domestic violence

We have always wondered why domestic violence is not a mainstream service rather than something on the edges of different people's work. And yet it can tell us so much.

There is no place like home. It is in the home that 1 in 4 women will experience violence in their lifetime from a partner or ex-partner; it accounts for a quarter of all violent crime and has the highest rate of repeat victimisation of any crime; domestic violence kills two women every week.

Violence can be physical ("He grabbed hold of my hair and held my face to the fire"); it can be being kept captive ("I was locked in a room and only allowed out to pick up my daughter from school"); it can be psychological ("He would call me a fat ugly cow, a bad mother and a useless piece of shit in front of anyone").



In 90% of domestic violence cases, children are in the same or next room. This - says the government - "often results in behavioural issues, absenteeism, ill-health, bullying, anti-social behaviour, drug and alcohol misuse, self-harm and psychosocial impacts". And yet there remains a worrying acceptance of violence among young people aged 16-20 which suggests that the cycle of violence will continue. Recent surveys have showed that 42% know girls who have been hit by their boyfriends; and that 50% of young men and 33% of young women said it was okay to hit a woman or force her to have sex in some circumstances.
Services for those who live with or have survived domestic violence have undoubtedly improved and expanded. But, clearly, much remains to be done. Funding is always -and always will be-an issue. But, more crucially, we all have to see the three elements in domestic violence as a whole: the perpetrator; the victim; and the children. And we need to work in an integrated way with all those elements at the same time.

I know that Do The Right Thing is only on the edges of the real work (which never fails to humble and inspire me in equal measure) but if we can help raise the profile, help raise awareness and help improve knowledge and skills through highlighting best practice, then we will be proud to do so.

why not "domestic abuse"?
In general, we prefer the term "domestic violence" to "domestic abuse" - mainly because it puts a more frightening image into our heads. The idea of physical violence, sexual violence, emotional violence and so on just seems more in tune with the reality. And we much prefer it to be spelt out in full rather than abbreviated to "DV" or "DA". Of course, we used to call it "wife battering". Now there's a phrase to put an image in your head - and a more telling one than the a somewhat verbally sanitised "DV" or "DA"

our approach to events
It always struck me (which, on immediate reflection, is perhaps not the greatest opening phrase to use on a commentary on domestic violence) that whenever you attend national conferences that only one or two people ever get the chance to ask questions of "national" experts. The rest of us sit anonymously within the audience daring not to speak up for fear of making a fool of ourselves, sounding unprofessional or simply nervously making a hash of speaking out loud.

 And yet, having chaired many national conferences for Community Care magazine, which often attract the top names in a given field, I know that (with a few exceptions) so-called national experts are ordinary and engaging people who would welcome more to and fro with the audience.
 So the idea behind our events is to put together a series of programmes where everybody has the chance to question, challenge and comment. And not just, somewhat typically, at the end of a presentation either, but at any time during it. And we like to run national events in the North and the Midlands - so people don't have to face the usual trek to London.