Frontline Service Providers
Chapter 14: Identifying TFGBV in Client Care
Technology‑facilitated gender‑based violence (TFGBV) can be difficult to detect in service settings. Clients may not recognize digital abuse, may feel ashamed, or may fear losing support. Staff may overlook digital harm because it leaves no visible injuries. Identifying TFGBV requires noticing behavioural changes, shifts in communication, and inconsistencies in how clients describe their digital lives.
In this chapter we will review ways to identify TFGBV in care contexts. For more information on how to reocgnise subtle signs that someone may be experiencing TFGBV, you can read more in Chapter 11: Recognizing that TFGBV is Happening.
Learning Objectives
- Understand your role as a service provider in facing TFGBV cases.
- Second
Why Health and Frontline Care Staff Need This Training
Staff benefit from reflecting on their own assumptions about “digital abuse” in clinical or support environments. This helps them notice signs that might otherwise be dismissed.
Frontline workers (such as healthcare providers, disability‑support staff, GBV workers, and law enforcement) are often the first people clients trust. Clients may disclose indirectly or show distress through behaviour rather than words. Because TFGBV is often hidden, staff must create safe, nonjudgmental spaces where clients feel comfortable sharing concerns.
Early intervention matters. Sensitive documentation, careful listening, and timely referral can prevent further harm and preserve evidence. Staff do not need to be technology experts; they need awareness, gentle inquiry, and clear referral pathways.
Reflection
A useful starting point is to reflect on your own assumptions.
What comes to mind when you hear the term digital abuse in a clinical or supportive environment? This reflection might help prepare staff to notice signs that might otherwise be dismissed
How TFGBV Appears in Service Environments
TFGBV can occur across many service settings, including healthcare facilities, disability services, shelters, home‑care agencies, and community programs. Technology is embedded in daily operations, such as appointment booking systems, caregiver apps, telehealth, communication platforms, digital records, and assistive devices. These tools can support care but can also be misused for surveillance or coercion. Common indicators include:
- Repeated loss of device access
- Unexplained gaps in communication
- Sudden changes in online activity
- Anxiety around device use
- Inconsistencies in caregiver app logs
- Unusual device behaviour
- A caregiver or partner managing all digital communication
Example: A support worker notices that a client suddenly avoids using her phone and becomes tense whenever messages arrive. Her caregiver insists on answering questions for her and manages all her digital communication.
Digital tools within the service can also be misused:
- Falsified entries in caregiver or support apps
- Photos taken without consent
- Monitoring through clinic Wi‑Fi or waiting areas
Observing relational dynamics around technology is essential. Staff should consider the following questions:
- Who holds or controls the device?
- Who answers questions?
- Who insists on being present during digital interactions?
- How might digital abuse be occurring within the systems and tools we use every day?
These questions may reveal power imbalances that place clients at risk.
Example: A staff member uses his personal phone to contact a client and secretly edits her caregiver‑app logs to make her appear non‑compliant. He restricts her access to shared devices and stores photos of her without consent.
Organizational Factors Can Increase Risk of TFGBV
Service environments can unintentionally create conditions that allow TFGBV to go unnoticed. Contributing factors include limited privacy, shared devices, rushed appointments, and unclear policies on device use or harassment.
Women with disabilities may face additional risks due to reduced privacy, lower digital literacy, and greater reliance on caregivers. Staff may also blur boundaries by using personal phones for client communication or storing client information on unsecured devices.
Power imbalances matter. Clients who depend on staff or caregivers for mobility, communication, or daily living may feel unable to question digital decisions or raise concerns.
Recognizing TFGBV Across the Service Journey
TFGBV can appear at any stage of service interaction.
At client intake, it may resemble a client hesitating to share contact information, or requests for unusual communication arrangements.
Example: During intake, a client named Rina asks the clinic to only contact her through her partner’s email address and says she “isn’t allowed” to receive texts directly. When staff try to confirm her phone number, her partner answers every question and insists all follow‑up messages should go through him.
During appointments or meetings with clients, it may look like avoidance around discussing home life, relationships, or even technology use, or anxiety when devices ring or vibrate.
In can show up in follow-up calls and communication (often through phone calls or email) as messages going unanswered or being answer by someone else, or as sudden changes in communication patterns.
During home care visits or community care settings, you might see that devices are frequently missing broken, or “being fixed”, that family or caregivers are monitoring all digital interactions, or that there are high levels of restriction of device use.
Recognizing TFGBV requires looking beyond isolated incidents and considering how systems, routines, or technologies might enable harm.
The Importance of Trauma‑Informed, Nonjudgmental Inquiry
Clients may not have the language to describe digital abuse. They may feel ashamed, confused, or afraid of retaliation. Staff should use open‑ended questions, avoid assumptions, and ask privately about device safety and account control.
Trust is essential. Clients are more likely to share concerns when they feel respected and believed. Confidentiality should be emphasized, and next steps explained clearly
Building a Culture of Awareness
Recognizing TFGBV is an organizational responsibility. Services need clear digital‑conduct policies, regular staff training, and safe reporting systems. When staff share a common understanding of TFGBV, they are better equipped to identify risks and respond appropriately.
Reflect
What changes in your service environment would make it easier to recognize and respond to digital abuse?
Feedback/Errata