Kristin Raworth: Domestic violence is an epidemic we still don't take seriously
Kristin Raworth: Domestic violence is an epidemic we still don't take seriously
If not for a political gaffe, would you have remembered the Portapique anniversary at all? No. We have largely forgotten this tragedy.
By: Kristin Raworth
This year marks the fourth anniversary of the Nova Scotia mass killings that resulted in the deaths of 22 people, making it the deadliest mass-killing event in Canadian history. You would, however, be forgiven for having missed this tragic anniversary. Unlike the 1989 École Polytechnique shooting which resulted in the establishment of the National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women, there has not been the same annual effort to memorialize the deaths in Nova Scotia.
To the extent that the anniversary, which falls on April 18th and 19th (as the attacks stretched across both days), garnered any national media attention this year, it was because of a gaffe. Instead of highlighting the loss of life or the status of the recommendations from the Mass Casualty Commission (MCC), the attention was on (now former) Nova Scotia justice minister Brad Johns. Johns gave a press conference on the anniversary of the murders wherein he disagreed with the position of the MCC’s final report which highlighted the role of domestic violence, stating that domestic violence is not in fact an epidemic.
This is, of course, absolutely inaccurate and despite quick attempts to save his job by apologizing and reaching out to stakeholders, he resigned the next day. As he should have. You cannot discuss what happened four years ago without acknowledging the context in which it occurred.
The final report of the MCC highlights that the shootings began with a domestic violence incident between Gabriel Wortman and his partner. And this came only after years of domestic violence incidents involving Wortman that the RCMP consistently failed to take seriously. Both Wortman’s abuse and his control over his partner were worsened through the isolation imposed by COVID and provincial lockdowns.
Indeed, perhaps another reason so little attention is paid to the anniversary of the attacks is that they occurred during a time many Canadians were distracted and would prefer to not think about at all. But in this case, we must. For many in abusive relationships, COVID and its imposed isolation added an additional layer of strain. In the early months of the pandemic it was virtually impossible to leave a relationship, or leave anywhere frankly. It also added financial and emotional stress on everyone and in the years since, the cost-of-living crisis has played (and undoubtedly continues to play) a role in what experts consistently point to as significantly increased levels of domestic violence.
The link between domestic violence and mass shootings has been long highlighted by advocates and in the last few years academic research has begun to catch up. In a May 2021 peer-reviewed article in Injury Epidemiology, authors demonstrated a strong link between the two when analyzing mass shootings occurring between 2014-2019 (mass shootings were defined, for purposes of the study, as resulting in four or more deceased victims). This study determined that in 68.2 per cent of mass shootings, or more than two thirds, the perpetrator either had a history of domestic violence or initially killed family or an intimate partner. Additionally, as would be tragically proved true in Nova Scotia, DV-related mass shootings are associated with a greater fatality rate.
The Mass Casualty Commission report was welcomed by experts precisely because of its clarity on domestic violence’s role in many mass killings. The proposed action items, many of which fall under both federal and provincial jurisdictions, are long overdue. So you can see why denying the epidemic of domestic violence is not just harmful but also damaging to the trust (or whatever is left of trust) survivors and the families of the victims have in the system.
And the lack of trust is sadly warranted. Little has changed since the attacks, or since the final MCC report was released just over a year ago. There are 130 recommendations within the report but I will highlight three broad pieces. The first did come swiftly, at least in terms of something being announced: in the immediate aftermath of the shootings, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau called for increased gun control, and issued an executive order — an “Order in Council” classifying a series of firearms as “prohibited,” effectively banning them. More than four years later, the government still has yet to confiscate a single firearm, as it can’t figure out how to actually do that. (Indeed, just this week we learned of another failed plan.) The Liberals later passed Bill C-21, which in part brought in a national freeze on the sale of handguns. The guns used by Wortman, as was quickly determined, were purchased illegally; a gun he did own legally was not covered by the new bans.
The focus on gun control, while to this author’s mind is not a bad thing, is the simple thing. Because it is easy for government to point to a bill that pledges to do things, even if the follow-through is absent.
The other two pieces are more support and services for domestic violence survivors and more education on gender-based violence, and amending the criminal code to include to coercive control.
Coercive control is defined a “an act or a pattern of acts of assault, threats, humiliation and intimidation or other abuse that is used to harm, punish, or frighten their victim.” In April 2023, following Ontario’s lead, the federal government introduced and passed Keira’s Law, passed in honour of Keira Kagan, who was killed by her father during an unsupervised visitation after her mother was repeatedly told by the courts his abusive behaviour wasn’t deemed “urgent enough” to prohibit contact. This law will ensure judges are educated on the dangers of both domestic violence broadly and coercive control in particular. However, the Liberals have not acted on the demands to specifically add coercive control as a new criminal offence as recommended by the commission. NDP MP Laurel Collins introduced Private Member’s Bill C-332 into Parliament last December to do exactly that; the bill is sitting at second reading with no real profile, and probably will until and unless the government decides to make it a priority.
The Liberal government has consistently spoken about domestic violence as part of a broad gender based violence focus. In typical Liberal form, what this has meant is some grant funding and extremely nice words, but mainly asking for report after report and action plan after action plan without much action at all.
Reports aren’t a bad thing, except when they’re used as a cover for inaction. The expert advice hasn’t changed since the Liberals took office in 2015: fund women’s shelters, fund and expand community family violence organizations, especially those in Indigenous and racialized communities, invest in programs to engage men and boys, work with the justice system to enhance protections for survivors and better train police. Some movement has occurred on these recommendations but more impactful change is hard to achieve when you have a government constantly wanting “just one more” action plan.
It is also more difficult to achieve when the general public isn’t demanding it or making it an election issue. In Nova Scotia, ex-minister Johns fell on his political sword so fast that hardly anyone noticed the scandal at all. And at a time where a lot of Canadians cannot afford groceries or rent or their power bills, it’s hard to break through.
But it’s vital that we do. In Canada in 2022, 184 women and girls were murdered, predominately by men. That works out to one women or girl killed every 48 hours. If we want to prevent another Nova Scotia, another École Polytechnique, if we want to support and protect the people we love and our communities, than we need to not only name domestic violence as the epidemic it is but use our vote and voices to demand politicians make it a priority.
Kristin Raworth is a victims’ advocate.
The Line is entirely reader funded — no federal subsidy for us! If you value our work, have already subscribed, and still worry about what will happen when the conventional media finishes collapsing, please make a donation today.
The Line is Canada’s last, best hope for irreverent commentary. We reject bullshit. We love lively writing. Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Follow us on Twitter @the_lineca. Fight with us on Facebook. Pitch us something: lineeditor@protonmail.com
Something has never sat right with me about this entire incident and the resulting (lack of) coverage. JT was practically salivating at the opportunity to enact further gun control measures, almost like he was just waiting for an event like this to happen. And when it did, we never really got much coverage of the incident itself. Your piece is pretty much the only time I've seen the guy's name in print in the last few years.
I think the focus on gun control was just opportunistic. There were red flags surrounding this man for years, but apparently nobody cared until it became politically beneficial for them to pretend to care.
Wortman did not have a firearms licence, all his guns were illegal so no amount of gun control would have prevented this massacre, what might have is if the RCMP had done there job long before it occurred and investigated Wortman after several domestic violence reports. Trudeau was just grateful to have horrible event to forward his political overreach against lawful gun owners