Handbook on Sexual Violence (68 page)

Over time, it became clear that the victims who were frequently known to the police were not necessarily those who were at the highest risk of domestic homicide. For example, the highest-risk victims may be those who are most scared of contacting the police, or they may have rung the police once but, having received a poor response, decided it was not safe or worthwhile making further contact.

The notion of assessing a person and assigning them a category of risk is a relatively recent innovation and relates to the risk of homicide or serious harm from which recovery can be expected to be difficult or impossible (Howarth
et al
. 2009). However, in a review of 13 domestic violence murders, Thornton (n.d.) found that seven had no prior domestic violence incidents reported to the police. Of those that had had police involvement and been risk assessed, none had been assessed as high risk using the DASH risk assessment
2
(of the

six assessed, one was assessed as medium and five as standard). In addition, one study found there to be no correlation between police risk assessment level and arrest, with incidents rated as ‘high risk’ not significantly more likely to result in arrest than those rated as lower risk (Hester and Westmarland 2006). This means that questions must be asked about the effectiveness and usefulness of risk assessing discrete incidents rather than the overall pattern of behaviour (Hester and Westmarland 2006).

Recognition of the importance of prevention work

The response to domestic violence internationally has been to situate the victim and any children at the heart of interventions so as to ensure their safety (Westmarland and Hester 2006). This focus is also acknowledged in the HM Government Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy, which outlines plans to include work on prevention and states that:

Traditionally, effort has been concentrated on providing support services once women have been victimised. But it is just as important to focus on proactive interventions to prevent violence as reactive services for those who need help after the event.

(HM Government 2009: 20)

However, since the end of a relationship does not necessarily signal an end to the perpetration of domestic violence, this means that a focus solely on the victim and children cannot in itself reduce domestic violence substantially over time (Westmarland and Hester 2006). Domestic abusers may go on to reoffend against new partners (Hester and Westmarland 2006) or continue to abuse the original partner and children in other ways, for example through child contact arrangements (Hester and Radford 1996; Radford and Hester 2006). In a longitudinal study of domestic violence perpetrators reported to the police, exactly half the perpetrators (50 per cent) were reported again on at least one occasion during the three-year follow-up period (Hester and Westmarland 2006). Nearly one in five (18 per cent) of the perpetrators who reoffended did so against a different partner from the one they originally offended against (Hester and Westmarland 2006). Some women’s support projects report providing support to a series of different women over time who have all accessed support in relation to the same perpetrator (Westmarland and Hester 2006).

Despite acknowledgement that to end violence against women requires investment in primary prevention (to prevent violence from happening in the first place) and secondary prevention (to prevent violence from continuing or increasing once identified) work, such investment has not yet surfaced. As budgets are again rolled back as part of the present international financial crisis, it is likely to be some time before the investment that is needed can be fully implemented. Until then, any prevention work will remain piecemeal, and it continues to be difficult to imagine a world free from violence against women.

The widening policy agenda

Rather than standing alone, domestic violence now fits as one area of a policy response to violence against women. This was not the case throughout the 1990s and much of the 2000s. Kelly and Regan (2001) refer to the 1990s as the ‘decade of domestic violence’, by which they mean that domestic violence took precedence over other forms of violence against women, and issues such as rape and other forms of sexual abuse were sidelined. Feminists have long argued that there are overlaps between forms of violence against women and that a gender-based analysis is key to understanding and tackling such violences. This is clearly inherent within Kelly’s aforementioned continuum of abuse.

The encompassing of domestic violence within a wider framework of violence against women has been a long task, and one which Kelly (as chair of the End Violence Against Women Initiative) has been central to. In fact, after many years lobbying government to develop an integrated violence against women strategy, Kelly and Lovett in 2005, in reference with women’s groups, developed their own outline of what should be included in a national violence against women strategy. They proposed that a national strategy should include: a long-term commitment to prevention; clear goals and priorities; the co-ordination of interventions for different forms of violence and abuse; and an evaluation of the impact of these interventions on the prevalence and seriousness of abuse. The lack of an integrated strategy was also highlighted in a number of submissions to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) (see for example submissions by Sen and Kelly 2007; the Women’s National Commission 2008; and Women’s Resource Centre 2008). Subsequently, the UK was specifically questioned on their lack of such a strategy during their examination by the Committee in 2008, despite their protestations that such a strategy existed in ‘all but name’ (United Nations 2008: 9).

It was not until late 2009 that the government launched its integrated violence against women policy entitled
Together We Can End Violence Against Women and Girls
(HM Government 2009). Here, the government accepted that:

A number of initiatives over the last decade have made a real difference, but many of these have focused only on specific offences. These distinctions can create artificial barriers. For example many women suffer both domestic and sexual abuse in the same relationship. Although the Government has published a number of separate plans in recent years for dealing with different problems, so far these have not been brought together in one place.

(HM Government 2009: 4)

This recognition of the importance of looking across different forms of violence against women in designing effective responses had already been taking place on the ground in some policy documents. A good example of this can be found within the national police guidance for investigating domestic violence cases (NPIA 2008). Here is listed a range of ‘potential associated investigations’

which includes: harassment, child abuse, honour-based violence, prostitution, missing persons and vulnerable adult abuse. They also highlight that the police may be called to incidents that are ‘not overtly domestic abuse’ (NPIA 2008: 18) where they include street disturbances and public order matters such as breach of the peace, antisocial behaviour, neighbourhood disputes, nuisance calls, animal abuse, criminal damage and assaults. They advise: ‘Whatever the type of incident, it is essential that the domestic abuse element is properly identified, including risk, and the necessary processes and support services put into place’ (NPIA 2008: 18). This level of understanding and leadership constitutes an important positive shift in responding to domestic violence and is one that differs significantly from the position of the late 1980s.

Conclusions

Domestic violence is said to have moved from the margins to the centre, in which central and local government in the UK now view and respond to domestic violence in a way that would have been unthinkable in the 1970s and 1980s (Hague 2006). This increased attention has given rise to a massive expansion of research, policy and practice documents. In 1988, Kelly wrote:

If I had begun this research project in 1987 the thought of reviewing the existing literature on sexual violence would have produced mild hysteria. Since the 1970s there has been a ‘knowledge explosion’ . . .

(p. 43)

The violence against women knowledge explosion has kept on erupting, and now even reviewing one sub-area of the study of violence against women (for example child contact, perpetrator programmes, health impacts) is enough to produce moderate hysteria! This knowledge explosion is ultimately a positive step. Although it makes it difficult for researchers to be confident that they have conducted a full and thorough literature review (especially given the expansion of the Internet and the ease of access of organisational ‘grey’ literature), there is now more knowledge available than ever before. This upwards trajectory will undoubtedly continue into the future. What is needed at this juncture are several very large-scale, multi-country studies to synthesise and consolidate existing knowledge and test hypotheses on a large scale.

The recognition that no single agency can provide a full response to domestic violence, since domestic violence cuts across so many different agencies, has been important (Hague 2006). The recognition was necessary to instigate the shifts discussed above, for example the need for information sharing and acknowledgement of the ubiquitous nature of violence against women. Given these shifts, it might be concluded that the situation for domestic violence victims is better in 2010 than it was in 1988. However, this is not necessarily the case. While there have certainly been some major steps forward, for example joining up policy on different forms of violence against women, there remain some significant limitations. The main limitations are the continued lack of primary and secondary prevention work and, linked to this,

a continued lack of focus on domestic violence perpetrators. Therefore, although there are now some improved services for victim survivors of domestic violence since Kelly wrote
Surviving Sexual Violence
in 1988, it remains the case that we are still a long way away from actually ending domestic violence.

Further reading

For a general overview of domestic violence, including policy and practice responses, a good starting point is
Domestic Violence – Action for Change
, by Gill Hague and Ellen Malos (2005, third edition). In terms of offenders, Dobash
et al
.’s 2004 study of men convicted of murder is a fascinating article. To help visualise the lack of specialist services on the ground in relation to domestic violence, see Coy
et al
.’s (2009)
Map of Gaps.
For a USA perspective, but with many of the examples used also being relevant in the UK,
Coercive Control
(2009) by Evan Stark provides joined up thinking on a lot of debates on domestic violence.

Hague, G. and Malos, E. (2005)
Domestic Violence: Action for Change
(3rd edn.).

Cheltenham: New Clarion Press.

Stark, E. (2009)
Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life.
New York: OUP USA.

Notes

1. In 2002 Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman, both aged ten, were murdered by Ian Huntly in Soham, Cambridgeshire. In 2003 the Bichard Enquiry was tasked with investigating alleged failings in relation to the storage and sharing of police intelligence. The police were heavily criticised within the Bichard Report and a number of recommendations were made.
   

2. The Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Harassment and Honour Based Violence (DASH) Risk Identification, Assessment and Management Model is the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) accredited model (see www
   .dashriskchecklist.co.uk for further information)
   

References

Bridgeman, C. and Hobbs, L. (1997)
Preventing Repeat Victimisation: the police officer’s guide
. London: Home Office.

Bullock, K., Sarre, S., Tarling, R. and Wilkinson, M. (2010) T
he delivery of domestic abuse

programmes – an implementation study of the delivery of domestic abuse programmes in probation areas and Her Majesty’s Prison Service
, Ministry of Justice Research Series 15/

10. London: Ministry of Justice.

Coleman, K. and Osborne, S. (2010) ‘Homicide’, in K. Smith and J. Flatley (eds)
Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence 2008/09 – Supplementary volume 2 to crime in England and Wales 2008/09
. London: Home Office.

Cook, D., Burton, M., Robinson, A. and Vallely, C. (2004)
Evaluation of Specialist Domestic Violence Courts/Fast Track Systems
. London: Crown Prosecution Service and Department for Constitutional Affairs.

Coy, M., Kelly, L. and Foord, J. (2009)
Map of Gaps 2 – The Postcode Lottery of Violence

Against Women Support Services in Britain
. London: End Violence Against Women Coalition and Equality and Human Rights Commission.

Coy, M. and Kelly, L. (2010) I
slands in the Stream: An evaluation of four Independent Domestic Violence Advocacy Schemes in London
. London: Trust for London/Henry Smith Charity.

Crown Prosecution Service Management Information Branch (2007) Domestic violence monitoring snapshot, available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/ domestic/snapshot_2006_12.html

Department of Health (2000)
Domestic Violence – A resource manual for health care professionals
. London: Department of Health.

Department of Health (2005)
Responding to Domestic Abuse: A Handbook for health professionals
. London: Department of Health.

Dobash, R.E., Dobash, R.P., Cavanagh, K. and Lewis, R. (2000)
Changing Violent Men
.

London: Sage Publications.

Dobash, R.E., Dobash, R.P., Cavanagh, K. and Lewis, R. (2004) ‘Not an ordinary killer – Just an ordinary guy: When men murder an intimate woman partner’,
Violence Against Women
, 1(6): 577–605.