Speakers plus: Bede
Solace
Minutes:
The panel then discussed issues and questions from the floor.
Dr Radford explained that the research evidence for programmes for the perpetrators was inconclusive, as the evidence was patchy. However, a programme in Scotland which had put perpetrators on probation had resulted in a decrease of violent activity. Angela D’Urso explained that sometimes the perpetrators would not change despite being in programmes, which in a way was an outcome, too, as it facilitated the decision to get out for his partner and other family. NtokozoDlova, from Bede House, said it was important to remember that domestic violence was not about anger, but about control. Neil Dickens, from Broken Rainbow, added that the victim was usually blamed by the perpetrator and also mistakenly blamed themselves.
Responding to a question from the floor, the panel responded that those under 18 could protect themselves by means of a child protection order which was made by social services. For over 18s, an injunction could be applied for. Speakers emphasised that it was a question of social responsibility for people to take steps against domestic abuse, including informing social services or the police. The panel also agreed that while no direct causality between alcohol and drug use and domestic violence could be established, alcohol and drug use were one of the warning flags which would be discussed at MARACs. Sometimes anti-social behaviour by young people had its roots in domestic abuse, and alcohol and drug use.
The panel explained that the government was currently consulting on a proposal on whether the authorities should have the right to warn the new partner of someone who had engaged in domestic violence, and that support for the wider family was not possible because of strained budgets – the focus was on those directly affected.
Responding to further questions, the panel agreed that the most important thing for victims of domestic violence was their safety and that the victims should not wait, for example for a suspected mental health condition to have been diagnosed in the perpetrator. In terms of the perpetrator being a regular visitor, rather than actually a resident in a building, the meeting heard that the police could take action as soon as any assaults took place, and ASBOs and other measures could be put into place to effectively ban the perpetrator from the property.
The panel advised that if a perpetrator tried to continue the abuse via custody visits, a solicitor should be involved, which was a good idea in any custody case. Independent, free advise was also available from Women’s Aid. In terms of reclaiming the rights to your property, after having had to flee an abusive situation, agencies would advocate on behalf of the victim to ensure they could return to the property, which could then also be fitted with extra security. On the whole, the sooner the victim left, the sooner the abuse would end, and more time there would be to re-establish her/himself.