Institutional violence and disability: punishing conditions

Hard-hitting from the outset, Institutional Violence and Disability: Punishing Conditions offers an indispensable analysis of violence within institutions designed for the residential ‘care’ of disabled people. Utilising multiple sources of empirical data and theoretical perspectives across disciplines, this book reveals important new insights into the nature of institutional violence, as well as the social patterns that may be producing it. Although the book focuses on specific cases of institutional violence in Canada, the knowledge it provides could be applicable across the globe.

Taking a broad definition of institutional violence, as ‘all practices of humiliation, degradation, neglect and abuse inflicted upon institutional residents, regardless of intention or circumstance’ (3; original emphasis), Punishing Conditions examines its ‘many instances, iterations and intensities’ (2). At the heart of the book, however, is an ongoing quest for justice for survivors of institutional violence. Therefore, the needs and experiences of survivors inform Kate Rossiter and Jen Rinaldi’s arguments throughout. Primarily, this is thanks to a three-year participatory research project involving survivors of institutional violence at Huronia Regional Centre (Huronia hereafter; now closed). Despite the unrelenting violence survivors faced, Huronia once served as a model for institutional care across Canada. In 2010, survivors launched a landmark class action lawsuit against Ontario, the local government within which Huronia was located, for its failure to act to prevent the violence that occurred there. Subsequently, similar class action lawsuits were brought against other local governments for their negligence in managing their respective institutions. Skilfully utilising the data produced from these cases, Rossiter and Rinaldi draw parallels between different Canadian institutions, exposing common institutional conditions that may lead to violence.

Expanding upon psychologist Albert Bandura’s (1999) theory of situational moral disengagement, Rossiter and Rinaldi maintain that institutional violence is not caused by individual perversion. Rather, they claim there are particular organisational traits that can lead to moral abandonment, which then can create ‘an ethos of violence’ (23). Fundamentally, they argue that these organisational traits are embedded within institutions, and thus institutional care is, by design, inherently violent. For Rossiter and Rinaldi, violent acts exist along a continuum, whereby institutionally sanctioned practices, such as restraint, dampen staff members’ abhorrence to cruelty. Hence, ‘institutionally sanctioned forms of daily care-qua-violence’ can lead to the normalisation of ‘sadistic forms of violence that seem to exist for the gratification of violence itself’ (39). Each chapter builds upon this central argument by drawing in different theorists, empirical data and disciplines (including Sociology, Psychology and Law). Whilst doing so, Rossiter and Rinaldi make clear that the voices of survivors are of utmost importance. Nevertheless, they do give some space to consider the public accounts given by staff. This works to strengthen their overall argument, as these accounts are a stark contrast to the survivors’ testimonies.

Although Punishing Conditions refrains from an in-depth description of its methodological foundations, the book does point to some innovative techniques that could mitigate potential harms for research with survivors of violence. The research project, upon which the book is heavily based, implemented various methods, including workshops, poetry, walking interviews and working with sound artists. Some of the book’s noteworthy strengths are derived from the latter two methods in particular. The walking interviews, involving survivors leading researchers around Huronia’s grounds, produced rich data in the form of survivor narratives and photographs. Through connecting these narratives with the materiality of the institution, Rossiter and Rinaldi offer a unique insight into institutional violence. Moreover, the photographs are dispersed throughout the book, serving as haunting depictions of institutional violence and allowing additional clarity for the reader. Providing a sense of balance, the survivors’ work with sound artists demonstrates possibilities for resistance. Here, survivors ‘spoke to the institution’ and reconfigured the way in which power operated within the space. Their ‘embodied experiences of pain and suffering literally returned to shake the site where they were so deeply harmed’ (79). Hence, the book powerfully demonstrates ‘what it means to survive institutional violence’ (79).

Despite this encouraging message of resistance and survival, Punishing Conditions is predominantly concerned with the violence inflicted upon the disabled people living within institutions. Yet interviews with survivors were focused upon daily life in Huronia, rather than their experiences of violence. However, Rossiter and Rinaldi state that ‘it was impossible for survivors to answer these questions without detailing the experiences of profound violence and neglect’ (19). These unsettling accounts of violence culminate in Chapter Three, in which Rossiter and Rinaldi appropriately add a trigger warning:

The stories themselves are deeply disturbing at best, traumatizing at worst … We have worked to balance the desires of survivors to share their experiences of violence with the need to respect readers’ boundaries. (40; emphasis added)

Although these descriptions of violence can be difficult to read, it is vital that the survivors’ stories are heard. Their stories, combined with Rossiter and Rinaldi’s theorising, make a compelling case for the abolition of these institutions. This insight into the types of violence that occur within institutional settings, and the potential reasons for this violence, could help to develop mechanisms that may work to prevent institutional violence in the future. Therefore, this book is an essential read for researchers and policy-makers within the field of health and social care.

Ending on a hopeful tone, Punishing Conditions concludes with a consideration of the potential for care without violence. Identifying commonalities between three community care provisions – Camphill, l’Arche and Geel – Rossiter and Rinaldi demonstrate how, through being ‘the organizational inverse of institutions’ (94), possibilities for violence have been minimised. In doing so, Rossiter and Rinaldi expose fertile ground for further disability studies research. Such research should be prioritised, as ‘we owe it to institutional survivors to do better imagining and constructing the conditions of care’ (102). This should not only be a Canadian project, but one that is worldwide.

Josephine Sirotkin
Centre for Disability Studies, Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
[email protected]