In recent news, the methods employed by Maison Grande Ourse, a therapy center for women survivors of sexual violence in Montérégie, have come under intense scrutiny. Critics allege that the facility treats its residents more like prisoners than victims seeking healing. Former staff members have raised concerns about the center’s controversial practices, pointing to restrictive rules that seem more closely aligned with incarceration than supportive therapy.
Upon entering the facility, women must undergo searches of their personal belongings. Items such as cell phones, wallets, and car keys are routinely confiscated by the administration. Additionally, all incoming residents are required to take a shower upon their arrival, regardless of their comfort or personal history. Testimonials reveal that for some women, being forced into a shower can exacerbate past traumas associated with their experiences of assault.
Notably situated in Saint-Ours, near Sorel, Maison Grande Ourse presents itself as the “first therapy house for survivors of sexual assaults and gender-based violence in Quebec.” The center offers a two-week closed therapy program free of charge for women recognized as victims of sexual crimes by the IVAC (Indemnisation des victimes d’actes criminels). This program consists of three workshops per day, each lasting two hours, aimed at various therapeutic topics.
However, critics assert that the environment is stifling. “One woman told me she felt like she was entering a prison,” recounts Marie, a former staff member. She explains that certain residents undergo victimization even in essential locations like the bathroom, making imposed hygiene rituals particularly damaging. The forced nature of these practices raises significant ethical questions and contributes to an unsettling atmosphere within the facility.
The measures don’t stop there. Residents are also not permitted to leave without supervision, even for simple activities such as grocery shopping or taking a stroll on the premises. For instance, during the recent Saint-Jean-Baptiste celebrations, women were reportedly barred from stepping outside to enjoy fireworks or purchase non-alcoholic beverages to celebrate the occasion. Former staff member Johanne echoed similar concerns, describing the resource as reminiscent of a prison rather than a safe haven for healing.
When contacted for clarification, Suzie Girard, the director of Maison Grande Ourse, defended the institution’s practices. She reiterated that these regulations are intended to protect the residents, although she struggled to articulate a theoretical framework from mental health principles to justify them. “Our model borrows elements from both domestic violence centers and suicide prevention approaches,” Girard stated, suggesting a hybrid approach that may not resonate with standard therapeutic practices.
The program at Maison Grande Ourse appears controversial, diverging sharply from the methodologies widely accepted for treating trauma from sexual violence. Manon Monastesse, the director of the Federation of Women’s Shelters, expressed confusion over the practices, stating that such an environment is antithetical to the needs of survivors. She asserted that treating sexual assault victims shouldn’t resemble a detox program for substance dependency but rather focus on empathy, support, and empowerment.
This sentiment is echoed by the Centre d’Aide aux Victimes d’Agressions Sexuelles (CAVAS) in Saint-Hyacinthe. Their director, Amélie Blain, voiced strong disapproval of the closed accommodation model, reminding us that such conditions are entirely inappropriate for victims of sexual violence. CAVAS has expressed persistent concerns about Maison Grande Ourse, particularly regarding its failure to demonstrate a sound theoretical basis for its treatment approach and has advised against referral to this establishment.
Further complicating matters is the stance of the Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux (CISSS) de la Montérégie-Centre, which has purportedly recommended against directing women to Maison Grande Ourse due to its deviation from accepted intervention plans regarding sexual abuse cases.
In a twist of irony, the artist Nathalie Simard serves as a spokesperson or “marraine” for Maison Grande Ourse. However, upon learning of the situation, she expressed disappointment, stating she lacks insight into managerial decisions and emphasizes her commitment to advocating for women who have experienced sexual violence.
While the intention behind the creation of such institutions presumably aims to provide a supportive space for healing, it is disheartening to witness practices that echo the very trauma these survivors aim to escape. It is crucial for authorities and the community to reassess and develop frameworks that align with trauma-informed care principles, focusing on empowerment and the actual needs of survivors.
In conclusion, the controversy surrounding Maison Grande Ourse raises imperative questions regarding the treatment of survivors of sexual violence. It challenges us to rethink what supportive and effective care should look like and how to create environments that genuinely foster healing rather than invoking feelings of imprisonment or coercion. The ongoing dialogue surrounding this issue must consider the voices of survivors and advocates to ensure that therapy centers both meet their foundational purpose and adhere to the highest ethical standards.
Source link
