|
Stalkers: Not Just for Celebrities Anymore, Part 1 |
||
|
Practitioner’s Information |
Linda Grounds |
|
|
When most of us think about stalkers, we recall the infamous cases involving public figures and celebrities. But the reality is that people from all facets of society are being stalked at rather alarming rates. In fact, estimates are that between 8 and 15% of women and between 2 and 4% of men will be stalked at some point in their lives. More alarming is the high rate at which stalkers engage in violence against their victims. A review of recent studies reveals that rates of interpersonal violence in stalking situations range from 27% to 76%. These rates rise dramatically when the person being stalked previously had a sexual or romantic relationship with the stalker. In this large subgroup, violence will occur to fully 55 to 89% of the victims. As expert Reid Meloy puts it, this means, “It is more likely than not that a stalking victim being pursued by her prior sexual intimate will be physically attacked by him,” (in press, 2003) Realistically, what this also means is that many of us will have to identify and assist a victim of stalking at some point in our careers. Furthermore, given the violence rates, we may be faced with a potentially lethal situation about which we may have little knowledge. In this issue of The Bulletin, I’ll present “Stalking 101,” with definitions, incidence rates, typologies and factors associated with violence by stalkers. I’ll also offer some thoughts about when and how to ask about this issue in your practice. In the next issue, I’ll talk about the alarming data regarding the stalking of mental health professionals, including psychologists. I will also examine issues around the accurate recognition of a stalking situation and the legal, ethical and self-care issues that arise. Private Investigator Jean Erhardt will offer specific suggestions for addressing safety issues when stalking situations arise in our practices, either for our clients or ourselves. Introduction. I began to explore this topic after beginning treatment with “Karen,” a 45 year old, successful professional woman who had recently separated from her husband of 25 years. The family lived in an upper middle class neighborhood despite the fact that the husband, “Don,” was a chronically under-employed man who had failed at several jobs and been unemployed for a few years. He was a rather passive individual except for the intense criticism, verbal abuse and name-calling to which he had subjected his wife for years. A couple of months before I saw Karen, she had insisted that her husband move out of the house, which he did. Shortly thereafter, he began calling her at work and at home, engaging in long conversations about how they needed to get back together, how she needed to let him come home, etc. These contacts became more frequent and more insistent, but neither Karen nor her family thought much about them except as a nuisance. One evening, Karen was in her bedroom, when her husband appeared in the bedroom doorway with a gun. He began talking about how if he couldn’t have her, no one else was going to. He became more and more agitated as the minutes passed, but clearly wasn’t psychotic. She began negotiating with him, saying she would agree to go to counseling and let him back into the house for a trial reconciliation, and he seemed to calm down. Suddenly, she saw his mood swing again, and she thought, “This is it!” She tried to run, but Don tackled her, and then pulled the trigger. Fortunately, Karen raised her arm in self-defense, and the bullet missed. Don stood up and aimed again, this time at her head. He fired, but his automatic pistol jammed. As he was preparing to fire for the third, and probably final time, the SWAT team stormed into the hallway, surrounded Don and swooped Karen up and into the protection of the bedroom. Luckily for Karen, when Don burst into her bedroom, she had been on her cell phone and hadn’t disconnected. Her friend called the police, and was able to relay what was happening in Karen’s home to the police. Actually, Karen is only alive because she was lucky enough to be on her cell phone, to negotiate for almost a half hour, to bump the gun as Don shot the first time, and, probably most of all, that the gun jammed, preventing the shot that almost certainly would have killed her. One of the interesting but not unusual aspects of this case was that absolutely no one suspected that Don was capable of or planning anything like this. They did not see the obsessional aspects of his letters and phone calls as something to worry about. However, several weeks later, as Karen’s home was being readied for sale, twenty voice activated microcassette recorders were found nailed to the undersides of furniture in most rooms of the house. This mild-mannered, passive man had clearly crossed the threshold into one of the categories of stalking. Who is stalked? When I asked Private Investigator Jean Erhardt to give me an idea of who might become the victim of a stalker, she gave me a list that reads like the census report. Just a few of the cases she has worked on include:
Jean makes the point that literally anyone can be stalked. She also notes that stalking is increasing in frequency among teenagers who were previously dating, or when one teen would like to date another who is uninterested. While it may be hard to distinguish between typical teenage intensity, she suggests that clinicians and parents alike be aware that this can happen, and watch for any of the signs described below. So what is stalking? There are both legal and clinical definitions. Legal definitions are intended to help articulate specific aspects of behavior in order to facilitate prosecution or other legal remedies. In contrast, the purpose of clinical definitions is to identify aspects of stalking behavior in order aid in understanding the phenomenon for the purposes of assessment, treatment and research into both stalkers and their victims. Legal definitions of stalking vary across jurisdictions, but most US statutes share three elements: 1) a pattern or course of conduct of intruding behaviorally on another person in a way that is unwelcome; 2) an implicit or explicit threat that is evidenced in the pattern of behavioral intrusion; and 3) as a result of these behavioral intrusions, the person who is threatened experiences reasonable fear. Bridging the gap between legal and clinical definitions, Reid Meloy, who is one of the leading experts on stalking, adapted language from Zona, Sharma and Lane (1993) to propose a clinical definition of stalking as “obsessional following,” characterized by “an abnormal or long term pattern of threat or harassment directed toward a specific individual,” and consisting of “more than one overt act of unwanted pursuit of the victim that was perceived as being harassing.” Similarly, Mullen (1999) offers a succinct clinical definition as “a constellation of behaviors involving repeated and persistent attempts to impose on another person unwanted communication and/or contact.” Note that in none of these definitions is violent behavior required to meet the standard for stalking. As Meloy (1998) states, “The crime of stalking does not include any physically violent acts; it was, in fact, codified to prevent future acts of violence.” What do stalkers do? Pathe (2002), in a book entitled Surviving Stalking, lists the following common elements of stalking behavior: Phone calls comprise one of the most common forms of stalking because it’s just so easy to do. Stalkers call their victims at home, at work, on their cell phones and pagers. S/he may breathe heavily, cry, plead, threaten, swear or simply hang up. Sometimes stalkers call victims when they are away from home and tell their victims who they are with, what they are wearing, etc. to show that they have the victim under surveillance Letters, cards and faxes also provide easy points of contact between stalker and victim. Cards and letters can be mailed or hand delivered to victim’s home or workplace. Sometimes they are attached to the victim’s property, especially their cars, which again demonstrates the stalker’s easy access to the victim. The content of written communication can be romantic, pleading, threatening or a combination of all three. Faxes are most often sent to the victim’s workplace, typically with the intent to humiliate the victim with their content, which is typically untrue. The Internet provides the readiest access of all. Known as cyber-stalking, this method of stalking is on the rise. The stalker can flood the victim’s email box, a strategy that already has a name: ‘mail bombing.’ The Internet also provides great shelter or anonymity for the stalker through various means. Stalkers can use anonymous Internet remailers or conceal their identity by using computers in public domains like schools, libraries or the countless wired coffeehouses. Unwanted gifts or other materials are also favorites of stalkers. Michelle Pathe has a vivid description of this behavior, saying, “There seems no end to the creativity of some stalkers in their choice of gifts. They vary from the predictable (chocolates, soft toys, flowers, books and jewelry), to the bizarre (jars of urine and frozen chickens). Some stalkers send only one or two such gifts, whereas others send gifts, typically flowers, by the truckload” (Pathe, 2002). Following can be one of the most unnerving tools in the stalker’s bag of tricks. The purposes of following can include keeping track of victims’ activities, who they are spending time with, and following can also creates opportunities for the stalker to be present and visible at the victim’s activities. Approaching. After following their victims, some stalkers approach their victims as they are engaged in a wide variety of professional and family activities. Typically, this is quite disturbing for the victim. Maintaining surveillance. Some stalkers maintain very careful surveillance of their victims, sometimes enlisting the assistance of others. Investigator Jean Erhardt says that whenever she gets a new client who asks her to do surveillance on someone, she inquires very carefully about his or her intentions. She requires that the individual sign a contract agreeing to specific rules about how they intend to use any information that she may gather. In most cases, she will also require that the client have legal representation in order to put in place another layer of protection for the subject of surveillance. Ordering goods or services on the victim’s behalf is very popular among stalkers. As evidenced in multiple movie scenes, the most common version of this is the delivery of pizzas, often late at night and more than one. While this almost always gets a laugh from the movie audience, in reality, victims have had to deal with the unexpected arrival of taxis, fire truck and ambulances. Stalkers have cancelled services to the victim, ranging from newspapers, to basic utilities like gas and water and electric services. The range, variety and virulence of these interferences in victim’s life can have disruptive, expensive and even have dangerous consequences. Initiating spurious legal action against the victim is a frequent strategy that both insures contact and harasses and disrupts the life of the victim. False rumors to discredit the victim can also have highly disruptive effects in the victim’s life, and are often difficult to trace. Threats can come in many forms, ranging from damage to property, pets or reputation, to direct threats of violence to the victim and his/her family members. Actual damage to property and pets is not uncommon, and is very traumatic for the victim, and may also be associated with greater risk of violence directly toward the victim. Assault or attempted murder is the most lethal component of stalking behavior. As I will discuss later, the risks for these dangerous behaviors are highest among stalkers who have had a prior intimate relationship with their victim. Current incidence and prevalence figures. As stated earlier, between 8 and 15% of women and 2 to 4% of men will be stalked at some point in their lives. 94% of stalkers identified by female victims are men; 60% of stalkers identified by male victims are men; overall, 87% of stalkers are men. Among female victims, 77% were stalked by someone they knew, and 59% were stalked by a previously intimate partner. In the population of male victims, 64% were stalked by someone they knew, and 30% of male victims were stalked by someone with whom they had been intimate. Other key findings include the fact that in stalking situations, contrary to the perception of some, interpersonal violence is quite frequent, with the numbers ranging from 27% to 76%. As Meloy (2003) notes, “an even more startling finding” is the rate at which stalkers who have had a prior sexual relationship with the victim engage in interpersonal violence. The so-called “prior intimate,” usually stalks the victim after she has rejected him romantically (including divorce situations). Meloy states that, in such circumstances, “violence frequencies substantially exceed 50%,” with research across numerous studies, and three continents yielding rates of violent acting out by prior intimates ranging from 55 to 89%. Of great importance for clinicians, Meloy says bluntly that, given these data, “it is more likely than not that a stalking victim being pursued by her prior sexual intimate will be physically attacked by him.” In one study (Tjaden and Thoennes, 1998) 45% of female victims and 43% of male victims were overtly threatened by the stalker. 55% of female victims and 48% of male victims reported to the police that they were being stalking. Within this group of reporters, only 13% of female victims and 9% of male victims, whose stalkers were charged criminally, had their cases prosecuted. Again, within this group of reporters, 52.8% of female victims and 60% of male victims had their cases result in a conviction. In this study, less that a third of the respondents (specifically, 28% of female victims and 10% of male victims) obtained some kind of protection order. Of these, fully 69% of female victims and 81% of male victims had the protection order violated. Another shocking figure is that the average duration of stalking reported was 1.8 years. However, if the stalking involved intimate partners, the average duration increases to 2.2 years. Are there different types of stalkers? Because the research and theoretical development about stalkers has been on a steep development curve during the last several years, a number of typologies of stalkers have been advanced. However, there is a fair amount of consistency among various theorists. One such categorization has been offered by Mullen and colleagues (Mullen, Pathe, Purcell, and Stuart, 1999), and it focuses on five categories of stalkers based on context and motivations. The Rejected stalker is created by the end of a relationship with someone. This is very often the end of a marriage or romantic relationship, but it can also be the result of some disruption in a family, friendship or work situation. This type of stalker often responds to his/her feelings of loss with frustration, depression, jealousy, anger and even rage. The Intimacy Seeker is a stalker who pursues an intimate relationship with someone whom they have identified as their “true love.” However, the stalker’s attentions are not wanted by the object of their affection. Stalkers who fall into this category often have a delusional disorder (e.g., erotomania), and may suffer from other serious Axis 1 disorders such as schizophrenia or mania. The Incompetent stalker is often an intellectually limited and/or socially incompetent individual who wants intimacy, but the object of their affection does not reciprocate these feelings. They often lack the interpersonal skills necessary to initiate or sustain a romantic relationship, but they may demonstrate a sense of entitlement, believing that they deserve a partner. Mullen et. al., suggest that, “unlike the intimacy seekers, those in the incompetent category do not view the victim as having unique qualities. They are not infatuated with the victim, only attracted, and do not assert that the affection is mutual.” The Resentful stalker feels as though s/he has been injured in some way by someone, and often desires revenge for a perceived injustice. The goal of this stalker is to distress and frighten the victim. The Predatory stalker thrives on the feelings of power and control that come from stalking a victim. This kind of stalker often strives to learn as much as he can about the victim, and may even mentally rehearse a plan to attack the victim. Many of these stalkers are diagnosed paraphilias and, compared to the previous four categories, they are more likely to have histories of sexual offense convictions. As with any set of typologies, although these descriptive categories capture the primary facets of and motivations for stalking behavior, there are certainly stalking situations that have a mix of factors, or their own idiosyncratic aspects. This is particularly true when mental health experts are stalked, a topic that I will cover in the next edition of the Bulletin. Who becomes violent? As can be seen from the variety in the above descriptions, people who stalk comprise a diverse group and present a wide range of behavior and psychiatric symptomology that we are only beginning to understand. In a paper currently in press, Reid Meloy, who is one of the most impressive thinkers at the intersection of clinical theory and forensic work, attempts to go beyond general typologies, to develop strategies to predict the violent acting out of stalkers. Meloy differentiates between affective and predatory violence, the former associated with the “private” stalking of former sexual intimates, and the latter associated with the stalking of public figures. Focusing exclusively on “private stalking,” Meloy notes that stalkers are characteristically very narcissistic, and therefore easily injured by rejection (real or imagined). Although it is beyond the scope of this article, Meloy is building on a growing body of theory and research that focuses on an understanding of interpersonal violence based on attachment theory. This work by Meloy, Dutton and others represents an elegant and robust integration of theory, research and real-world application to the issues surrounding both domestic violence and stalking. Importantly, when private individuals are stalked, the data indicate that domestic violence and stalking are highly correlated. Women who leave battering relationships are often stalked. Women who are stalked by someone with whom they were previously intimate were often abused while in the relationship. Reid indicates that five variables have been identified as correlates of violence by stalkers:
What does all this mean for our clinical practice? Since many of our clients enter therapy because of the end of a relationship, we need to adopt some basic level of screening for the potential of stalking, much as we regularly do with respect to substance use and domestic violence. Some possible questions might include:
What next? In the next issue of the Indepedent Practitioner, I’ll talk ways to think about helping the individual who may be the victim of stalking. Private and legal investigator Jean Erhardt will offer specific suggestions for addressing safety issues when stalking situations arise in our practices. Finally, I will talk about the very alarming rates at which professionals, including psychologists, are now being stalked, sometimes with very harrowing outcomes, and what we can do about it within legal and ethical parameters. I will also provide a short reference and resource list. |
||
