Domestic violence on political agenda

Frank Mullance, of Advocacy After Fatal Domestic Abuse Frank Mullance, of Advocacy After Fatal Domestic Abuse

DOMESTIC violence will take centre stage at an event held by the Labour Party in Swindon.

On Saturday the party will be hosting a domestic abuse roundtable event with special guest speakers who are experts on the subject.

There will be an opportunity to hear from Olwen Kelly, director of Swindon Women’s Aid, and Frank Mullane, of Advocacy After Fatal Domestic Abuse (AAFDA), on issues surrounding domestic abuse and its effects on families and children.

The event will form part of a continuing campaign by the Labour Party to highlight the effects domestic abuse can have on families locally.

The Labour Party are keen to hear the views of Swindon residents on the issues surrounding domestic abuse, and its effects on families and children, as part of Labour’s national “Your Britain” programme of events designed to help shape domestic abuse prevention and awareness strategies.

Councillor Cindy Matthews, shadow lead on children's services, said: “It is the first of a series of policy forums, and the idea is to open it to the public and to have people there who can inform people.

“For me it is a subject that is quite close to my heart.

“We had an incident in my family and I had a colleague who was killed at the hands of their partner.

“It is important to raise people’s awareness of the issue right from when they are young.

“People think it doesn’t happen in their class of people but it is something that takes place across all classes.”

Olwen Kelly said: “I’m delighted that the Labour Party have invited me to talk about domestic violence and I believe that this is an important issue that affects people in our community.

“It is vital that people are aware that they are not alone and the support that is available for them.”

The event will take place at the Broadgreen Community Centre, Salisbury Street, starting at 10am.

If you would like to attend contact Chris O’Brien at 01793 230657 or email at chris.obrien@ southswindonlabour.co.uk

Comments(25)

Tim Newroman says...
3:41pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Hopefully the meeting will highlight, and discuss, why it is that a notoriously pro-contact judge in the town routinely insists on putting children and, especially, women at risk from convicted violent offenders.

Not much point hand-wringing about the current levels of domestic violent abuse when the system itself enables and encourages it.

It's good that the local Labour party are going to debate this issue, but why did they do nothing - at all - to curtail the dreadful rise of domestic abuse cases during the 13 year period where they were in government and could have actually DONE something meaningful about it?

dukeofM4 says...
4:15pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Family Violence will not be solved by current policy. It may sound nice that the government is 'doing' something about it and fits in with the current pop culture surrounding the issue, but very little progress has been made indeed.

The only progress has been increased costs to the taxpayer with benefits, legal aid, police and court time and still ever increasing cases.

Other countries are now questioning the victim-centric approach the UK uses and starting to focus on prevention. It's the old adage a ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Tim Newroman says...
4:26pm Wed 13 Mar 13

@dukeofM4: absolutely. The vast amount of money squandered on Legal Aid is staggering and needs to end. Thankfully, the government are putting a stop to much of it (while still continuing payments for the victims who do require it). No longer will the taxpayer be forced to fund convicted criminals and their continued attempts to ruin people's lives.

Prevention is indeed preferable to cure. And the best way of preventing repeat violent criminals from committing yet more crime is to put them behind bars for worthwhile periods of time.

If it eases some people's consciences, we can all play along and pretend it will be help 'rehabilitate' those criminals.

dukeofM4 says...
4:52pm Wed 13 Mar 13

All incidents of family violence are not equal. We have to stop treating every case as severe from a policy point of view and start to categorise them from minor to severe.

If of course the woman wants to leave the relationship then resource should be made available for her to do so, but we have to stop wasting time and money on cases where the people involved won't make up their minds to split or stay together leaving the government caught in the middle playing referee and footing the bill.

Also jailing every single man I doubt would have much impact. The threat of jail has had little effect on the drug war why should family violence be any different?

The only real hope is to give people the tools (and the guts) to make tough decisions between themselves avoiding violence all together. I think most people would agree family violence starts with frustration spilling over to something more serious.

The 20% of real psychos like Sean Jenkins in Cornwall, the law, police, courts will never stop unless we start locking people up for only the act of thinking of violence. In that case it would not have mattered because the woman involved wouldn't leave him until she was blinded. Sometimes the' victim' is their own worse enemy.

Localboy86 says...
7:04pm Wed 13 Mar 13

Tim Newroman wrote:
Hopefully the meeting will highlight, and discuss, why it is that a notoriously pro-contact judge in the town routinely insists on putting children and, especially, women at risk from convicted violent offenders.

Not much point hand-wringing about the current levels of domestic violent abuse when the system itself enables and encourages it.

It's good that the local Labour party are going to debate this issue, but why did they do nothing - at all - to curtail the dreadful rise of domestic abuse cases during the 13 year period where they were in government and could have actually DONE something meaningful about it?
Could of guessed you would be the first one on here moaning about judges, give it a rest man, get out in the fresh air, take a walk

Tim Newroman says...
8:16am Thu 14 Mar 13

Localboy86 wrote:
Tim Newroman wrote:
Hopefully the meeting will highlight, and discuss, why it is that a notoriously pro-contact judge in the town routinely insists on putting children and, especially, women at risk from convicted violent offenders.

Not much point hand-wringing about the current levels of domestic violent abuse when the system itself enables and encourages it.

It's good that the local Labour party are going to debate this issue, but why did they do nothing - at all - to curtail the dreadful rise of domestic abuse cases during the 13 year period where they were in government and could have actually DONE something meaningful about it?
Could of guessed you would be the first one on here moaning about judges, give it a rest man, get out in the fresh air, take a walk
'Have', rather than 'of'. Other than that, well done, almost coherent.

RichardR1 says...
10:49am Thu 14 Mar 13

Domestic violence has been a fact of life for centuries, no amount of initiatives is going to wipe it out.

How you overcome the fear factor is the key, whoever comes up with that would indeed be hailed as the Messiah.

Tim Newroman says...
11:30am Thu 14 Mar 13

RichardR1 wrote:
Domestic violence has been a fact of life for centuries, no amount of initiatives is going to wipe it out.

How you overcome the fear factor is the key, whoever comes up with that would indeed be hailed as the Messiah.
Sadly, you're right. It's the same with bullying.

Every other month there's an article about some anti-bullying initiative or other... which rather tends to highlight that none of them actually work.

dukeofM4 says...
1:20pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Family violence has been happening since cavemen and recorded history. The only thing that has changed is the feminist movement from the 1960s onwards.

At the end of the day a couple has to decide whether they're staying together or splitting. Society should give couples every incentive to resolve their differences and stay together if possible rather than give the easy option of filling in a form and get guaranteed money from the government.

It's well documented single mother households leave children at much higher risk for sexual abuse, bullying, and drug abuse than households with an active father. I'm not saying this to belittle single mothers, but it's true. If anyone wants the source of this research I'd be more than happen to post it. I'm sure someone will say Ms X had children and her children turned out just fine, I agree but someone could also smoke cigarettes and live to 100, it's all about risk and odds.

And it does make some sense when single mothers have yet another boyfriend move in (who they don't know anything about or his relatives or his friends), only one parent supervising the child because she's too busy working to meet some sort of government minimum hours per week or is just plain skint, and latch key kids left alone before anyone comes home to get into God knows what.

It's a fact of life and all the women's rights groups can't change that. Of course society has tried to subsidised this reality with benefits, childcare allowances for daycare centres, and society making allowances for the single mothers from prioritising them on housing waiting lists, to getting preferential legal aid when others have to endure government cuts.

It's a complicated issue, but we've tried the single mother model for 40 years now and it's time to review if society has really been improved or have we just been spinning our wheels.

Unfortunately the culture we have to address today is women don't want to be seen dependent on men and want the government to provide the funding when they've had enough of the male persuasion. But hey it's a vote winner for Labour but Mr Cameron may find he's on the thin edge of the wedge next time around with female voters.

Tim Newroman says...
2:14pm Thu 14 Mar 13


And it does make some sense when single mothers have yet another boyfriend move in (who they don't know anything about or his relatives or his friends)

I agree with much of what you say in your post above, but the element I've quoted above is something of a red herring.

There are plenty of mothers who get pregnant and then have children by men they barely know. Indeed, often the reason the father is no longer around (even by the time the child is actually born) is because both parties realise they weren't suited, or discover things about each other that they'd rather not have anything to do with.

Often, the very types of men that women may otherwise choose not to have children with are the ones who are careful to hide their past and their true nature, yet are also the ones who don't care about getting another woman pregnant.

Also, the higher percentage of child abuse is actually committed by blood relative family members.

itsamess3 says...
5:15pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Tim
Once again you centre on males with mainly unsupported claims--perhaps you should spend some of your research time on some rather obvious facts as to gay/lesbian relationships etc and female prosecutions which will paint a rather different set of facts. You might look into the high proportion of false claims year on year against step fathers.
It does show from your claims you cannot hold a balanced debate.

dukeofM4 says...
5:41pm Thu 14 Mar 13

This whole debate is victim centric and the 'victim' is usually female. The pop culture surrounding family violence has muzzled the media when reporting on actual cases. It's a form of self censorship.

When you get headlines repeatedly like 'husband bruises wife' rather than something like 'husband bruises wife when threatened with knife' the part she played in the incident never gets reported because it's not politically correct to report what both parties allege these days. It's victim centric nonsense. Read the articles it's a fairly continuous theme. To get to the detail of an incident you'd have to go to the court.

Tim Newroman says...
6:13pm Thu 14 Mar 13

itsamess3 wrote:
Tim
Once again you centre on males with mainly unsupported claims--perhaps you should spend some of your research time on some rather obvious facts as to gay/lesbian relationships etc and female prosecutions which will paint a rather different set of facts. You might look into the high proportion of false claims year on year against step fathers.
It does show from your claims you cannot hold a balanced debate.
The Crime Survey for England and Wales - the most reliable figures we have available - clearly show that 81% of domestic violence incidents involve a female victim and a male perpetrator.

Yes, OBVIOUSLY, it's true that some men are the victims of female on male abuse and, yes, OBVIOUSLY same sex abuse can occur in homosexual relationships.

You are the one who finds it impossible to (a) hold a reasoned, intelligent and adult debate and who (b) cannot ever admit you are wrong.

Do understand that 81% is a huge majority figure.

Do understand that the CPS publically state that two women are killed each week by their partner or ex-partner. The comparable number for men is not listed because it's statistically insignificant.

Do understand that the CPS publically state that 76 per cent of all domestic violence incidents are repeat. So much for your judges making an impact.

I can only assume that you have been a victime of female on male domestic abuse, it can be the only rational reason for your continued insistence on pretending nobody cares about it.

Tim Newroman says...
6:14pm Thu 14 Mar 13

itsamess3 wrote:
Tim
Once again you centre on males with mainly unsupported claims--perhaps you should spend some of your research time on some rather obvious facts as to gay/lesbian relationships etc and female prosecutions which will paint a rather different set of facts. You might look into the high proportion of false claims year on year against step fathers.
It does show from your claims you cannot hold a balanced debate.
Also, I'm not yet aware of any females who've managed to get men pregnant.

itsamess3 says...
7:02pm Thu 14 Mar 13

dukeofM4 wrote:
This whole debate is victim centric and the 'victim' is usually female. The pop culture surrounding family violence has muzzled the media when reporting on actual cases. It's a form of self censorship.

When you get headlines repeatedly like 'husband bruises wife' rather than something like 'husband bruises wife when threatened with knife' the part she played in the incident never gets reported because it's not politically correct to report what both parties allege these days. It's victim centric nonsense. Read the articles it's a fairly continuous theme. To get to the detail of an incident you'd have to go to the court.
Tim
Take the lesson of a balanced debate.
That confirms what i have always said--the only way to hear all the facts is to be in the court or read a full transcript.

"Also, I'm not yet aware of any females who've managed to get men pregnant.”
The article is about domestic violence not pregnancy.
Perhaps you can find some figures that show how many men have appealed decisions successfully.
You do resort to abusive claims when you are shown to be wrong--it gets you nowhere.

Tim Newroman says...
7:30pm Thu 14 Mar 13


That confirms what i have always said--the only way to hear all the facts is to be in the court or read a full transcript.


My evidence and statistics are based on actual court decisions. Anything else is pointless conjecture.

81% of all UK domestic violence convictions are for male on female violence. None of your dull witted dancing around the issue can change that.

Unless, of course, you're suggesting that magistrates and the judiciary routinely make mistakes and find men guilty of domestic abuse when they are not, and yet find women not guilty of it when they are?

Very unlike you to admit the judiciary can't do their job properly. Do note how good it is to see you becoming more educated on the subject.

dukeofM4 says...
8:00pm Thu 14 Mar 13

Whether the split is 80/20, 70/30, 60/40 or even 50/50, the fact of the matter is Olwen Kelly and Frank Mullane as noted in the article are only treating the symptoms of family violence.

When they have their chat it's my hope they will be talking about PREVENTION in the same breath. Draconian sentencing, Clair's List?, and Wiltshire Police's positive arrest policy really does not have a significant effect on cases. Nobody really knows the scale of the problem and you can play with the figures all you want.

Family Violence falls into a category of crimes like drugs, prostitution, alcohol abuse, sex trafficking, and other social crimes, where management is the only real solution because they will never be eradicated. Once we accept the problem for what it is then put real solutions into place rather than make all women out as helpless defenseless creatures that can't manage that part of their lives.

When Olwen Kelly gets up to talk about her refuge I hope she mentions that women on drugs or alcohol are not welcome and routinely turned away. Don't these women deserve help as well?

Tim Newroman says...
8:57pm Thu 14 Mar 13

The split is actually 81/19.

As for the rest of your post, of course the problem will never end. As with all criminality, the will is not there with the people who have the power and ability to do anything about it.

Until we build at least 20 new, large prisons and move to a system of locally elected judges, crime will continue to get worse.

RichardR1 says...
9:42am Sun 17 Mar 13

Tim I always find it odd when a self proclaimed Nuclear Scientist seems to run hot and cold on the science of statistics when it suits him.

You are of course right that the percentage of male/female abuse has always been as you depict.

What causes the violence of course is a totally different debate.

itsamess3 says...
10:57am Sun 17 Mar 13

"When they have their chat it's my hope they will be talking about PREVENTION in the same breath. Draconian sentencing, Clair's List?, and Wiltshire Police's positive arrest policy really does not have a significant effect on cases. Nobody really knows the scale of the problem and you can play with the figures all you want"
How true..

RichardR1 says...
9:15am Mon 18 Mar 13

Not true the ONS publish the figures.

itsamess3 says...
9:44am Mon 18 Mar 13

Perhaps you should ask some of the groups that mediate when men are attacked by their partners and denied access to their home and kids etc.

Tim Newroman says...
3:14pm Mon 18 Mar 13

For the last time, nobody has claimed that no men are ever attacked by women. Clearly, it's very obviously something that some here have experienced.

But the simple facts of reality, backed up by all the available evidence from the police and court convictions, demonstrate that the overwhelming majority of domestic violence and abuse is male on female. Attempting to pretend otherwise is not only plain wrong, it's also rather insulting to the countless thousands of women who experience this terror each and every day - not to mention those who are killed because of it.

RichardR1 says...
12:18pm Tue 19 Mar 13

Tim it is simply Itsamess trying to cause another row. He probably doesn't believe what he is saying.

itsamess3 says...
3:41pm Tue 19 Mar 13

"Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned--nor hell a fury like a woman scorned "
As Tim said ONS figures only show cases that make court--however they take general figures rather than the severity or circumstances of the crimes.
That lies within the judgement of the court on evidence heard.
Why do the ONS not include figures from solicitors-marriage guidance and a host of help groups. Men rarely want to report partners-purely as they know it could end the relationship.
A local case i know of was when a man in a very good job and married for 12 years with 2 kids went to work as normal and had a writ issued on him at his place of work as emergency injunction proceedings had been issued.
He had a quick chat with a solicitor who agreed to attend with him.
His wife was not in court but her barrister was and claimed that her husband had beaten her up and had numerous injuries-confirmed in a note from her doctor. The judge granted the injunction with the order he must not go to the house or harrass her and the power of arrest granted if he did.
A week later she invited him to come for a chat telling him the injunction had been cancelled.
He was arrested and put before the justices charged with GBH as his wife was claiming a new attack. Subsequently after 6 months on remand he faced trial--what happened?
A teacher at the childrens school heard the news on tv and remembered one of the kids had been brought to school on several occasions by a relative and the teacher had asked on those occasions if mummy was ill and the child said on the first occasion-yes she fell over and hurt herself and the later occasion was hurt when her brother was batting and the bat went flying and hit her in the face. Questioned in court the woman broke down and blamed anti-depressants--th
e judge ordered the jury to aquit.
She was never charged with any offence and a quirk in the law means he could not claim compensation despite losing his job.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree