Are you being stalked by an ex-partner, colleague, friend or stranger?
You are not alone.
Community surveys suggest that each year between 1% and 2% of women and 0.25% to 0.5% of men are stalked (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1996; Tjaden and Thoennes, 1998). Although these behaviors have been documented for centuries, stalking has been recognized as a social problem only during the last decade (Meloy, 1999; Mullen et al., 2000). The media began using the word stalking in the late 1980s to describe persistent following of celebrities. It was soon generalized to include a wide range of recurrent harassments and an equally diverse range of victims. Successful media campaigns established stalking as a public issue and stimulated legislative changes to allow the more effective prosecution of stalkers.
Who are the victims?
It can be anyone of us.
The impact on the victim's psychological and social well-being is considerable. Pathé and Mullen (1997) studied 100 victims of persistent stalking. The majority had to severely restrict their lives by changing or abandoning work, curtailing all social activities, and becoming virtual recluses. Over 80% developed significant anxiety symptoms. Sleep disturbance was common, and many resorted to substance abuse. Over half had symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder. Feelings of powerlessness and depression were common, and nearly a quarter of the victims were actively considering suicide as a means of escape.
What will a Stalker do?
They feel justified, in the right and angry.
Zona et al. (1993) were the first to systematically study assault in stalking. They suggested a low risk of overt violence, with only two out of 74 stalkers physically assaulting their victims. In contrast, Harmon and colleagues (1998) reported that 46% of stalkers exhibited violent conduct. The majority of stalkers who threatened their victims subsequently acted upon their stated intentions. Kienlen and colleagues (1997) reported that 32% of stalkers in their study committed assaults, with assault higher among the nonpsychotic subjects with personality disorder or substance abuse. Mullen et al. (1999) reported over a third of the victims in their study were attacked by their stalker. In addition, 6% of stalkers assaulted third parties whom they believed were impeding their access to the target. These studies are based on samples of stalkers. Victims, however, are in our view the most reliable source of information about intimidation, threats and violence. Hall (1998) reported that 41% of the 145 victims studied had been threatened, 43% had their property damaged, 38% were hit or beaten, and 22% were sexually assaulted. In addition, 11 subjects were kidnapped and two were victims of arson attacks. Pathé and Mullen (1997), in their sample of 100 victims, reported that 58 had been threatened, 36% were assaulted and 7% suffered sexual attacks. Threats preceded assault in 70% of cases. Assault was significantly more likely for victims who had had a former intimate relationship with the stalker. Meloy (1999, 1998) concluded that approximately half of all stalkers threaten the victim. The majority of those who threaten do not proceed to subsequent violence. Nonetheless, threats should be taken seriously, as those who proceed to assault have usually threatened previously. Violence occurs in approximately a third of the cases, yet rarely results in serious physical injury.
Is there more than one type of Stalker?
Yes
Stalker Types
There have been several attempts to describe the different types of stalker (Harmon et al., 1995; Mullen et al., 1999; Zona et al., 1993). No generally accepted classification has yet emerged.
Mullen et al. (1999) proposed a multiaxial classification. The first axis was a typology derived primarily from the stalker's motivation, the second from the prior relationship to the victim, and the third a division into nonpsychotic and psychotic subjects. This attempted to capture the stalker's behavior in terms of both motivation and the needs and desires the stalking itself satisfies. They described five subtypes:
1.
The Rejected respond to an unwelcome end to a close relationship by actions intended to lead to reconciliation, an extraction of reparation from the victim or both. For the stalker, the behavior maintains some semblance of continued contact and relationship with the victim.
2.
The Intimacy Seekers pursue someone they have little, if any, relationship with in the mistaken belief that they are loved, or inevitably will be loved, by the victim. The stalking satisfies needs for contact and closeness while feeding fantasies of an eventual loving relationship.
3.
The Incompetent are would-be suitors seeking a partner. Given their ignorance or indifference to the usual courting rituals, they use methods that are, at best, counterproductive and, at worst, terrifying. The stalking provides an approximation of finding a partner.
4.
The Resentful respond to a perceived insult or injury by actions aimed not just at revenge but at vindication. The stalking is the act of vengeance.
5.
The Predatory pursue their desires for sexual gratification and control. The stalking is a rehearsal for the stalker's violent sexual fantasies and a partial satisfaction of voyeuristic and sadistic desires.
6.When the typology, relationship to the victim and psychotic/nonpsychotic dichotomy were combined, the result predicted the duration and nature of the stalking, the risks of threatening and violent behavior, and, to some extent, the response to management strategies (Mullen et al., 1999; Mullen et al., 2000).
The
rejected used the widest range of behaviors, such as following, repeatedly approaching, telephoning, letter-writing and leaving notes. In contrast, the
predatory stalkers concentrated almost exclusively on furtively following and maintaining surveillance.
Intimacy seekers were the most prolific letter-writers, and they also sent the most unsolicited gifts and other materials. Duration was longest in the rejected and intimacy seekers and shortest in the predatory. The
psychotic subjects were most likely to send unsolicited materials, and the
nonpsychotic to follow and maintain surveillance.
The
psychotic and nonpsychotic were equally likely to threaten, but the nonpsychotic were twice as likely to proceed to assault. The
rejected were the most likely type to assault and the
resentful, although often issuing threats, were the least likely to resort to overt violence. The best predictor of stalking duration was typology. Also best predicted by typology were assaults. When assaults were combined with substance abuse and a history of prior convictions, they accounted for most of the explained variance.
Intimacy seekers were largely impervious to judicial sanctions, and often regarded court appearances and imprisonment as the price to be paid in the pursuit of true love. They often had a treatable psychiatric disorder, however, that when effectively managed, ended the stalking.
In contrast, the
rejected, who could usually calculate their own advantage, often responded to the threat or imposition of judicial sanctions by curbing their behavior. The
rejected type, however, do have significant levels of psychopathology, particularly connected to personality disorder, and therapeutic interventions can play a role in preventing a relapse. The
incompetent type could usually be persuaded to abandon the pursuit of their current victim with relative ease. The challenge is to prevent them from harassing the next victim who catches their fancy. The
predatory were generally paraphilics. Management of their sexual deviance is central to the prevention of stalking recidivism.
The resentful, who all too often were both self-righteous and self-pitying, can be very difficult to engage therapeutically. Unless they have an overt paranoid illness, they rarely benefit from mandated treatment. They will, however, usually abandon their harassment if the cost to them, in terms of judicial sanctions, becomes too high. Victims' distress can only be relieved by stopping the stalker. Stalking is criminal (in most jurisdictions), but is a behavior in which mental disorder can often play a role. In managing the stalker, the choice between criminal sanctions and therapy is not either/or. Rather, the choice should be pragmatic, selecting the appropriate balance of judicial sanctions and therapy that will best end the stalking and reduce the chances of future recurrences (Mullen et al., 2000).
