Domestic violence: whose problem is it?
In a previous post, which suggested a few measures government could take to reduce domestic violence (or at the very least improve care for its victims), I mentioned the necessity for greater provision of refuges where women could seek shelter from their tormentors.
Conveniently, this survey by the Equality and Human Rights Commission details the extent of the current provision – or lack thereof – and produces some quite troubling figures.
The commission found that one in four local authorities in Britain has no specialised support services whatsoever, that a quarter of the rape crisis centres which do exist fear closure or cuts in funding, and that ethnic minority women – whose circumstances can be slightly different due to the intersection of culture, relgion and misogyny – are particularly poorly-served by current provision. In short, we’re just not doing enough to care for victims.
To put this right, the EHRC has decided to write to those local authorities which don’t provide a specialised service and warned that the commission may take them to court for breaching the 2006 Equality Act, which requires them to promote gender equality. They argue that “because violence against women is such a major cause of women’s inequality, public bodies should ensure adequate support for women in such circumstances.”
Even if the commission did take these councils to court, it’s not a foregone conclusion that they’d prove why their interpretation of the act is correct, and I’ll leave that question in the hands of those more well-versed in British law. But just assuming the commission isn’t able to force councils into action through the courts, is there a case for legally mandating councils to provide shelter for victims of domestic violence?
It’s certainly possible to construct a compelling case for why they should. A quarter of all women and 15% of men will be victims of abuse at some stage of their lives, two women a week are killed by current or former partners and an incident of abuse is reported to the police every minute. On top of the misery & pain it causes, domestic violence also costs public services an estimated £3bn a year, and costs the wider economy an estimated (and eye-watering) £23bn. If shelters/crisis centres could contribute just a little to reducing the costs to the state and the wider economy, they would prove not just morally essential, but fiscally sensible.
Equally, though, one could argue that the burden for providing such centres shouldn’t be placed on already-overstretched local authorities. Whilst it’s unacceptable for victims to have to make 120-mile round trips just to receive counselling, it’s also true that the demand for these services is going to be slightly less pronounced in areas like Teesdale (population 25,000) than in Kirklees (population 400,000). When you have councils which vary dramatically in size, resources and demographics, it’s slightly absurd to expect them to all provide the same level of support for victims, irrespective of whether that effectively meets demand.
All of which might suggest that the buck should stop with central government. I think it’s reasonable to conclude that through smart planning, a government which was committed to increasing the number of crisis centres could target them effectively to where they’re most needed. Whilst this might mean that there isn’t a shelter in each local authority, it could at least ensure they’d have less far to travel, and that the centres themselves don’t live under constant threat of financial failure.
Either way, we’re failing to support the victims of domestic violence as well as we could. In 1984, there were 64 rape crisis centres. In 2008, there were just 36, and those that remain are fighting for their survival. If this government – apparently so concerned with helping the victims of crime that they’ve appointed their own chief victim – means what it says, it could redouble its commitment to reducing domestic violence by ensuring that all its victims have a safe place to stay, recover and rebuild their lives.
---------------------------
Tweet |
Neil Robertson is a regular contributor to Liberal Conspiracy. He was born in Barnsley in 1984, and through a mixture of good luck and circumstance he ended up passing through Cambridge, Sheffield and Coventry before finally landing in London, where he works in education. His writing often focuses on social policy or international relations, because that's what all the Cool Kids write about. He mostly blogs at: The Bleeding Heart Show.
· Other posts by Neil Robertson
Filed under
Blog ,Crime ,Feminism ,Sex equality
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Reader comments
In 1984, there were 64 rape crisis centres. In 2008, there were just 36, and those that remain are fighting for their survival.
While lap-dancing clubs continue to spring up all over the place. I think we need to grow some priorities.
An excellent example of how pathetically low domestic abuse and rape falls on our political master’s list of prorities, let’s examine the case of Boris Johnson’s administration in London.
During the election, Boris promised that he would fund the existing London rape crisis centre, and with a pledge to build four more, to the tune of £744,000 a year. This is what the Mayor of London should be doing; London wide solutions to the most serious issues facing the capital.
Post election and women’s issues are being purged; Capital Woman has been shut down, much to the ire of Diane Abbot, and when the Metropolitan Police reveal that while major crime has fallen across the board (knife crime, gun crime, theft) except in the case of rape, which has risen sharply over the past months (up +24.7% on 2007, which translates as an additional 469 cases over 2008), Boris covered the issue up by lauding the Met for their hard work and effort with no mention of the disturbing statistics.
Then came the extraction by Jenny Jones that Boris was not going to fund the rape crisis centres for that sum. Instead, it was going to be cut by £500,000 to £233,000 a year. The additional centres are now, presumably, gone with the wind and leaves the women who suffer in those 2,366 reported cases of rape each year in London with minimalist support.
Brilliant and well-reasoned piece Neil, well done.
“While lap-dancing clubs continue to spring up all over the place. I think we need to grow some priorities.”
There’s more supermarkets too, those fuckers.
Thanks Laurie
[2] This is why I don’t believe official statistics. Is it credible that there were 5 rapes in London last year for every 4 the year before? Human behaviour doesn’t change that quickly.
Still, I look forward to asking Karen Buck – when she comes after my vote – if she’s proud of having supported a government which has abandoned victims of sexual violence whilst promoting lap-dancing clubs…
“While lap-dancing clubs continue to spring up all over the place. I think we need to grow some priorities.”
Those will be your priorities then Paul.
The usual response to anything the PC brigade don’t approve of is to implement a ban and I see the ground has already begun to be prepared.
http://www.object.org.uk/index.html
An excellent, thoughtful and well reasoned article followed by hysterical clap-trap about lap-dancing.
Oh, things were so much better under Queen Victoria.
“An excellent, thoughtful and well reasoned article followed by hysterical clap-trap about lap-dancing.”
Gosh, you think that’s hysterical keep taking the medication. You know it’s just those “wandering testicles” of yours…or was it womb? Whatever.
And supermarkets don’t create objectification of women which is linked in with oh I don’t know – inequality and domestic violence.
Well my local Asda doesn’t anyways.
Check the magazine racks.
This is why I don’t believe official statistics. Is it credible that there were 5 rapes in London last year for every 4 the year before? Human behaviour doesn’t change that quickly.
Put it this way, what credible reason do the police have for artificially inflating reported rape?
[12] Just because more rapes are reported (a good thing) doesn’t mean that any more took place.
It does suggest that the problem is deep and that it needs serious attention, even if the figures are not an actual increase in the numbers of rape. (Just an aside, the raw number increase is an additional 469 rapes in London across the entire year) There is something odd with the Met’s crime mapping though, which (the best version of) can be found here
There is, of course, the question of why more cases are being reported, given there has been no major push.
Regardless, rape does remain a serious problem in the United Kingdom and, in my view (and you are welcome to disagree), an under-represented issue and one which needs tackling.
[14] “The question of why more rapes are being reported…” – I’m sure the criminologists are writing up their grant applications even now…
There is, of course, the question of why more cases are being reported, given there has been no major push.
According to the BCS, 54% of rapes are committed by current or ex partners. Since in the previous year in London, the number of Independent DV Advocates has risen, this may well explain the increase in reported rapes.
Reactions: Twitter, blogs
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or RSS feed. You can also get them by email and through our Facebook group.
» Five reasons why Germany is also to blame for the Euro-crisis
» Ten ways to save money on FOI without changing the Act
» Is Boris actually serious about winning the London election?
» Earth to banks: Where will you go if we tax you?
» What Abu Qatada and Sun journalists have in common
» How companies like Tesco are paying workers virtually nothing
» What yesterday’s Welfare Bill defeat means for the government and activists
» Portugal’s example shows why the IMF will ruin Greece
» Why is Cameron secretive about his Nursing & Care Quality Forum?
» Osborne rumbled by the very credit ratings agencies he relied on
» Secularism: the best defence for religious freedom
84 Comments 146 Comments 19 Comments 9 Comments 15 Comments 41 Comments 19 Comments 30 Comments 82 Comments 63 Comments |
LATEST COMMENTS » Cylux posted on Sun slammed for "hunting" pregnant man » xoxoPortugal posted on Portugal's example shows why the IMF will ruin Greece » Robin Millar posted on Ten ways to save money on FOI without changing the Act » Sarah AB posted on Did Queen say Xtianity 'under-appreciated'? » steveb posted on Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government » TruthBeckons posted on Portugal's example shows why the IMF will ruin Greece » Ermintrude posted on Ten ways to save money on FOI without changing the Act » pjt posted on Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government » dizzy posted on Remember this, Trevor Kavanagh? » Jimmy posted on Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government » Jimmy posted on Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government » Jadwiga L Reinke posted on Portugal's example shows why the IMF will ruin Greece » lucy posted on Secularism: the best defence for religious freedom » So Much For Subtlety posted on Another retailer abandons 'workfare' » Liberty Factor posted on Laziness levels in Britain getting lazier, wails government |