I genuinely haven’t watched any of the MAFS series since the very early days of almost quaint arranged marriages as someone put it on here, which was a very different show. More just because I haven’t got round to it to be fair, it was on my watchlist!
But I watched the Panorama programme and it seems very clear the woman ?Shona who was filmed herself was absolutely at least at risk of becoming coercively controlled. Having said that I was actually fairly impressed at the experts calling that out in no uncertain terms and ultimately pulling them from the show because of it. I have no doubt it happened exactly as she said, having said that “pulling out” is ultimately an unreliable method of contraception, and I also wonder what else she feels could or should have been done for her by the welfare team in that situation. Yes they for sure should have had more curiosity about what exactly happened when helping her access the morning after pill and I would hope she had plenty opportunity to speak to the experts as well as the welfare team on her own and not on camera about the relationship red flags they were seeing.
The other two I think are more serious allegations especially the women who said she was violently attacked and raped and threatened with acid etc. I totally believe her and am GOBSMACKED that they didn’t immediately get the police involved (unless it was discussed and she was dead set against it but there is no hint of that, and even so I think in that setting I can’t see how it would have been avoided ultimately). Even if she didn’t use the word “attacked” or “raped” she showed up with bruises to the welfare team and saying he said she couldn’t say no because she was his wife (as she alleges, I think they disputed that?), and telling them about the acid threat, which is completely undisputed from their side. I’m sorry but someone dropped the ball SOOOO badly on that one. It’s clear they need domestic abuse workers involved in the welfare team. Nobody makes a “passing comment” about having acid thrown in their intimate partner’s face, that can’t possibly be passed off as a joke or insignificant comment. Especially with the added context of “not being able to say no” to sex, reports of rough sex, and literal bruises plus enough concern from her to proactively approach the welfare team… I totally understand why she wants to sue but I also think she’s mad not to take up the offer of inpatient psychiatric treatment. And in some ways not to have now contacted police - I do understand why she might not want to involve them for fear of retaliation when someone has made those sort of threats. But it’s a slightly tricky position to take even though I do understand the logic to say you want to sue but not involve police.
The other case also sounds awful and again I have no doubt it happened exactly as she describes, it’s sadly too detailed and realistic a reaction from him for there to be any doubt in my mind about it. And I do think they should not have shown her scenes knowing her complaint existed and the seriousness of her allegations.
I agree it does sound like the psychiatrist was good which is something but they need people who understand the dynamics of coercive control and domestic abuse and able to spot early red or even pink flags AND feel confident to know what to do about it when identified, not try to explain it all away as something they’d rather not be hearing as it’s inconvenient. The need Women’s Aid or similar people involved on the welfare team and able to respond instantly in real time and in person.