Study: Sexual assault victims suffer involuntary paralysis

Sexual violence

The courts should take steps to ensure victims of sexual assault are given priority when it comes to the hearing of cases.

Photo credit: Photo I Pool

What you need to know:

  • Scientists have discovered that rape victims, even if they want to, are unable to cry or move as a result of threat and fear that causes them to “freeze”.
  • The findings by watershed research by a team of neurosurgeons based at the University College London could go a long way in fast-tracking justice for victims.
  • Moreover, the neuroscientific evidence could have significant implications on arguments for defence used in rape cases in court.

Victims of sexual assault and rape undergo “involuntary paralysis”, a condition that prevents them from resisting their attackers, a new study shows.

In the latest findings, scientists have discovered that rape victims, even if they want to, are unable to cry or move as a result of threat and fear that causes them to “freeze”.

The findings by watershed research by a team of neurosurgeons based at the University College London (UCL) could go a long way in fast-tracking justice for victims. Moreover, the neuroscientific evidence could have significant implications on arguments for defence used in rape cases in court.

Coming at a time when a section of defence lawyers have been accused of applying the infamous tactic of shifting sexual assault and rape blame onto victims, because of not fleeing or fighting their attackers, the study is a most welcome relief.

At least a third of women globally are predicted to experience rape or assault cases in their lifetime, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO). The organisation says that among them, seven per cent are victims of attempted rape or have undergone the actual rape nightmare.

The experts now want the law to incorporate the neuroscientific evidence when tackling cases on rape and sexual assault. To arrive at their findings, the researchers analysed a rape case where the defense team transferred on the victim the blame of sexual assault.

Immobility

They questioned why she did not show any attempts to struggle but instead she just froze. The scientists hold that the immobility of the sexual assault victim is purely involuntary, in their study published in the Nature Human Behaviour journal.

In previous studies, scientists have demonstrated how the brain responds when faced with threats, particularly by shutting off neural circuits that provide voluntary control movement of the body.

Most animals are ready to trigger a flight or fight reaction as a response to a mild threat because they only freeze temporarily. However, the behaviour can change where the body becomes entirely limp or frozen, causing prolonged immobility as a response to severe or abrupt threats.

The scientists hold that human beings also undergo similar processes, which could have a major impact on defence arguments in court.

According to the experts, “defences on 'loss of control' have been recognised by law for a long time. In specific situations, especially where evidence indicates that voluntary control was not involved in the actions, diminished responsibility can be accorded."

“This may include some conditions that are extreme like emotional triggering, coercive control, as well as sleep disorders, among other medical conditions.

“From our analysis of neuroscientific evidence, we are of the opinion that involuntary immobility at the time of sexual assault and rape ordeal should be given the same consideration.

“It is our hope that this will highlight to society the crucial need for active consent and stop victim blaming, which is inappropriate.”

The experts argue that “sexual assault and rape definitions in legal terms are based on consent absence. It is, however, not unusual for non-consent reports of the victims to be juxtaposed in court against stereotypes, with no evidence, of how the behavior of a ‘real victim” should allegedly be.

“For instance, due to absence of clear attempts to resist whatsoever, a perpetrator could claim that they presumed there was consent from the victim.

“This neuroscientific evidence should be used not only to ensure victims get justice but also to stop peddling these myths as arguments for defence.”