Partner Şiddetinde Gizil Duygusal Bir Bağ: Stockholm Sendromu

Öz

Stockholm Sendromu, fail ile mağdur arasındaki güçlü duygusal bağları içeren travmatik bir bağlanma ilişkisini tanımlamak için kullanılan önemli bir kavramdır. Stockholm Sendromu güç dengesinin belirgin bir şekilde farklı olduğu, bir kişinin diğerini aralıklı olarak taciz ettiği, şiddet gösterdiği, tehdit ettiği veya korkuttuğu ikili ilişkilerde ortaya çıkmaktadır. Dünya genelinde özellikle kadınların yaklaşık %84’ünün maruz kaldığı partner şiddeti, bu tür ilişkilerin en çarpıcı ve yaygın örneklerinden biridir. Stockholm Sendromu, istismar edilen bireylerin, kendilerine zarar veren kişiye karşı duydukları karmaşık duygusal bağlarla karakterize edilir. Bu bağlamda, mağdurların istismarı inkar etme, durumu görmezden gelme ve istismarcısından ayrılmayı reddetme gibi davranışlar sergilemeleri, Stockholm Sendromu’nun temel belirtileri arasında yer almaktadır. Şiddete uğrayan kadınların çoğunda, içinde bulundukları durumla baş etme konusunda yaşadıkları güçlükler, kendilerini istismar eden partnerine (faillerine) boyun eğme ve bu kişiler karşısında olumlu duygular geliştirme gibi davranışların ortaya çıkmasına neden olduğu görülmektedir. İronik bir şekilde, bu tür duygular, mağdurun istismarcısını savunma ve onun eylemlerini haklı çıkarma eğilimleriyle de ilişkili olup, Stockholm Sendromu bulguları ile eşleşmektedir. Böyle bir durumda mağdurun istismarcı partnerle duygusal bir bağ kurması veya faille arasını iyi tutmaya çalışması başlangıçta avantajlı bir durum gibi görünse de sendrom sınırlarında patolojiktir. Bu yazıda da, partner şiddetine maruz kalan bireylerde gözlemlenen Stockholm Sendromunun klinik belirtileri, psikopatolojik süreçleri ve bu sendromun gözlendiği bireylere yönelik sağlık çalışanının yaklaşımı üzerinde durulacaktır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Partner Şiddeti
• Stockholm Sendromu
• Sağlık Çalışanı

A Latent Emotional Bond in Partner Violence: Stockholm Syndrome

Öz

Stockholm Syndrome is an important concept that describes a traumatic attachment relationship, where strong emotional bonds form between the perpetrator and the victim. Stockholm Syndrome occurs in relationships where the balance of power is significantly different, where one person intermittently harasses, threatens or intimidates the other. One of the most striking and widespread example is partner violence, affecting approximately 84% of women worldwide. Stockholm Syndrome is characterized by the complex emotional bonds that abused individuals feel towards the person who harmed them. So, the victims' denial of the abuse, ignoring the situation and refusing to leave their abuser are among the basic symptoms of Stockholm Syndrome. It is observed that in most women who are subjected to violence, the difficulties they experience in coping with the situation they are in lead to behaviors such as submitting to their abusive partners (perpetrators) and developing positive feelings towards these people. Ironically, such feelings are also associated with the victim's tendency to defend their abuser and justify his actions, which is consistent with the findings of Stockholm Syndrome. In such a case, although it may initially seem advantageous for the victim to establish an emotional bond with the abusive partner or to try to maintain good relations with the perpetrator, it is pathological on the borders of the syndrome. This article will focus on the clinical symptoms of Stockholm Syndrome observed in individuals exposed to partner violence, its psychopathological processes, and the approach of health care professionals to individuals with this syndrome.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• partner violence
• stockholm syndrome
• healthcare professional

Kaynakça

1. Abel EL. A Note on psychological disordernamed after cities. Names. 2014;62(3):177–82.
2. Sharma VS [İnternet]. TAB Theory of emotions: stockholm syndrome -finally decoded. 2022. [Erişim tarihi: 2 Haziran 2024]. Erişim linki: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357539187_TAB_Theory_of_Emotions_Stockholm_Syndrome_-Finally_Decoded
3. Raju N. Stockholm syndrome. International Journal of Advances in Nursing Management. 2014;2(2):109-11.
4. Fabrique N, Van Hasselt VB, Vecchi GM, Romano SJ. Common variables associated with the development of Stockholm syndrome: Some case examples. Victims Offenders. 2007;2(1):91-8. doi:10.1080/15564880601087266.
5. Ase C. Crisis narratives and masculinist protection. International Feminist Journal of Politics. 2015;17(4):595-610. doi: 10.1080/14616742.2015.1042296.
6. Strentz T. The Stockholm syndrome: Law enforcement policy and ego defenses of the hostage. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1980;347:137-50. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1980.tb21263.x
7. Ochberg F. The victim of terrorism: Psychiatric considerations, Terrorism. 1978;1(2):147-68. doi:10.1080/10576107808435404
8. Chongtham S. Stockholm syndrome. Int J Multidiscip Educ Res. 2021;10(6):128-30.

9. Graham DL, Rawlings EI, Ihms K, Latimer D, Foliano J, Thompson A et al. A scale for identifying “Stockholm syndrome” reactions in young dating women: Factor structure, reliability, and validity. Violence and Victims. 1995;10(1):3–22.
10. World Health Organization [İnternet]. Violence against women. 2024. [Erişim tarihi: 11 Mayıs 2025]. Erişim linki: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
11. World Health Organization [İnternet]. Global and regional estimates of violence against women: Prevalence and health effects of intimate partner violence and non-partner sexual violence. 2013. [Erişim tarihi: 6 Temmuz 2024]. Erişim linki: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241564625
12. Semahegn A, Mengistie B. Domestic violence against women and associated factors in Ethiopia; systematic review. Reproductive Health. 2015;12:78. doi: 10.1186/s12978-015-0072-1.
13. Superable, CS. Lived experiences of battered women in Ozamiz City, Philippines. The Qualitative Report. 2017;22(13):3447–60.
14. Phollawan S. Battered wife syndrome: Legal proceedings in Thailand. Journal of Applied Security Research. 2017;12(3):415–23.
15. Adjah ESO, Agbemafle I. Determinants of domestic violence against women in Ghana. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:368. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3041-x
16. Baysan Arabaci L, Dereli F, Büyükbayram Arslan A, Taş Soylu G, Kurt A, Kurt A. University students’ attitudes about violence against women in the name of honor. J Forensic Nurs. 2021;17(2):76-83. doi:10.1097/JFN.0000000000000319
17. Lee E. Curing beauty’s Stockholm syndrome. Criterion: A Journal of Literary Criticism. 2020;13:1.
18. Adorjan M, Christensen T, Kelly B. Stockholm syndrome as vernacular resource. Sociological Quarterly. 2012;53(3):454-74.
19. Karan A, Hansen N. Does the Stockholm syndrome affectfemale sex workers? The case for a “Sonagachi Syndrome”. BMC International Health and Human Rights. 2018;18:10
20. Earp BD, Wudarczyk OA, Sandberg A, Savulescu J. If I could just stop loving you: Anti-love biotechnology and the ethics of a chemical breakup. The American Journal of Bioethics. 2013;13(11):3-17. doi:10.1080/15265161.2013.839752.
21. Begum, S, Donta B, Nair S, Prakasam C. Socio-demographic factors associated with domestic violence in urban slums, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India. The Indian Journal of Medical Research. 2015;141(6):783–8.
22. McMurray A. Domestic violence: Conceptual and practice issues., Contemporary Nurse. 2005;18(3):219-32, doi: 10.5172/conu.18.3.219.
23. Bate L, Hancock D. “A little encouragement”: Health services and domestic violence. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance. 2001;14(2):49–56.
24. Rodriguez M, Sheldon W, Bauer H, Perez-Stable E. The factors associated with disclosure of intimate partner abuse to clinicians. Journal of Family Practice. 2001;50:338–44.
25. Lutenbacher M, Cohen A, Mitzel J. Do we really help? Perspectives of abused women. Public Health Nursing. 2003;20(1):36–64
26. Mazza D, Lawrence J, Roberts G, Knowlden S. What can we do about domestic violence? Medical Journal of Australia. 2000;20:532–35.