Search results

The fear and experience of violence, harassment and abuse of those with learning disabilities are significant barriers to full social inclusion. The patchy evidence base and the confusing, and sometimes contradictory, array of policy and legislative instruments hamper efforts to tackle the issues. This article draws on the findings from an extensive review of literature looking into disabled people's experiences of targeted violence, harassment and abuse. The review found that people with learning disabilities and/or mental health conditions are at higher risk, and experience greater levels, of violence, harassment and abuse, not only than non‐disabled people but also than other disabled people. Situational vulnerabilities mean that the probability and experience of violence, harassment and abuse are due not simply to any inherent characteristics of those with learning disabilities. Under‐reporting and lack of appropriate response and support from criminal justice agencies compromise access to justice. People with learning disabilities are also found to have a propensity to report to third parties instead of to criminal justice agencies. However, the evidence points to lack of joined‐up working in various agencies, which hampers efforts at redress. There are particular concerns over a vacuum of responsibility as a result of confusion about the No Secrets guidance.

This article draws on findings from an extensive review of literature conducted as part of a wider project on disabled people's experience of violence, harassment and abuse. In addition to under‐reporting, disabled people tend to report incidents to a third party rather than to the police. Physical, procedural, and attitudinal barriers discourage disabled people from reporting to the criminal justice system. The relationship between the victim and the perpetrator can also throw up significant challenges to reporting. Disabled people may accept that these incidents are ‘part of everyday life’. There is an implementation gap in relation to current legislative tools that can facilitate a disabled person to seek redress.

This paper aims to discuss the sensible management of risk for disabled people, which can turn into disproportionate steps to attempt to completely eliminate risk, leading to diminished opportunities across life. Instincts to protect are heightened in the context of disabled people as potential victims of targeted violence and hostility. Individual‐, organisational‐ and systemic‐level responses can often be orientated towards protection and/or the minimisation of risk rather than towards providing access to justice and effective redress.

This paper draws on evidence generated through a literature review, interviews with disabled people and interviews with representatives from a number of key organisations.

For many disabled people, incidents can be persistent and ongoing. Common responses by disabled victims include avoidance and/or acceptance strategies. They are also advised by those around them and by agency staff they come in contact with to ignore perpetrators or to avoid putting themselves at risk. Criminal justice agencies may be more concerned about a victim's disability than about taking action to provide access to justice and effective redress. The protectionistic approach underpinning much of policy, legislation and guidance can be at odds with the positive promotion of disability equality.

The paper examines the need to move away from a protectionist paradigm to a rights‐based paradigm. It calls for a more inclusive approach where disabled people are involved meaningfully in the process of risk management and in other decisions around combating targeted violence and hostility against them.