Nowhere to run: Immobility of Migrant domestic violence survivors

Migration has always been seen as a potential escape for survivors of domestic abuse, a chance to live life beyond the control of their abuser. From films like Maid, to novels like Escape Point: A Memoir cultural references of such escape and their popularity show that for survivors, moving out and moving away to escape domestic abuse has been central to the discourse on life after experiencing domestic abuse. Whether it is moving to another city, another state, another country, or another continent, putting geographical distance between their bodies and their abusers had brought survivors of domestic abuse a sense of safety. What happens when technology makes the physical distance redundant? When moving away does not matter? 

The Economist Intelligence Unit reports that 38% of women worldwide reported personal experiences with online violence and 85% have witnessed digital violence against other women. A study by Plan International in 32 countries found 58% of adolescent girls had experienced harassment on social media platforms. Leitao (2019) writes, ‘The remote nature of technology-facilitated IPA leads victims to perceive perpetrators as omnipresent and omnipotent, whilst removing feelings of safety that may have been achieved, in the past, when victims relocated or were otherwise physically distant from perpetrators.’

Technology facilitated forms of transnational interpersonal violence take forms which are fast evolving. For example, coercive control can take place through WhatsApp video calls, financial control through online money transfer apps such as Revolut and Transferwise, and psychological abuse through control of movement using location finder apps. It will also create an understanding of how survivors use technology to resist such forms of violence. Figure 1 shows the various ways in which technology can be used in IPV:

Figure 1: Technology Abuse Wheel. Source: https://domesticviolence.com.au/safety-planning/online-safety/

Social workers and domestic violence scholars increasingly share the feeling of being ‘behind the game’ (Tanczer, López-Neira, & Parkin 2021) when it comes to the use of technology and the ‘Internet of things’ (IoT) for controlling people coercively. IoT systems are understood as “smart” devices such as conventional household appliances that are connected to the internet. Interdependencies between different products together with the devices’ enhanced functionalities offer opportunities for coercion and control (Slupska and Tanczer 2021). Some groups may be at greater risk than others of technology-facilitated coercive control (TFCC) (Dragiewicz et. al 2018), including women with insecure immigration status, women with learning disabilities and younger women and girls (Brookfield, Fyson and Goulden 2024). 

The European Union has been seeking to urgently address the lack of research and policy in relation to cyber violence. In 2024, the Directive (EU) 2024/1385 of the European Parliament and of the Council of the European Union of 14 May 2024 on combating violence against women and domestic violence (the VAW/DV directive) was adopted. The VAW/DV directive places on EU Member States a legal obligation to address and to collect statistics on all forms of cyber violence, including non-consensual sharing of intimate or manipulated material, cyber stalking, cyber harassment and cyber incitement to hatred or violence (EIGE 2024). To further counter cyber violence and to protect women’s safety online, the Commission also facilitated the development of a framework for cooperation between internet platforms (code of conduct). In light of this, this project does not only seem to be groundbreaking and timely, but also urgently needed.

Written by Dr Arpita Chakraborty

Vice Director, Institute for Research on Genders and Sexualities, Dublin City University

Disclosure: This research has been funded by the 21/PATH-A/9508 Research Ireland Pathway Programme.

References:

Brookfield, K., Fyson, R., Goulden, M. (2024). Technology-Facilitated Domestic Abuse: An under-Recognised Safeguarding Issue?, The British Journal of Social Work, Volume 54, Issue 1, January 2024, Pages 419–436, https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcad206.

Dragiewicz, M., Burgess, J., Matamoros-Fernández, A., Salter, M., Suzor, N. P., Woodlock, D., & Harris, B. (2018). Technology facilitated coercive control: domestic violence and the competing roles of digital media platforms. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), 609–625. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1447341.

Slupska, J. and Tanczer, L.M. (2021), "Threat Modeling Intimate Partner Violence: Tech Abuse as a Cybersecurity Challenge in the Internet of Things", Bailey, J., Flynn, A. and Henry, N. (Ed.) The Emerald International Handbook of Technology-Facilitated Violence and Abuse (Emerald Studies In Digital Crime, Technology and Social Harms), Emerald Publishing Limited, Leeds, pp. 663-688. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83982-848-520211049. 

Tanczer, L. M., López-Neira, I., & Parkin, S. (2021). ‘I feel like we’re really behind the game’: perspectives of the United Kingdom’s intimate partner violence support sector on the rise of technology-facilitated abuse. Journal of Gender-Based Violence, 5(3), 431-450. Retrieved Feb 17, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.1332/239868021X16290304343529.