Loading...
Original Publication Date
2026
Document Type
Video
Abstract
The "bodily injury rule", a policy framework developed in the 1970s to protect survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV), operates on the assumption that visible marks or bruises are objective evidence of abuse, allowing authorities to intervene even when a victim is unable or afraid to speak. However, this doctoral research argues that without the critical context of consent and negotiation, such policies can systematically misinterpret healthy, consensual BDSM (Bondage, Discipline, Dominance, Submission, and Masochism) practices as domestic violence. This misclassification is particularly acute for transgender practitioners, who already face systemic medical and legal scrutiny.
Findings and Recommendations:
The study posits that bodily injury lacks a universal meaning and can only be understood through the lens of relationship context. To prevent the further marginalization of the trans and Kink communities, the researcher advocates for:
-
Nuanced Screening: Shifting from "What happened to your body?" to "What happened within the context of your relationship?"
-
Professional Training: Educating clinicians and law enforcement on the distinction between consensual power exchange and abusive control.
-
Epistemic Justice: Treating individuals as the primary experts of their own lived experiences and bodily autonomy.
Keywords
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV), BDSM, Transgender health, Health equity
Rights
Copyright © 2026 Casey Lopez. All rights reserved.
Comments
Presented in the Reimagining Care for Gender Diverse Populations session.