth and acquire assets. It limits their ability to unearth their agency, autonomy, and power to make independent decisions about their future, personal, and professional lives. There is also the resiliency of toxic “ideological masculinity” that favors “male supremacy,” which enables harmful gender-related acts against women and girls globally.

Gender-based violence is a universal problem under whose umbrella various forms of violence against women can be identified by society. Its manifestation is a human rights violation that strips women and girls of their human dignity, and it is an atrocity that leads to women and girls overrepresentation as victims of violence. In 2022, 48,800 women were killed worldwide “by their intimate partners or other family members.” Factors such as inequitable distribution of powerand controlling behaviors can foster environments where multiple and overlapping forms of violence and oppression exist. Lack of access to finance and entrepreneurial opportunities, education, and healthcare can significantly reduce women and girls’ capacity to build consciously secure, healthy, and stable lives. Housing, food insecurity, and unemployment continue to affect millions of women and girls across the world, disproportionately positioning them at a greater risk of victimization. Addressing economic and health inequity, poverty, and food and housing insecurity is critical for the prevention of domestic and intimate partner violence, as these can exacerbate violence against women and girls, contributing to social and emotional distress and intensifying direct and indirect economic costs. Lack of financial security can also facilitate unhealthy intergenerational cycles that place women and girls at a higher risk of violence and adversely impact their ability to build household wealth, embrace leadership positions outside the home, and live productive lives to experience upward mobility.

Violence Runs on a Continuum: Women and Girls Experience Multiple and Overlapping Forms of Violence

While violence against women and girls manifests within family units, communities, and public and private spaces, it runs on a continuum. Perpetrators can express it in explosive public displays and subtle, unsuspecting ways. Violence against women and girls in any form are issues that affect everyone. While they may occur in different sites, their consequential effects impact every societal institution. When women experience domestic violence, they can also experience multiple forms of violence that overlap, thus deepening the complexity of their experience and the issue itself.

For example, a woman who experiences physical violence at the hands of her partner may also experience financial and sexual violence and psychological abuse. The latter, when coupled with unresolved childhood adverse experiences, mental health and social issues, or experiences with past unhealthy relationships, can be an ominously toxic combination, contributing to women remaining stuck in co-dependent violent relationships where they begin to accept what is happening to them but also what perpetrators are saying about them (to others) as an accurate depiction of who they are as a person.

Psychological Dynamics and Isolation and Mental Health

The psychological dynamics of domestic violence strip women of their human dignity, affect their agency and autonomy and contribute to women questioning their self-worth. Anyone who questions their self-worth and sense of being is at a greater risk of being manipulated and controlled, much more so for women and girls who grew up in unstable environments with high-risk factors or women who live in environments where repetitive forms of overlapping violence and isolation (intrapersonal or interpersonal) forms the foundation of their daily lives. Isolation is a primary tactic used by perpetrators to disconnect women and girls from their support systems, thus gaining complete control of them. Isolation must not be seen solely from a person’s physical absence from a particular space or social event. Isolation can manifest in different ways, such as social, emotional, physical, or relational. Notions of disconnection (forced, free, or used as a survival or coping mechanism) is an aspect of isolation.

A woman or girl who experiences domestic violence may experience multiple forms of violence, such as psychological, financial, and physical violence. They may unconsciously engage in existential isolation, feeling alone and assuming that no one understands their situation, thus disconnecting internally and from the world around them. Additionally, women and girls who experience domestic violence, sexual assault, and intimate partner violence may also engage in behavioral adjustments (code-switching). To feel accepted, make others comfortable, or to hide their authentic selves and cover their daily experiences with violence, putting on different personas that enable them to show up at school, work, church, and social gatherings, ultimately shielding themselves from retributive and intensified abuse when they return home and from the harsh judgment of many in society. Code-switching carries a high emotional and stress response and costs.

Using Individual Experiences of Exiting Domestic Violence Relationships as the Measuring Line for Other Women and Girls Sets a Problematic and Harmful Precedent

The manifestation of violence disrupts every aspect of women’s and girls’ lives and erodes every foundation on which they stand. The lack of sustainable human-centric social and economic support mechanisms can make the process and decisions to leave violent relationships much more difficult. It is not as easy to leave a domestic or intimate partner relationship as some make it out to be. Even women who are not in violent relationships and who decide to terminate their long or short-term partner relationships may experience extreme mental health and social effects and other challenges after ending a relationship. Women who experience violence do not have the luxury of walking out without feeling the repercussions. It is also ludicrous for a person to engage in a comparative dialogue using their personal experience of leaving a domestic violence situation as the yardstick to judge other women and girls who experience domestic violence situations. While there may exist some similarities, every situation is unique. Each woman’s or girl’s capacity and support systems are different. Their access to resource and their psychology is also different.

Such behaviors devalue women and girls’ traumatic experiences, create a narrative about their emotional and mental state, support systems, and resource availability, and undermine the strength it takes for women to survive repetitive cycles of abuse daily. Understanding the factors that contribute to why women stay, leave, or return to domestic and intimate partner violence relationships is paramount to addressing the issue. Knowledge of the factors can help reduce a culture of victim blaming, provide insights into the complexity of violence against women and girls, deepen understanding of victim and perpetrator dynamics, unveil the legal, government, and social welfare gaps, and inform the establishment of adequate prevention and social sustainability mechanisms, as prevention and robust social protection are two of the most substantial measures for sustainable protection that promote peace, safety, and security. 

Victim Blaming

Many in society judge women for staying, leaving, or returning to domestic and intimate partner violence situations. Sadly, when femicide occurs, even in their death, they are also judged and blamed. The culture of proportioning blame to women and girls for the victimization they experience continues to set a harmful precedent in our societies. Such a culture enables every form of violence against women. It encourages stereotyping and discrimination and socially categorizes women, which is an unhealthy and oppressive practice. The culture of victim blaming sends a harrowing message to young girls and women, which says, “Stay quiet when you experience violence because we will not believe you,”solidifying the psychological and manipulative abuses of perpetrators.

Victim blaming runs on a continuum and shows up in unconscious and conscious ways. Thus, education and awareness are critical to make the unconscious conscious, reduce illiteracy related to the complexity of victim-perpetrator dynamics and that of domestic violence, and establish robust and responsive prevention mechanism that promotes the protection of women and girls, restore human dignity, and fosters cultures of nonviolence that facilitates ‘no safe zones for perpetrators of violence.’ Let us consider for a moment: suppose every woman and girl who experiences violence remains silent. In that case, society will function on a skewed perception that all is well. At the same time, its bottom falls out as the consequences of something hidden in plain sight will eat away at the marrow of society while rippling through every institution, leading to high societal costs.

No woman or girl places as a life goal living in a domestic or intimate partner violence relationship. Multiple factors contribute to women staying, leaving, and returning to such relationships, many of which can overlap and further complicate their experiences. Many of these are the framing of unhealthy childhood experiences that heighten the vulnerability of women and girls and harmful social and cultural norms. Many are the lack of national responses and the lack of educational systems to disrupt the developmental pathways to violence. Many are the inequitable social and economic systems that have systematically constructed systems of oppression. Some include the gaps in global indicators regarding violence against women and girls. Some include the invisible factors and unconscious factors. While these are just a few factors, States Parties, international funders, and academic and nonprofit institutions, including independent scholar-practitioners, must invest in research to understand the factors that enable cultures of violence and environments where women and girls who are being brutalized daily fear to leave and fear to stay.

In this three-part series, I cover a few of the factors drawing from over fourteen years of professional experience, published research from various scholars, personal experience, and speaking with women and girls from different countries who have and are experiencing some form of domestic and intimate partner violence and frontline leaders in the field. This series provides general information with the aim of awareness-raising to enable individuals and organizations to gain deeper insights into the dynamics of domestic and intimate partner violence and the ways violence entraps millions of women and girls globally. Not to encourage apathy but rather to ignite conversations that would lead to actionable micro, meso, and macro steps. And help individuals understand that everyone, from state parties to corporations, has a responsibility to address violence against women and develop sustainable organizational and national practices to reduce the cost of violence, prevent it, and protect those who experience it.

Part two provide a general overview of some of the factors contributing to why women stay, leave, or return, looking at Norms Related to Parental Abandonment and Societal Mothering Institutions, Public Stigma, Economic Dependency, Housing Insecurity, Lack of Family Support; Psychological Dynamics peering into Trauma Bonding and Learned Helplessness; Social Capital; and Laws, Law Enforcement, and Legal Systems. Share this series with family members, friends, and colleagues so they can understand the dynamics that undermine the lives of women next door, colleagues in the office, a relative, or the woman sitting on the bus next to you as you read this post.

Recommended Citation, Benjamin, A. S. (2024). Part one of two: Understanding and addressing the complexity of domestic and intimate partner violence: Barriers to leaving. https://alexinnasolutions.com/2024/08/01/understanding-and-addressing-the-complexity-of-domestic-and-intimate-partner-violence-barriers-to-leaving-part-one-of-three/

Addressing Violence in Trinidad and Tobago Requires Multifaceted Approaches

Sherna Alexander Benjamin's avatar

Sherna Alexander Benjamin

Violence is a global hazard that has left no nation or community unscathed. Its manifestation undermines the safety and security of families. It enables national insecurity and reduces citizens’ confidence in law enforcement and public officials. The effect of violence destabilizes economies, contributing to individuals’ declining health and well-being.

Violence manifests in different forms and fosters social and economic fragility within society. It is a political, economic, social, health, and criminal legal system issue. One act of violence in a country of any size is one act too many. The manifestation of violence of any degree should ignite national concerns. Public officials should emphasize the issue and place it on national and local government agendas. Violence in any society demands proactive responses from all citizens—especially public decision-makers. Violence reduces civic participation and undermines human rights. Impeding freedom of movement, human capital investment, and social sustainability development.

Trinidad and Tobago is experiencing an upsurge in violence, which contributes to nationwide distress and social instability. Many citizens no longer feel safe anywhere in the country. A lack of citizen security has significant economic and health consequences. Insecurity reduces business growth, enabling migration and social deterioration. Further, the daring acts of violence occurring in private and public spaces heighten citizens’ fears, elevating anxieties. The causes of violence are multifactorial. State actors and socioeconomic practitioners, law enforcement officers, and the media should avoid sensationalizing incidents of violence or oversimplifying causes and factors that influence a climate of violence.

Citizens are demanding that public officials take immediate action and improve their responses to addressing violence. Ensure there are adequate services for victims and enhance legal frameworks. Implement programs to improve citizen safety and hold perpetrators to account. Addressing violence requires multidimensional, people-centered, and preventative approaches. In responding to citizens’ calls, public officials must examine the social determinants of health to understand their influence on violence while incorporating social-ecological methods to analyze systems and promote a culture of national security and sustainable development.

Utilizing Social-Ecological methodologies

People do not live isolated lives disconnected from the systems around them. Healthy systems contribute to healthy people. In contrast, fragile systems contribute to fragile and failing communities. Using ecological methodologies will help public officials understand the complexity of violence. Identify how fragile systems contribute to violence and its by-products and understand ways to establish anti-fragility structures to promote healthy people, systems, and societies. 

Ecological methodologies help people understand that every system has a role and is interconnected. Systems are not inanimate; they can prevent or foster violence. The latter can occur in subtle ways, leading to unintended consequences. Integrating ecological approaches will provide actors with holistic violence prevention strategies and ways to sustain them. Identify processes to drive national-level social impact, thus looking beyond the surface to see the whole picture, peeling back socioeconomic layers to determine the factors that drive violence.

Social Determinants of Health Provide Deeper Insights into Addressing Violence

Violence is a multifaceted and complex issue. Thus, it is counterproductive for public officials to use a single lens to address it. Incorporating an integrated, multifaceted approach will benefit the country. Understanding social determinants of health and the factors affecting people’s lives, shaping their experiences, and influencing their decision-making will provide deeper insights into addressing violence. Identifying factors that influence violence is crucial, as violence is a social determinant of health, which disproportionately affects the lives of women, children, and low-income populations. 

Social determinants of health are those conditions that affect people’s health and well-being in the environments where they are born, grow, live, learn, work, play, socialize, and worship. Social and economic conditions can affect people’s mental and physical health and social mobility—people residing in environments with derelict buildings. Poor environmental hygiene, lack of green spaces, poor air and water quality, and a lack of play areas are at a higher risk of experiencing desperation, hopelessness, and social and economic segregation. 

Social conditions include poverty, economic instability, limited access to employment, and healthcare inequity, underdeveloped neighborhoods. Discrimination, food and housing insecurity, and low education levels can nurture a climate of violence. Although these conditions do not cause violence, they place people at increased risk of exposure to adverse life experiences. Mainstreaming social determinants of health and ecological approaches can improve the human conditions under which people exist. Such approaches can strengthen legislative frameworks and inform the development of social and economic programs to address all dimensions of health, including spiritual dimensions. Promote investment in education and research to establish healthy norms and evidence-based practices. 

The Future of the People of Trinidad and Tobago will depend on the Methods used to Address Violence

The presence of violence in society is costly. Trinidad and Tobago, as a developing nation, cannot afford to bear the social, economic, and human capital costs of violence. Violence has many factors that impact society and requires many approaches to address it. By incorporating social-ecological and social determinants of health approaches, actors in Trinidad and Tobago can co-develop tailored interventions, identify the factors contributing to a violent climate, foster equity and justice, and build anti-fragility systems. Actors can understand the interconnectedness of systems, enabling the development of comprehensive frameworks for violence prevention strategies.  

Cultures of violence did not emerge overnight; systems in society feed and breed them. Violence moves and grows with people, and systems can give it life directly and indirectly. Despite citizens’ calls for public officials to act Now! Acting without a sustainable plan can make the situation worse. Furthermore, the country has a history of knee-jerk reactions to addressing violence and crime that has had little impact on the island. Reactionary responses will show a sense of action but will not solve the problem in the long run. Public officials who want to foster environments of safety, citizen security, and socioeconomic progress must recognize that there’s a long road ahead.

Addressing violence will take time and requires all societal systems to shape the country’s future, where social impact and citizen security are paramount. Such actions will require strategic planning, community engagement, and investment in multidimensional approaches to address the present culture of violence and prevent its future manifestation. The country has an excellent opportunity to address violence comprehensively. Develop sustainable strategies that promote violence prevention and invest in human capital—working towards sustainable development and building healthy institutions to establish citizen security and safety calls for addressing violence and the factors enabling it at all societal levels. Failing to address violence comprehensively will be disastrous for Trinidad and Tobago.

Building Stronger Collaborations: Strategies for Success

Sherna Alexander Benjamin's avatar

Sherna Alexander Benjamin

When did you last collaborate on a project or activity with others to achieve a goal? Recently, I spoke with a professional in the corporate sector about their inter-departmental collaborative experience, and the response was not what I had expected. I heard things like, “Never me again!” As I sought specific answers as to what contributed to such a response, the professional stated, “We kept going around in circles…it was as if almost everyone in the room was working on a different radar…and don’t get me started about the communication, whew!” The professional said, “The next time I have to work with those people in that department, I will scream,” then came the “I love what I do and appreciate my company, but working with groups is not for me.” 

Have you ever expressed similar sentiments? I know I have! I have had some collaborative experiences that pushed me to tears, and some facilitated an environment where the flow of work and interactions were seamless, contributing to healthy friendships. In both instances, I learned many valuable lessons that sparked my interest in understanding why some collaborations work and others go awry. What factors contribute to healthy and sustained collaborations and enable teams and organizations to work effectively in ways that drive productivity to realize their goals successfully? 

Many, if not all, have worked with another person or team where realizing a goal was why the group came together. Such groups may have comprised people from different social, economic, and educational backgrounds and people who think and process information differently. Yet, everyone may have appeared engaged in the process, working towards the goal until unmanaged group dynamics contributed to a stalemate and slowing of the process. Working towards a goal and working towards a common goal is not the same thing. I have been part of collaborative processes where almost everyone had different expectations and conflicting perceptions about the goal and how to reach it. 

Collaboration is fundamental to human existence; it can foster healthy relationships within the work environment, enhance human and social capital, and support effective networking when facilitated with care. Psychological safety, effective communication, respect, transparency, and vulnerability are some of the many aspects of collaborative processes. In this article, I share some basic lessons from being a collaborative member, co-facilitating groups, and being an observer. 

Collaboration a Process to Strengthen the Pillars of Corporate Culture

A fundamental pillar that strengthens corporate culture is collaboration. It can shape and improve leadership, enhance productivity, and enrich employee interaction while transforming how corporations do business, especially within the communities where they operate. As corporations seek to improve their environmental, social, and governance (ESG) programs and policies, they must integrate and invest in collaborative skills to build sustained collaborations, as this is a crucial aspect of advancing local and global progress and prosperity.

Collaborative processes can drive more inclusive inter-departmental, inter-community, and interprofessional working to enhance creativity, productivity, innovation, and knowledge exchange. Teams can realize goals more quickly, and positive social, economic, and relational effects can emerge from well-facilitated collaborative processes. Collaboration is not inanimate but a dynamic and transformative process between and among people. Various approaches are used based on situational factors, history, context, people involved, timeframe, costs, and goals.

The Intricacies of Collaboration

People working within organizational teams with differences in work ethic, where the vision is repeated but not made plain, and where ways of addressing challenges differ can experience complexities that make working together a challenging experience. Complexities can be exacerbated when teams engage in interdisciplinary, cross-sector, and cross-border collaborations; such teams can face challenges such as different working methodologies, diverse perspectives, and communication barriers.

An attorney, social worker, psychologist, economist, corporate mogul, accountant, traditional researcher, and local community leader may see the same problem differently. Some people may see differences, while others may see an opportunity to weave each perspective into the solution puzzle. Working together is no easy feat; it calls for self-awareness and social consciousness, professional integrity, emotional intelligence, and a willingness to embrace diversity of thinking, expression, experience, and presence while honoring all voices in the space and doing what is best for the whole and those the group is tasked to serve.

Complexities in collaborations may be further amplified when undergirded by different organizational mandates and visions, opposing work practices, limited contextual knowledge, time frames, competitive cultures, rigid top-down institutional practices, a lack of trust, covert manipulative practices, and unclear goals and visions but also, by not having the people with the knowledge and experience who can bring deeper insight to the work in the room.

However, while complexities exist, they can provide remarkable opportunities for teams to engage in ‘complexity thinking’ and build healthy and transformative systems and experiences. Collaborative approaches can bridge gaps between departments, external institutions, diverse groups, and communities. It is essential for co-developing innovative solutions to address the challenges employees, customers, and community members encounter. Using collaborative approaches requires surveying environments and landscapes and assessing potential challenges and risks.

Catalyzing Change Through Inclusive Collaborative Practices

When working with communities, it is vital to facilitate environments where residents are placed at the center of all planning and programs as they are the experts of their communities; they bring their experiences, knowledge, and solutions. Change demands inclusion, and inclusion is an aspect of collaborative processes. Inclusive collaboration, where people are placed at the center, fosters a space where people feel included and experience inclusion, leading to greater buy-in. Individuals can then own the process, their choices, behaviors, and solutions—ultimately enhancing relationships, productivity, communities, agencies, and programs. 

Using collaborative techniques to effect change can drive evidence-based social impact, contribute to high investment returns, community stability, and resilience, and foster cultures of anti-fragility and sustainability; integrating inclusion into collaborative processes facilitates environments where people truly experience what it means to be listened to and seen, valued and respected, and people become agents of change while disrupting tunnel visions related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. 

Inclusion is stressed here because it is essential for fostering participation, collaboration, creativity, and progress at all levels of society. Many organizations automatically revert to the same names and organizations they have used for decades during collaborative planning exercises, thus creating development and social change echo chambers that can foster stagnation and show movement without progress. Companies may also reach out to people and groups that manifest the lowest degree of resistance or those they can influence to inform decision-making. At the same time, they covertly hold power, ultimately excluding many actors with brilliant, innovative ideas for change and powerful, transformative ways of working. 

Collaboration Across Spaces

Collaboration is not only used within corporate, development, academic, or non-profit spaces. Family members collaborate daily to accomplish goals for stability, social and economic advancement, and well-being. Elements of collaboration are foundational to the sustainability of family structures. These elements can be unique to each family as members work together to support homeostasis and positive family norms. Many individuals first learned collaboration skills in the family environment. Collaboration is a critical feature that promotes families’ security, social presence, and upward mobility. 

Collaboration Needed to Address Global Crisis

The Cambridge Dictionary1 defines collaboration as “the situation of two or more people working together to create or achieve the same thing.” The definition further defines collaboration as “the act of working together with other people or organizations to create or achieve something.” Working together to achieve something is connected to our daily lives. Working together can manifest healthy or unhealthy behaviors, relationships, systems, structures, and processes. 

We live in a world where the unhealthy manifestation of conflict, violence, and socioeconomic problems overflows into families, communities, institutions, and corporations, exacerbating pre-existing challenges. As individuals and agents within agencies and corporations attempt to make sense of these challenges and identify ways to work together to develop and implement solutions, collaboration is pivotal for addressing global issues, reconstructing systems, corporations, societies, and communities, aiding the co-designing of equitable practices and safe working environments at all social and economic levels.

According to Steve Jobs, “Great things in business are never done by one person; they’re done by a team of people.” The word ‘business’ can be extended to every space within society.  Participating in collaborative processes can be complex, challenging, and beautifully dynamic, as the process is not linear. The process can be gratifying, inspirational, and successful when facilitated with care and respect. People coming together make collaboration possible, and “great things” can be done collectively. 

When the collaborative process lacks effective facilitation, the manifestation of unhealthy conflicts, a lack of trust, and a breakdown in relationships can be some of the results, including a hemorrhaging of time, expertise, and money. However, when members allow the process to evolve while being well facilitated through an emotionally conscious process of care, the results can be transformative and mutually beneficial while at the same time providing opportunities for learning, growth, and building strong networks and relationships.

Effective Communication and a Psychological Approach Needed for Sustained Collaborations

Henry Ford said, “Coming together is a beginning. Keeping together is progress. Working together is success.” Keeping and working together requires more attention, excellent care, awareness, and tailored facilitation approaches using diverse collaboration techniques to enable teams to start and finish strong. Coming together may be easy for some individuals, but the reality for many is that the initial phase can be challenging, even triggering.

At the same time, for many teams, staying together for the duration of the collaboration can be extremely difficult and, at times, stimulating, filled with emotional ebbs and flows, contributing to the success or breakdown of even the best-resourced teams. Effective communication, which comprises various competencies, is one of the critical components that can strengthen collaborative working. Speaking and listening competencies are crucial to building sustained collaborations.

In a 2019 Harvard Business Review article entitled “Cracking the Code of Sustained Collaboration,”2 Harvard Business School Professor Francesca Gino shared findings from her research, including specific tools to assist organizations in training employees to build sustained collaborations.

Gino suggests “that all too often when others are talking, we’re getting ready to speak instead of listening. That tendency only gets worse as we climb the corporate ladder,” findings from Gino’s research further suggest “We fail to listen because we’re anxious about our own performance, convinced that our ideas are better than others’, or both. As a result, we get into conflicts that could be avoided, miss opportunities to advance the conversation, alienate the people who haven’t been heard, and diminish our teams’ effectiveness.”

Gino also suggests that a psychological approach is needed for sustained collaborations as mental attitudes can significantly impact collaborations, colleague dynamics, and the work. Moreover, leaders should broaden their view of collaboration, moving beyond seeing it ‘only’ as a value to cultivate but also as a skill where employers take the initiative by identifying training and development opportunities to strengthen the capacities of their employees.

The psychological approach to collaboration requires checking perceptions, identifying, and owning conscious biases, and embracing opportunities that unearth unconscious biases—establishing boundaries while being open to stepping out of comfort zones, building trust and accountability, and igniting empathy and motivation. The collaborative process can be used by many for either the common good of society or to promote injustice and cause immense harm. 

Some other factors that inform the collaborative processes and their outcomes (positive or negative) include collaborators’ goals (individual vs. collective), clarity of vision and its meaning, and various other internal and external factors. Such as the accelerating pace of change, evolving socioeconomic problems, environmental challenges, declining trust in private, public, and religious leaders, and the uptick in violence at the family, community, and institutional levels. The changing nature of work, competing personal and professional demands, and technology-facilitated change all demand that collaboration skills be taught to individuals to address local and global challenges effectively and adequately. 

Investing in Research for Sustained Collaboration

Companies and philanthropical agents ought to consider investing in social and organizational research to understand better ways collaboration can positively transform human behavior for the common good of society, develop evidence-based practices to building sustained collaborations, and identify innovative ways that transnational non-governmental organizations and governments can integrate collaborative practices into their work to respond to national and global crises.

Researchers from Warwick Business School (WBS) and the Institute for Collaborative Working (2017) published a report entitled “Understanding The Psychology Of Collaboration: What Makes An Effective Collaborator?”3 The report contains findings from their two-year research project where they surveyed 107 companies. Findings include “Key Individual Attributes for Effective Collaboration” and “Top 10 Attributes of Effective Collaborators.” According to the report’s authors, “Collaboration isn’t a new concept; it has always been a necessity since [organizations] work together. In today’s age of hyper-[specialization], it has become even more important.” The authors also stated, “As firms focus on what is core to their success while serving the broader needs of customers and service-users, firms must become better at collaborating.”

Lessons Learned from My Experiences with Collaborative Processes

By sharing these lessons, I have learned. I hope to ignite more profound, meaningful conversations within government agencies, corporations, communities, civil society, and groups considering broaching the topic of a prospective collaboration or those involved in a collaborative process and want to reengineer it. I also hope that individual members of society and families can see value in these lessons and work to improve their daily interactions to build healthy, equitable, and sustained relationships. I hope stakeholders and decision-makers can invest in research in this area and support the institutional strengthening of organizations at all levels:

  1. Collaborate Using a Strengths-based Perspective: When considering a collaboration, it is advisable to work from a strengths-based approach versus a deficit approach; unfortunately, the latter emerges automatically in many instances. A strengths-based approach facilitates an environment of empowerment and ignites purpose. Too often, people collaborate and spend time identifying what is not working, overlooking the collective and individual strengths and resources they can draw from to brainstorm and co-design solutions. 
  2. Adopt an Ecological Approach: Such a perspective helps collaborators analyze the layers of a system and the people who engage with the systems at various ecological levels to identify causes, problems, consequences, and solutions at multiple levels; using such an approach reduces the impact of suboptimization and individualistic system perspectives. Issues are not disconnected from the systems they thrive in, and people’s ideologies enable systems.
  1. Be Open to Recognizing New Talents and Skills: Building a robust collaborative culture requires diverse perspectives. Companies shouldn’t avoid bringing in new talent to support their teams during the collaborative process, which can help accelerate growth, bring new perspectives, and drive innovation. While experienced consultants and other professionals provide valuable knowledge and experience, repeatedly using the same consultants or professionals across various projects can result in stagnation, lack of new perspectives, and reduced impact.
  2. Establish a Culture of Psychological Safety: When individuals feel psychologically safe, they are more likely to engage deeply with the process. Think creatively, share learnings, and promote organizational citizenship. Psychological safety fosters a culture of resilience, accountability, care, and well-being as people are centered throughout the process. Safety provides opportunities for individuals to authentically engage with the process and those involved.
  3. Pre-collaboration Assessment: An assessment is necessary for successful collaborations to articulate the process’s purpose, objectives, and key stakeholders. It helps institutions to consider scope, timelines, strategies for sustainability, and how resulting products and services will be maintained and by whom. Ultimately, an assessment clarifies the “why” of the collaboration, ensuring alignment with the vision while strengthening goals.
  4. Roles, Responsibilities, Expectations, and Boundaries (RREB): Naming roles and responsibilities, clarifying expectations, and identifying boundaries are pivotal for shaping the experience. Roles support the development of an agreed-upon decision-making method that best suits the group. Responsibilities enable clarity of work and hold people accountable. They also help manage expectations and realize goals. Boundaries support a respectful culture, clarify responsibilities, and reduce burnout. A collaborative process without RREB can impede the group’s progress, reduce work quality, and contribute to a demoralized team. 
  5. Embrace Setbacks: Setbacks (often termed failure by many) can dishearten even the most resilient and optimistic team; however, they can be a catalyst to spark innovation and unlock valuable learning and growth opportunities that strengthen relationships and drive productivity. Equipping teams with the tools and environment where they do not see setbacks as “failures” or dead ends but as opportunities for exploration, thriving, and reframing “failure” is critical. It’s not about working with failure in mind but using it to your advantage. Effective collaboration centers on collective ownership of setbacks. Collective ownership fosters a supportive environment where teams can share knowledge and experiences openly, minimizing an environment of blame and shame. However, balancing collective and individual accountability with personal responsibility remains crucial to the collaborative process; it is a delicate professional dance that ensures lessons are learned and progress is made.
  6. Reduce Ambiguity: reducing ambiguity calls for sharing information in a transparent, relevant, and timely manner while communicating in a way everyone understands. Avoid assuming everyone in the room understands the terminologies, jargon, abbreviations, or the language level. Clarifying the vision, goals, and objectives at different points during the process helps reduce ambiguity. I have seen many teams or coalitions go around in circles because those leading did not clearly define the vision, goals, and objectives. Information was not shared transparently or in a timely manner, contributing to a lack of buy-in and mistrust. It is an act of violence to use language beyond the comprehension of most people in the space; thus, understanding the composition of the group always works.
  7. Leadership Framework: Consider the leadership framework the team will use to guide the collaborative process, evaluating options such as co-leadership, vertical or horizontal, and centralized or decentralized models based on the scope and needs of the project. It is essential to distinguish between the leadership frameworks chosen for collaboration as these will differ from individual members’ leadership styles and approaches, as well as organizational leadership structures and cultures. Remember, every person has leadership abilities, and using individual members’ leadership styles will complement the leadership model selected.
  8. Foster Growth and Recognition:  Successful collaborations enable a culture of team development and individual appreciation. Determine team members’ strengths and areas where they can improve their skills and explore professional development opportunities to fill those gaps. Allocate resources for professional development training, including recognizing team members’ contributions. Recognition could include anything from tokens of appreciation and training stipends to public acknowledgment of individuals’ innovative contributions and achievements to financial rewards.
  9. Embrace Healthy Conflict as a Catalyst for Growth: Conflict is an intrinsic and neutral aspect of human life. Because individuals have different conflict styles and respond differently to conflict, unmanaged conflict can become disruptive, jeopardizing the collaborative process. Collaboration thrives on open communication, and healthy conflict can catalyze positive change. A conflict transformation plan fosters a healthy culture and helps constructively anticipate and address potential disagreements. It promotes a safe space for healthy discussion while minimizing the risk of destructive conflict.
  10. Recognize Biases and Power Dynamics: Effective collaboration requires self-awareness and self-regulation. This includes recognizing conscious biases, welcoming opportunities that reveal unconscious biases, and seeking opportunities to challenge them personally or collectively. Furthermore, it’s crucial to identify, understand, and acknowledge the power dynamics within collaborative settings. Developing strategies to address and manage these dynamics, both individually and as a group, is essential. Failure to recognize biases can perpetuate unequal power relations, contributing to instability. Unbalanced power dynamics can destabilize any team, ultimately hindering its effectiveness.
  11. Self-awareness and Leading with Flexibility: Leaders must develop self-awareness skills crucial for the collaborative process—enabling them to identify and strategically adapt to presenting situations. Leaders must engage in introspection, which requires knowing when to take charge, lead from behind, and allow others to lead. Leaders should identify if their actions are hindering progress, causing stagnation, or fostering healthy collaboration practices. Simultaneously, group members should also be self-aware, understanding when to take the initiative, when to follow, provide support, and allow room for others to lead.
  12. Evaluate the Fit:  Individuals, professionals, and organizations should carefully evaluate whether a collaboration aligns with their goals and resources. Before joining any collaborative process, prospective team members should consider factors such as the purpose, required time commitment, expertise, potential conflicts of interest, and financial investment. Carefully weigh the opportunity cost of time to ensure the collaboration aligns with your values and provides a strong return on your investment; return on investment should not be seen only as financial benefits. Evaluating the fit also helps individuals to identify how best they can contribute to avoid overextending themselves.
  13. Embrace Active Listening: Collaborators should integrate active listening techniques to humanize processes and honor the voices and presence of persons in the space. Many individuals talk over each other or fail to be mentally present (physical presence is not an indicator that a person is mentally present) and open to listening to the speaker. Other times, individuals are preoccupied with formulating their responses while others speak. This tendency can devalue others’ voices and experiences, neglecting diverse perspectives, and people can miss out on incredible opportunities to listen to different ideas and ways of seeing a situation. Implementing active listening techniques fosters the development of more inclusive and sustainable teams. It enhances communication effectiveness, aids in conflict transformation, and cultivates an environment conducive to power-sharing, reciprocity, and mutually respectful relationships.
  14. Collective Principles vs. Individual Values: A principle-based approach keeps collaborators centered on the issue and the work. Instead of getting bogged down in disagreements about personal values, teams can focus on their shared goals. For example, imagine five organizations collaborating on the issue of quality and affordable healthcare for all. This core principle would guide their discussions, even if individual members have differing personal beliefs about who should have access to specific aspects of healthcare. While personal values are essential, a collective approach focused on core principles can minimize disruptive conflict and streamline the collaborative working process toward tremendous success. By agreeing on guiding or core principles, teams can manage emotions objectively and respectfully, focusing on problem-solving. Remember, personal values and principles are interconnected, and self-awareness remains paramount as successful collaborations benefit from shared foundation principles.
  15. Harnessing Technology for Impact:  Research and implement technologies that can enhance the collaborative process. Leveraging user-friendly technologies can support the group’s efforts, allowing members to use their time in ways that increase their productivity. Technologies can significantly improve the group’s work, promoting objectivity, facilitating clarification through questioning, and fostering a culture of openness to learning, research, and skill development. Using technologies can streamline communication, support information sharing, and promote transparency. For example, AI can be used ethically to generate an outline for a report (not write the report), supporting creativity and helping teams save time during the writing process; it can also help individuals enhance their writing skills with greater clarity.
  16. Measure and Learn for Continuous Improvement: Effective collaboration flourishes on continuous learning, so work with your team to establish a monitoring, evaluation, accountability, and learning (MEAL) plan. Agree upon what defines success for the group; defining success during the initial stages helps ensure everyone is working towards the same goals. Identify clear milestones, metrics, and methods for measuring progress. Capturing key learnings supports the innovative and improvement process. Evaluating the process and engagements is not just about documenting results; it’s about informing future collaborations, reporting best practices, measuring company growth, and identifying areas for improvement. It helps teams understand what worked and why and what did not work and how to avoid future errors.
  17. Embrace the Journey: Collaboration isn’t just about achieving goals – it can be an exciting, inspirational, fun, and rewarding journey. The process can enhance collaborators’ intrinsic value, fostering a sense of accomplishment and shared purpose. View setbacks as an opportunity for growth, celebrate milestones along the way, honor individual and team achievements, and identify growth opportunities. Having fun during the journey, you’ll enable a culture to unlock members’ full potential. Collaboration can be a fun, rewarding, learning, and engaging experience, but only for those who embrace it as such.
  18. Before Commencing Work, Interact:
    1. Acquaint yourself with the individuals present and capture what motivates them.
    2. Walk alongside team members to learn their strengths, obstacles, and unmet needs, especially when collaborating with community members.
    3. See individuals as peers and engage with them as such, recognizing that people always remember how others made them feel.
    4. When engaging with others, exercise self-regulation, compassion, and care.

I’ve observed where external stakeholders manifest resentment toward community members who propose alternative pathways and solutions to address community challenges or, worse, covertly isolate group members. Always remember that community members are the foremost experts in their communities, as they intimately understand the daily realities and unmet needs of residents. Similarly, most employees are the experts on their company operations.

Collaboration: A Path for Sustainable Development

As the global community faces pre-existing and evolving challenges that impact the social, economic, and political pillars of societies, institutions, and governments are tasked with exploring new ways to address the accelerating problems they encounter. Exploring innovative ways to collaborate, teaching collaboration skills to foster sustained collaborations, and having well-equipped collaborators are critical to responding to challenges effectively. The survival of societies is linked to realizing sustainable development goals and collaborative efforts.

Investing in research to gain deeper insights into the social psychology and economics of collaboration is equally important to cultivate evidence-based collaboration practices. The cost of not incorporating and working towards sustained collaboration can be astronomical at the community and broader societal levels, especially in a technology-driven age. Although collaborative processes are challenging, they are also one of the main connectors required to address the complexities of our global problems.

Collaborations provide opportunities to explore transformative solutions to drive change. It is not static but rather an ever-evolving human-centric process. That requires individuals and corporations to enter at the speed of trust, with great care, curiosity, empathy, authenticity, and purpose for the common good of society. Collaboration may be referred to by different names based on the group, context, language, and culture. All partnerships have an aspect of collaboration, but not all collaborations end in partnerships.

The purpose, vision, environment, and people define sustainability, success, or failure of the collaborative process. It is imperative that private, public, and civil society organizations revisit their collaborative processes, invest in collaborative training, and reframe how they see collaboration to ensure local and global problems are effectively addressed. The world is at multiple crossroads, and sustained collaboration is needed now more than before to help steer the path toward equitable and anti-fragility systems and institutions, thus changing the global trajectory through reengineering systems, institutions, communities, families, and societies using collaborative practices. 

  1. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/collaboration ↩︎
  2. Gino, F. (2019 ). Cracking the code of sustained collaborations: Six new tools for training people to work together better. https://hbr.org/2019/11/cracking-the-code-of-sustained-collaboration ↩︎
  3. Chakkol, M., Johnson,M., & Finne, M. (2017 March). Understanding the psychology of collaboration: What makes an effective collaborator. https://instituteforcollaborativeworking.com/resources/Documents/understanding_the_psychology_of_collaboration.pdf ↩︎

Understanding Crime and Violence in Latin America and the Caribbean is Critical for Building a Healthy Anti-Fragility and Resilient Region.

Sherna Alexander Benjamin's avatar

Sherna Alexander Benjamin

6–9 minutes

Governments in LAC have a responsibility to Address Social and Economic Determinants.

Crime and Violence are not new phenomena; they have been around for generations. Countries in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) continue to grapple with the acceleration of crime and violence in the face of challenging socioeconomic, health, climate, and technology-driven change. The cost of crime and violence1 in the region is significantly impacting citizen security, sustainable development, social protection, and broadly the development and progress of the region retarding its ability to build anti-fragility and resilient communities. “The overall cost estimates reveal that crime costs LAC countries, on average, between 2.41 percent and 3.55 percent of their GDPs. This is equal to an amount for LAC between US$115 billion and US$170 billion (at 2014 exchange rates) or between US$175 billion and US$261 billion (adjusted for purchasing power parity)” (Jaitman & Keefer, 2017, p.6).2

Unfortunately, families, communities, and businesses in the region face the harrowing consequences of crime and violence due to the evolution of these issues, which impede the establishment of equitable, just, safe, and peaceful societies. Crime and violence are not static, linear, or homogeneous in their human expressions. They can occur within any private or public site and have different durations and intensities. Anyone can be a perpetrator or victim of a violent or non-violent crime. Crime and violence intersect with various socioeconomic and health factors, contributing to their complexity and varied societal perceptions about crime and violence. Therefore, governments in the LAC region must look at the role of social and economic determinants3 to better understand crime and violence to inform their development of strategic micro, mezzo, and macro responses to prevent, reduce, and adequately intervene when it occurs. 

Impact on Health

Socioeconomic determinants place individuals and families, especially marginalized groups, at a greater risk of exposure to crime and violence. Increased risk factors4 and low protective factors coupled with intergenerational instability can significantly contribute to adverse experiences with crime and violence within families, communities, and workplaces. There is a transgenerational effect of crime and violence that undergirds peoples’ decision-making, lifestyle choices, and ideologies about themselves, their communities, socioeconomic systems, and the world. More profoundly, crime and violence negatively impact people’s health and well-being and their sense of trust5 and security, and there are substantial socioeconomic costs attached. Crime and violence contribute to individual and collective trauma, anxiety, and fear, which is counterproductive to social protection and sustainable development. 

These issues have devastating health effects and significantly reduce the quality of life for individuals’ weakening the resiliency of communities and countries. Their manifestation contributes to physical injury, disability, and death, which negatively impact the financial, mental health, and well-being of individuals. “Specific examples of detrimental health effects from exposure to violence and crime include asthma, hypertension, cancer, stroke, and mental disorders” (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, n.d)6. Violence is considered a social determinant of health, and governments in the LAC region must incorporate a public health response when addressing crime and violence.

Theories as to Why People Commit Crime

Many theories or reasons as to why people commit crimes and manifest acts of violence exist; reasons can include social and physical environmental factors, unhealthy family dynamics, socioeconomic disparities, learning and educational challenges, unemployment, mental illness, substance use disorder, social and peer pressure, and impulsivity (Alliant International University, 2023) in a resource guideline titled “Why Do People Commit Crimes? (Nine Reasons)7.”

The Cost of Crime

Individuals, communities, businesses, private and public institutions all bear the direct and indirect costs of crime and violence, which facilitates financial and social instability, increases national debt, reduces individuals’ ability to build safety nets for their families, limits community resiliency, impacts the productivity and financial viability of businesses, and reduces the capacity for countries to thrive ultimately negatively impacting how governments govern. The “economic impact of violence and conflict on the global economy…was estimated to be $14.4 trillion in constant purchasing power parity (PPP) terms” (Institute for Economics and Peace, 2021)8. Therefore, understanding the economic impact of crime and violence on countries’ economies, especially Small Island Developing States (SIDS), is critical for their survival and requires financial investment to promote consistent data collection and research. 

Crime and Violence Destabilizes the Lives of Individuals and Families

Individuals who experience crime and violence may undergo several inauspicious life challenges as their lives are upended. They may experience forced domestic or international migration or incur new debt to protect themselves and their property to create a sense of safety and security. They may undergo short or long-term healthcare treatments associated with physical or psychological injuries, adding to their expenses. Individuals may experience a drastic reduction in their quality of life owing to additional financial commitments, work absenteeism, or inability to retain employment. The economic cost of crime and violence in LAC also affects the region’s GDP, informs how governments allocate funding, and can significantly affect the productivity and responses of state and private agencies. “The size of crime-related costs in LAC is similar to what those countries spend on infrastructure and is roughly equal to the share of the region’s income that goes to the poorest 30 percent of the population” (Jaitman & Jeefer, 2017, p.6)9.

Strategies to Consider

Prevention and Collaboration

Crime and violence are complex and can destabilize the whole of society, negatively impacting the socioeconomic, health, safety, and security of communities and contributing to the deterioration of moral and spiritual compasses that act as stabilizers to support human capital growth and the social and sustainable development of families, communities, and broader societal systems. However, the complexities of crime and violence should not justify reactive responses or inaction by governments or citizens in LAC. Governments should develop preventative, adaptable, multi-disciplinary strategies with multi-pronged approaches as part of their response to understanding the role of socioeconomic and health determinants10 to effectively address the issue of crime and violence.

Analyze and Evaluate What Exists, Build Trust, and Establish Public Policies.

Other strategies should include developing public policies to prevent and reduce crime and violence in individual countries and the region to foster a climate of safety and security. Governments in LAC should embark on programs towards increasing trust11 between law enforcement officers and the public. One study found that “higher crime rates were linked with less local trust” (Garcia., et al., 2007).12 There should be the incorporation of lean techniques to analyze existing processes, programs, and services to eliminate resource waste, reduce the cost of suboptimization, identify value stream issues to enhance their effectiveness and areas for improvement and work to establish high-quality performing systems and processes.

Invest in Research.

The study of crime and violence can provide practitioners and officials with findings to inform responses at the micro, mezzo, and macro levels within society. Findings can help inform public policies, programs, and budgetary allocations. Investing in research that drives violence prevention13 is beneficial on many levels for countries in LAC, and increasing research efforts is paramount to understanding the root causes, drivers, and diverse impacts of crime and violence in the region. 

Mental Health Screening, Enhancing Human Services and Educational Programs

Early and regular mental health screening can form part of public health responses to prevent and reduce crime and violence. While mental health diagnosis is not an indicator that an individual will perpetrate violence, environmental and other factors can intersect with mental illness,14 contributing to victimization or perpetration. Enhancing human services and educational programs can provide protective factors to build healthy and resilient families and communities to reduce environmental and socioeconomic factors that place people at a higher risk of exposure to crime and violence or perpetrating the same. Programs to drive spatial and economic equity can also significantly contribute to preventing and reducing crime and violence.

The Future of LAC depends on Preventing and Eradicating Crime and Violence.

Addressing crime and violence in LAC requires multiple strategies, public-private partnerships, long-term resource investment, consistent education, and leaders with the resolve to act. It requires a whole-of-society approach as everyone has a part in preventing and reducing crime and violence, with a more significant burden on elected public officials. The presence of crime and violence impedes individuals’ human rights to live in freedom and safety.

It widens gender disparity, economic and social class gaps, retards the sustainable development and socioeconomic progress of countries in the region, and hinders the ability of families to live fulfilled and resilient lives to build healthy futures and communities. It reduces the ability of businesses to thrive and develop solid economic pillars in the region, fosters public distrust of government actors, and impedes the capacity of governments to govern effectively. The future of LAC depends on preventing and ultimately eradicating crime and violence and the resolve of government officials and citizens to take strategic actions to hold individuals within families, communities, workplaces, and government agencies to account.

References

  1. Jaitman, L., & Keefer, P. (2017). The costs of crime and violence: New evidence and insights in Latin America and the Caribbean. Inter-American Development Bank. https://publications.iadb.org/publications/english/viewer/The-Costs-of-Crime-and-Violence-New-Evidence-and-Insights-in-Latin-America-and-the-Caribbean.pdf ↩︎
  2. Jaitman, L., & Keefer, P. (2017). The costs of crime and violence: New evidence and insights in Latin America and the Caribbean. Inter-American Development Bank. https://publications.iadb.org/publications/english/viewer/The-Costs-of-Crime-and-Violence-New-Evidence-and-Insights-in-Latin-America-and-the-Caribbean.pdf ↩︎
  3. Centers for Disease and Control. (2020, March 2). Risk and Protective Factors. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/riskprotectivefactors.html ↩︎
  4. Washington State Department of Health. (2013, May 14). Social and economic determinants of health. https://doh.wa.gov/sites/default/files/legacy/Documents/1500/Context-SED2013.pdf ↩︎
  5. Garcia, R. Marie, Taylor, R. B., & Lawton, B. A. (2007). Impacts of violent crime and neighborhood structure on trusting your neighbors. Justice Quarterly, 24(4), 679-704. ↩︎
  6. Office of the Secretary, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (n.d.). Crime and violence. https://health.gov/healthypeople/priority-areas/social-determinants-health/literature-summaries/crime-and-violence
    ↩︎
  7. Alliant International University. (2023, September 21). Why do people commit crimes? (nine reasons). https://www.alliant.edu/blog/why-do-people-commit-crimes ↩︎
  8. Institute for Economics and Peace. (2021, January). Economic value of peace 2021: Measuring the global economic impact of violence and conflict. https://www.economicsandpeace.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/EVP-2021-web-1.pdf ↩︎
  9. Jaitman, L., & Keefer, P. (2017). The costs of crime and violence: New evidence and insights in Latin America and the Caribbean. Inter-American Development Bank. https://publications.iadb.org/publications/english/viewer/The-Costs-of-Crime-and-Violence-New-Evidence-and-Insights-in-Latin-America-and-the-Caribbean.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎
  10. World Health Organization (n.d.). Social determinants of health. https://www.who.int/health-topics/social-determinants-of-health#tab=tab_1 ↩︎
  11. Vincent-Perez, S., & Scartascini, C. (2016, August 6). To fight crime, increase trust. Inter-American Development Bank (“IDB”). https://blogs.iadb.org/ideas-matter/en/to-fight-crime-increase-trust/ ↩︎
  12. Garcia, R. Marie, Taylor, R. B., & Lawton, B. A. (2007). Impacts of violent crime and neighborhood structure on trusting your neighbors. Justice Quarterly, 24(4), 679-704 ↩︎
  13. Violence Prevention Alliance and Education Development Center.  (2011, November). Why invest in violence prevention? Geneva, Switzerland, and Newton USA, VPA and EDC. https://cdn.who.int/media/docs/default-source/violence-prevention-alliance-section/why_invest_in_violence.pdf?sfvrsn=7601910a_3#:~:text=From%20a%20public%20health%20and,mental%20health%2C%20and%20physical%20health ↩︎
  14. American Psychological Association. (2022, July 11). Mental illness and violence: Debunking myths, addressing realities. https://www.apa.org/monitor/2021/04/ce-mental-illness ↩︎