domestic - STOP Domestic Violence Conference

Conference

2015

www.stopdomesticviolence.com.au

The Australian

STOP

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Connecting the Dots… Canberra Rex Hotel ACT 7 - 8 December 2015

STOP Domestic Violence Conference 2015

Canberra Conference Proceedings Non-Peer Reviewed

Publisher Details Publisher Contact Address Telephone Fax Email:

Australian and New Zealand Mental Health Association Isabel Venables PO Box 29, Nerang QLD 4211 +61 7 5502 2068 +61 7 5527 3298 [email protected]

Table of Contents

Non Peer Review Papers

Brogden, L

Domestic Violence, childhood trauma and mental illness in our communities

4

Cooke, T

Acting to Interrupt Violence and Abuse

15

Counsel, C

Creating a Taskforce: The Victorian Experience

28

Crowe, P & Hart, J

Domestic Violence and Disabilities – A Discussion Paper

38

Ghafournia, N

Domestic Violence among Immigrant and Refugee Women in Australia: The Review of the Literature

53

Knowles, J et al

Engaging Families – Crossing the Service Divide

73

Magistrates Court of Victoria – Family Violence Taskforce

Family Violence Taskforce – Recommendations to the Royal Commission into Family Violence

90

Munro, A & Rowe, M

Domestic Servitude and Slavery Repositioning the severity of pwer and control in intimate relationships

92

Sharman, Z, & Horne, K

But he’s a good father … The Intersection of domestic violence, complex trauma and child protection

108

Wood, J & Edwards, K

Safe and Well: Responding Across Generations to Families Impacted by Domestic and their Mental Health Needs

121

Yavu-KamaHarathunian, C

Healing Circle Work – Empowering Aboriginal Woman to Break their Cycle of Abuse from Domestic Violence

148

Domestic violence, childhood trauma and mental illness in our communities

Mrs Lucy Brogden Commissioner National Mental Health Commission

Paper Presented at the The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7 - 8 December 2015

Key messages

 



The impact of childhood trauma (abuse) on the mental health system is considerable – a history of childhood trauma is the most significant predictor that a person will end up in the mental health system. There are high levels of unmet need for people who have experienced childhood trauma, including no national framework or approach to delivering mental health services for this significant, at risk group. Recommendations: an integrated, national framework based on prevention, early intervention and treatment; and better research capacity and impact that targets community need.

Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge the Ngunnawal people who are the traditional custodians of this land on which we are meeting and pay my respect to the Elders of the Ngunnawal Nation both past and present. I extend this respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in attendance today. I also would like to pay my respects to people with lived experience of family violence and or mental health issues, their families and other supporters. Today I will provide a brief overview of the NMHC and our work and then address the topic at hand starting at the global level and then moving to the national context. In all aspects of mental health I believe it is important to identify and understand the issues recognising the progress to date and focusing on the opportunities and hope for the future. National Mental Health Commission We are Australia’s first National Mental Health Commission, set up in 2012 to provide independent reports and advice to the community and government on what’s working and what’s not. From day one the Commission’s view has been that we must think differently about mental health, to see mental wellbeing as important to the individual, their family, support people and community. This sees services not as separate elements to be used when needed. It sees that the interconnections between services, families, employers and co-workers, health providers, teachers and friends, together improve mental wellbeing and a sense of a life well lived. We work across all areas that promote mental health and prevent mental

illness and suicide–not just government and not just health, but education, housing, employment, human services and social support. By leading, advising, collaborating and reporting we will help transform systems and promote change, so that all Australians achieve the best possible mental health and wellbeing. This time last year we submitted to the Minister for Health, our review of the Commonwealth’s expenditure on mental health – we based on this on the Contributing Life Framework – a whole-of-person, whole-of-life approach to mental health and wellbeing. It recognises that if we enable people to live contributing lives – to have relationships, stable housing, and to maximise participation in education, employment and the community more broadly – we will help build economically and socially thriving communities, and a more productive Australia. Sadly, a contributing life can seem unattainable for people living with mental illness. Our review found that Australia’s mental health programmes and services are not maximising the best outcomes from either a social or an economic perspective. Last week the Commonwealth responded to the review. We welcome the Federal Government's announcement on mental health reform as "a major step forward in enabling people to lead more contributing lives and for Australia to grow thriving communities." The Government's response represents a ringing endorsement of the strategic directions we outlined. The reform package recognises that change is needed to create a high-performing system that supports the wellbeing of the Australian population and through that to build the mental wealth of Australia. With support across the lifespan The review included recommendations relevant to today’s topic Promote the wellbeing and mental health of the Australian community, beginning with a healthy start to life Rec 15. Build resilience and targeted interventions for families with children, both collectively and with those with emerging behavioural issues, distress and mental health difficulties. Rec 16. Identify, develop and implement a national framework to support families and communities in the prevention of trauma from maltreatment during infancy and early childhood, and to support those impacted by childhood trauma. Rec 17. Use evidence, evaluation and incentives to reduce stigma, build capacity and respond to the diversity of needs of different population groups.



Recommendation 20: Improve research capacity and impact by doubling the share of existing and future allocations of research funding for mental health over the next five years, with a priority on supporting strategic research that responds to policy directions and community needs.

Implicit in this is developing an evidence base relating to: - childhood trauma and linkages to domestic violence and mental illness - an analysis of the (social and economic) costs - prevention and support for those living with the impact of childhood trauma Let’s look at why this issue is so important. Context - Global Social determinants of health: mental health disorders are shaped by social, economic and physical environment. Taking actions to improve conditions can reduce risks of disorders The NMHC endorses the life course approach – we need to preserve our mental capital over the course of life. This approach is not new. It does highlight where the vulnerabilities are and the opportunities. - Mental capital: both cognitive and emotional resources (including cognitive ability, flexibility and efficiency at learning; emotional intelligence, social skills and resilience in the face of stress) – it captures, essentially, how well an individual is able to contribute to society and to experience a high quality of life - Mental wellbeing: a dynamic state encompassing an individual’s ability to develop their potential, work productively and creatively, build strong and positive relationships with others and contribute to their community

Pre-natal: There are pre-natal – risk factors for the future mental wellbeing of a person: these include intimate partner violence involving the mother. Women traumatised as children may carry this vulnerability into their adult lives Both of which emphasize the importance of maternal education Early years DV negatively impacts parenting style. Lower psychological functioning related to poorer parenting –even if the mother is maintaining good parenting labile moods can be an issue and cause problems with attachment. Children worry about their mother Children’s exposure to neglect, direct physical and psychological abuse and growing up in families with DV was particularly damaging.

Being abused is more detrimental than witnessing abuse.

Australian Context Contributing Lives, Thriving Communities

The population affected by mental health issues is huge, with as many as 20 per cent of the adult population in any given year. In fact, one in two Australian adults will experience mental ill-health at some point – this is 7.3 million Australians (aged 16-85). And the issue is greatest for our young Australians, those who should be participating in the education system and embarking on their working lives. One in four 18-24 year olds experience a mental ill-health problem every year. To reinforce the point about the size of the problem, I note that mental illnesses are the leading causes of the non-fatal disease burden in Australia – they account for about a quarter of the total burden. Mental illness also accounts for about 13 per cent of our total burden of disease (including deaths). Approximately 2 out of 3 inpatients and outpatients in the mental health system have a childhood history child abuse (sexual and/or physical). Coupled with emotional abuse and neglect, this percentage increases. “The most significant predictor that an individual will end up in the mental health system is a history of childhood trauma, and the more severe and prolonged the trauma, the more severe are the physiological and physical health consequences” (Professor Warwick Middleton, Belmont Private Hospital, p. 104) In one long-term study, as many as 80% of young adults who had been abused met the diagnostic criteria for at least one psychiatric disorder. Data from the ABS Personal Safety Survey (2012) found:  61% percent of men and women who reported experiencing violence by a current partner had children in their care at some time during the relationship and approx. 48% of that figure said children had witnessed the violence ATSI

For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people the social and emotional wellbeing concept is broader than just the notion of “mental illness” and recognises the importance of connection to the land, culture, spirituality, ancestry, family and community, and how these affect the individual.

For ATSI people social and wellbeing problems cover a broad spectrum that can result from unresolved grief or loss, trauma and abuse. Service and system responses to these poor outcomes are inadequate, and have generally not been designed with the particular needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in mind. There are areas of crisis in indigenous mental health, social and emotional wellbeing and suicide. In 2011–12, 30 per cent of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander adults had high or very high levels of psychological distress. That’s almost three times the rate for other Australians. Indigenous children were significantly more likely to have witnessed physical violence against their mother or stepmother compared with all child respondents – 42% compared with 23% (Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care study cited in Flood & Fergus 2008) In 2012–13, the annual suicide rate for Australians generally was 10.3 deaths for every 100,000 population – for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples it was 21.4 deaths per 100,000. Children’s exposure to domestic violence in Australia

Children's 'witnessing' or exposure to domestic violence has been increasingly recognised as a form of child abuse, both in Australia and internationally. Although it is difficult to accurately assess the scope of the problem, research has demonstrated that a substantial amount of domestic violence is witnessed by children. Witnessing domestic violence can involve a range of incidents, ranging from the child 'only' hearing the violence, to the child being forced to participate in the violence or being used as part of a violent incident. Psychological and behavioural impacts

Most research has focused on the psychological and/or behavioural impacts experienced by children exposed to domestic violence. The research literature documents the following psychological and/or behavioural impacts:  depression;  anxiety;  trauma symptoms;  increased aggression;  antisocial behaviour;

         

lower social competence; temperament problems; low self-esteem; the presence of pervasive fear; mood problems; loneliness; school difficulties; peer conflict; impaired cognitive functioning; and/or increased likelihood of substance abuse.

There is also evidence to suggest eating disorders, teenage pregnancy, leaving school early, suicide attempts, delinquency and violence as potential consequences of child abuse and/or childhood exposure to domestic violence. Further, there is a body of research – which has mixed support - Child Maltreatment and Psychosis, Read et al. (2008) that draws on the large body of research demonstrating that child abuse (both physical and sexual) and neglect are significant causal factors for psychosis. The evidence also suggests that while childhood abuse and neglect do result in adverse subsequent mental health outcomes – these are not independent of the broader socio-economic contexts. “Failure to acknowledge the reality of trauma and abuse in the lives of children, and the long-term impact this can have in the lives of adults, is one of the most significant clinical and moral deficits of current mental health approaches. Trauma in the early years shapes brain and psychological development, sets up vulnerability to stress and to the range of mental health problems.” (Professor Louise Newman, Centre for Developmental Psychiatry and Psychology, Monash University, p. 105). The way early experiences affect later mental health varies in light of events that occur across the life course:  the outcome is not inevitable  they unfold within the context of a lifetime of stressors  effects do differ for men and women Therefore it is important to be cognisant of the structural and temporal contexts of life experiences.

Early intervention has been identified as crucial to “disrupting the intergenerational transmission of domestic violence” Recommendations and future directions

Better support is needed for children and their families. The current public health model for children and maltreatment doesn’t address the increased risk of poor health and wellbeing in childhood or later in life. The challenge (particularly within the given system), is how do we create personal mental health and wellbeing, rather than just remedy sickness through treatment? Better integrated and innovative approaches are needed. A cross-sectoral approach, that includes coordination of care across the health, family and community services and education portfolios, and builds on the foundation of a person-centred approach to the provision of services and programmes. As stated in the opening, the Commission in our Strategic Direction 5 recommended prevention, early intervention and treatment, as a key measure leading to better individual outcomes and enabling people to live a contributing life. This is particularly important given about half of all adults with mental illness begin to develop that illness before the age of 15. We found that greater support for families and communities is needed because a healthy start to life is crucial. Therefore, building positive parenting approaches, resilience and targeted interventions for families before a child is born and throughout the early years is important. Early intervention measures are supported the 2015 Senate Committee Report into Domestic Violence which emphasise early intervention, particularly in relation to perpetrator interventions. Government Response

The Commonwealth acknowledges the importance of preventing trauma from maltreatment in childhood and in supporting those who have been impacted by it. Accordingly there are a number of frameworks and strategies which seek to address this including: the Indigenous Advancement Strategy; the National Framework for the Protection of Australia’s Children 2009-2020; and the National Child and Youth Health Strategic Framework.

The Third Action Plan of the National Framework for Protecting Australia’s Children in particular focuses on early intervention and improved provision of services such as education, child care and health, to actively respond to the needs of vulnerable families and children. The Framework supports the focus of improving mental health supports for children and young people. Children at heightened risk of mental illness as a result of violence, crime or abuse need to be supported through access to health and broader social support services as well as skilled clinical and non-clinical professionals who are able to identify problems early and intervene appropriately. Work committed under recommendation 15 will facilitate action to support the above Frameworks. In relation to Strategic Direction 5. Promote the wellbeing and mental health of the Australian community, beginning with a healthy start to life 15. Build resilience and targeted interventions for families with children, both collectively and with those with emerging behavioural issues, distress and mental health difficulties. The Commonwealth is committed to ongoing and refocussed efforts in child and youth mental health, in recognition of the long term health, social and economic benefits of such an approach. A joined up approach is needed to address child and youth mental health, with improved integration and linkages within and across sectors at a regional level. Refocusing action within an integrated system and cross promoting services will improve early intervention efforts, which can have potential long term benefits for individuals, families and communities. It will also enable better targeting of support for young people with severe mental illness. The Commonwealth will work across portfolios to join up child and youth mental health programmes to establish a new networked system of reducing the impact of mental illness on children, commencing with the early years and going through to adolescence. This will include: • a single integrated end-to-end school based mental health programme; • easy access to telephone and web-based services through the new digital mental health gateway; and • a national workforce initiative assisting clinical and non-clinical professionals and services who work with children to identify, support and refer children at risk and to promote resilience building. Other work on the agenda related to this topic:

 Domestic and family violence and parenting: Mixed method insights into impact and support needs Dr Rae Kaspiew, Senior Research Fellow, Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS).  The National Children’s Commissioner for 2015 will focus on how children (aged 0-17 years) are affected by family and domestic violence. Conclusion

Two quotes to finish on – one nearly 1500 years old from the Emperor Justinian – Salus populi suprema lex esto – the wellbeing of the people is to be the highest law. And my motivation to keep working in this field – the persistent and successful William Wilberforce: “You may choose to look the other way but you can never say again that you did not know.”

Acting to Interrupt Violence and Abuse

Ms Tori Cooke Family and Domestic Violence Consultant Anglicare WA

Paper Presented at the The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7 - 8 December 2015

“How can we ask the question about whether men can change when we are still valiantly trying to create the social conditions where change is possible, validated and sustained by informal and formal social conditions?” “Men who are violent or abusive often project an attitude of not needing or not wanting to change. Deep down, most of them know that something is not right. They start new relationships with high expectations only to see their abusive behaviour tear the relationships apart.” (Michael Paymar 2000:1) This work can be referenced as: Cooke, V, (2014). Acting to Interrupt Violence and Abuse (AIVA), AnglicareWA, Perth Western Australia. Contact: AnglicareWA Family and Domestic Violence Consultant, Tori Cooke, 08 9263 2156 [email protected]

Background Evidence continues to show that the Western Australian service system responding to family and domestic violence struggles with inconsistent and fragmented responses to male perpetration of family violence (Law Reform Commission, 2013). Strategies that address perpetrator accountability are yet to be seen across the service system in flexible ways that encourage and invite behaviour change (Law Reform Commission, 2013). Services that are engaging abusive men are those who have worked in men’s behaviour change programs (voluntary and mandated) and judicial responses at the high risk end of the continuum. This is occurring at the pointy end based on risk assessments designed to calculate the likelihood of serious or lethal harm to women and children. “…there is still a significant lack of community education, awareness raising and intervention programs specifically targeted at men” (DVIRC, 63: 2011) The Western Australian Prevention Strategy to 2022 (‘the Prevention Strategy’) highlights that service system responses tend to operate in a fragmented and inconsistent way resulting in “isolated and stand-alone strategies to address this problem.” (CPFS, 2010). The Prevention Strategy proposes that having “an enduring focus on the outcomes of prevention and early intervention, victim safety and perpetrator accountability will remain for the life of the Prevention Strategy, with targeted actions supporting the achievement of these primary outcomes.” (CPFS, 2010). Here then is an invitation to contribute to innovative reform, particularly as Western Australia moves to finalise the current first phase of the strategy including “addressing and identifying new issues” (CPFS, 2010). Community organisations have a fundamental role to play in proposing and driving solutions given their unique professional perspectives, community relationships and development of innovative, client focused service provision. Formal system responses to family and domestic violence: The service system currently (and appropriately) provides a strong crisis oriented response in the context of women fleeing violence and abuse as has been the norm since the early 1970s. Current policy work in WA has focused on naming perpetrator accountability and early intervention as key areas of work. Early intervention is framed as prevention strategies (for example, web portals and brochures targeting young people about respectful relationships) and perpetrator accountability the responsibility of statutory organisations. However, there is an intellectual and practice gap between prevention, early intervention and postvention service delivery (including legal and statutory responses). This significant gap provides us with opportunities to rethink this old but enduring problem.

We need to be thinking about the problem in a more innovative way based on the practice expertise of those who have worked with men using abuse for many years and those who have worked in the prevention space. Social conditions that allow violence and abuse to flourish The social conditions of silencing and sanctioning violence and abuse against women and children, legal systems that struggle to understand the complexity of the issues and an acutely under resourced crisis response system ensure perpetrators continue to weave a confusing narrative of denial and victim blaming. In this unfortunate background, victims are forced to negotiate complex systems, post separation abuse as well as a social landscape of scrutiny and judgement. For some families, this becomes life, with an ebbing and flowing of resistance and increased escalation culminating at times with overwhelming paralysis. Victims (including children and young people) become skilled at self-monitoring, building safety strategies that decrease escalation until this no longer becomes viable or the cost to well being becomes too great. Perpetrators become skilled at negotiating systems (formal and informal) in detracting from responsibility and holding the victim responsible for his violence (Jenkins, 1990). There is nothing new in our understandings about this and work undertaken in national perception surveys indicates that there continues to be ongoing challenges in terms of violence supportive attitudes, victim blaming and denial of the deliberate nature of the perpetrator patterns of behaviour. Herein is an opportunity to have further discussions about some different ways of thinking.

Early Interruption What has become obvious is that we are crying out for men to become accountable and responsible for change in the context of a social environment that has limited pathways that promote change. This presents an opportunity for creating ‘pathways of interruption’. Definitions of the work ‘interruption’ include:   

an occasion when someone or something stops something from happening for a short period a time during which something interrupts a process or activity something that someone says or does that stops someone else when they are speaking or concentrating on something

The concept of ‘early interruption’ invites everyone, family, friends, community, service system, policy and government to develop local strategies that consistently send clear messages to perpetrators at as many points of reference as possible. The messages can be unique to each community or family but the expectation of non violence and stopping violence is central to the message. Early interruption is about listening to the ways in which women, children and young people resist violence and abuse and are actively ignored in their interactions with others during attempts to stop the violence or seek assistance. It includes challenging the social landscape of violence supportive attitudes and having a strong expectation of accountability by the person using violence and abuse. But crucially, early interruption is about lighting up the social landscape with opportunities for men to be invited into stopping their violence. If we are to stop violence, we must interrupt the attitudes, values and actions that support it. Early interruption is an active response focused within the family, community and service system context. Acting to Interrupt Violence and Abuse (AIVA) The AIVA concept/framework assumes that offering abusive men multiple interruptions using a flexible set of strategies will provide multiple options for change. Men choosing not to change will find over time, they experience a loss of status in family and community relationships and connections, as well as having to manage a loss of status in interactions with legal interventions. Families need to become equipped with capacity and competency to have the difficult discussions with young people in their family using violence or holding attitudes that support violence. The service system has contact with perpetrators via multiple referral points (Family, Community agencies, Children Protection, Corrective Services, Police, Courts, Men’s helpline and other services) with information and resources provided that promote (and expect) perpetrator accountability. More pragmatically, this includes the expectation that men can make decisions to act in safe ways immediately and, with support, to develop both short and long term safety planning strategies, The fundamental challenge in the current budget constraints is how innovative program design can interrupt men’s violence and abuse at the opportune moments in relationships, separation, separation and post separation across a continuum of family, community and service system. The concept of ‘interruption’ is critical and assumes capacity and competency for the men to change and for the service system to support them to do so. Can we create contexts that provide constant invitations for men using abuse to begin a journey of change leading to safer outcomes for women, children and communities? How do we begin to inform women’s decision making with information that fits with their lived

experience? And importantly, how do we engage and empower families and communities in this process? Of paramount consideration is the safety and wellbeing of women and children in the context of an integrated response that continually offers opportunities to abusive men, inviting them to participate in change processes by engaging with flexible, responsive, and accountable strategies at every entry point in the service system. This is not an invitation that is currently consistently undertaken and resourced and is an ongoing gap in our service system. At the same time, information and support is given to women, children and young people about coercive control, women’s resistance to that control and the realities of men’s behaviour change. At the heart of AIVA is demystifying men’s behaviour and attitudinal change to both men and women in order to invite abusive men to change and to better inform and discuss with women about what that actually looks like in their lived experiences. Acting to Interrupt Violence and Abuse (AIVA) is underpinned by the following understandings and most particularly: 



 

That, women, children and young people resist and manage abuse and violence by assessing and monitoring the perpetrators behaviour and developing strategies that deescalate violence and abuse. They also, provide opportunities to abusers that communicate their non acceptance of abuse and violence. These are usually ignored and are invisible to the service system (Wade, 2008) That women and children would prefer to live and be in a non abusive environment with their partners and fathers where they feel safe, loved and valued for who they are. That, abusive men are capable and competent at choosing non abuse (NTV, 2006). Most abusive men would value early interventions with flexible opportunities to learn more about increasing non abusive ways of living and being.

Leaving, returning and staying cycle In thinking through the considerations of the victim experience of decision making (leaving, staying and returning) we are given a unique opportunity to shift the lens and engage with this process as a social context. The starting point needs to be what victims say about their experience of their decisions about the relationship (leaving, returning and staying) rather than an imposition of a set of previously determined outcomes (her leaving). We need to examine our practices around this cycle and make some robust changes to the service system by incorporating this cycle as a normal response to violence and abuse, the system’s responses to the abuse and families/communities responses to assisting to reduce harm associated with the violence and abuse by engaging directly with perpetrators.

Women would prefer to live in an environment of healthy, respectful relationships and often do. Research indicates that women’s decision making about their partner’s violence is complex and includes:    



Consideration of the investment in the relationship (time, emotional, economic investment, children, familial and community relationships) Follingstad, 2001), Decision making includes a cost benefit analysis giving weight to the economic, social and emotional costs of leaving an abusive situation (Gordon, et al., 2004). The lived experience of fear, decision paralysis, anxiety and concern for the wellbeing of the perpetrator. Assumption of control over the behaviour, Clements and Sawhney (2000) position that abused women show high expectations for control over future abuse, suggesting that abused women may return because of a belief or experience of being able to influence a reduction of abuse in the abuser. To a certain extent, placatory, conciliatory and compliant behaviours that successfully de-escalate the perpetrator are evidence that these beliefs may be well founded. The hope of change or optimistic bias – promises and actual attempts to change may indicate to the woman that there is hope that her partner and father of her children may well become a positive and loving role model that she occasionally experiences.

Women returning to the relationship then have to contend with poor and adverse professional understandings of the leaving, returning, staying cycle and can be penalised, judged, shamed and subsequently isolated from formal and informal supports. This can also be reflected in informal ways by family and friends – thus creating further isolation. Perpetrators deliberately use these opportunities to continue their abuse often validated by poor or negative social responses. The average return rate of women after leaving an abusive man is between 5 and 9 times (Strube, 1988)i. This is an issue that is under addressed and misunderstood as the service system is designed to support women leaving abuse rather than supporting women’s decisions to return and stay in their relationships. Evan Stark (2007) refers to the tendency for governments to gravitate to designing broader service delivery on the basis of a “calculus of harm” resulting in services addressing only the most at risk in order to prevent the worst outcomes. This is the classic ambulance at the bottom of the cliff approach. Early Interruption Strategies - Perpetrators Early interruption strategies aim to work alongside, prior to and post crisis responses, informed and eventually evaluated by victim services and women’s focus groups using community approaches to inviting men into the following opportunities: 

Asking men who no longer use violence to talk about how they achieved this?

    

Seamless access to voluntary or mandatory men’s family and domestic violence behaviour change programs Access to a range of intervention options that are individually designed and tailored for those struggling to gain access (eg. FIFO workers, shift work employment etc) Safety planning for perpetrators (men designing their own safety plan and strategies) Strategies for early interventions that increase the likelihood of compliance to legal orders and conditions Community forums and prevention campaigns

These opportunities are not currently offered in a consistent and seamless way because the service system responds reactively to a particular set of circumstances (high risk) and continues to have a strong focus of attention on supporting the victim leaving the relationship as the best way to stop violence. We need to stop viewing this as the only viable response to stopping violence and abuse. Early Interruption – Women, children and young people The cycle of leaving, staying and returning that is a normal aspect of decision making for women provide an opportunity that is more process oriented with consideration of the lived reality of women returning to the relationship multiple times. By creating spaces that seek to inform victims of perpetrator behaviours, beliefs and attitudes, victims have the opportunity to become more informed about real change. Critical to the process is to assess the social responses to the victim, children and young people experiencing violence and abuse. We need to ascertain how her informal networks are (or are not) supportive and how the formal service system is (or is not) providing appropriate support and information. One possible AIVA strategy can include working with women experiencing violence and abuse having a strong focus on whether men change. Delivered by women’s services, supported by professionals working with perpetrators, women are provided with strategic information: 



Identifying each woman’s experience of her partner’s pattern of violence and abuse. The underpinning interventions used are drawn from Biderman’s Chart of Coercion, the cycle of violence and relevant power and control wheels. Information and discussion of the evidence, process and reality of men’s behaviour change. Interventions are drawn from the work of Wade (1997), Bancroft (2002), Jenkins (1993), No To Violence (2006) and Bancroft & Silverman (2002).

Informing women about men’s behaviour change and providing information about what opportunities are offered to their partner in the system provides women with an additional resource. Evidence based information details the behaviours, attitudes and beliefs that support change and provides a counter to the denial, minimisation and distortion mechanisms of the perpetrator. Currently, it is often the perpetrator who provides misinformation or

distorted information about service provision and professionals and his own view of his change process. By assisting the woman to identify the moment by moment experience of control by examining the unique pattern of her partners controlling behaviours, she becomes better informed and further equipped in her decision making and responses. The core assumption is that she is capable of making decisions about the relationship (and has done so for some time) and the purpose of AIVA is to provide the relevant information and support at each point of the leaving, returning and staying cycle. Women are informed and educated by others instead of by the perpetrator. To be informed about these patterns (whilst behaviours are common – the patterns of abuse are often unique and individual to the family’s experience) fundamentally assists victims to become aware of and to begin noticing and tracking the patterns as well as the ways in which they successfully manage and resist the abuse thus beginning the journey of disconnection from the perpetrators constant perspectives and distortions about his behaviour. This strategy directly addresses and counters the confusion and distortion about the abuse that impacts on decision making. Evaluation Outcomes need to primarily assess reduction of harm to women, children and young people by evaluating women’s experiences of men post early interruption interventions and reviewing police and court data. Undertaking localised perception surveys can assess attitudinal change in the broader community. Key determinants of harm reduction include:      

Increase in men engaging with men’s behaviour change programs and workshops across agencies, Increase in men using the Men’s DV Helpline as a core aspect of safety planning, Increase in men accessing drug and alcohol services, Reduced criminal offending in family and domestic violence, Reduced psychological abuse and; Ending violence and abuse.

Understanding coercive control and intimate partner violence The choice to use violence and abuse in a systematic and patterned way defines psychological abuse. It is a fundamental attack on an individual’s ability to feel emotionally, physically and psychically safe in their decision making, opinion seeking and opinion making, negotiation, collaboration as well as an equal sense of safe competency in daily functioning. Importantly, the effects of this patterned behaviour on the victim also provide evidence of the existence of psychological abuse. The victim will experience psychological abuse as a “persistent pressure” at times alleviated by apparent periods of reduced hyper vigilance (Cooke, 2014).

Whilst the range of behaviours may vary both in behaviours and risk, there is also significant differentiation between perpetrators (Bancroft, 2004); however behaviours associated with the following can clearly indicate (but by no means exclusive) factors attributable to the presence of psychological harm:     

isolation from relational, vocational, recreational and educational spheres of human social interaction the presence of monitoring and surveillance of the victims movements intimidation and threats threats to life reality distortion and monopolization of perception

In order for an individual to feel a strong sense of emotional wellbeing, there needs to be the presence of self-efficacy (ability to do), independent identity (ability to be oneself) and the safe haven of an environment that promotes the human ability to learn and change over time. The ongoing nature of abuse and violence is designed to elicit particular responses in victims usually understood as ‘induced compliance’ (Biderman, 1957). Induced compliance ensures victim safety and survival under psychological duress – management and resistance of the perpetrator’s behaviours and others responses to his behaviours becomes the main preoccupation for victims. Of particular importance in sustaining abuse is that abusive and violent behaviours are invariably persistent over time, can be intermittent and include the presence of occasional kindness. Behaviours Coercive Controlling behaviours are used as part of a pattern to initially establish and then sustain control. They most commonly include:       

  

actively isolating from informal and formal networks ignoring and overcoming victim resistance threats and manipulation negative consequences for non compliance (silence, public humiliation, embarrassment, financial abuse etc) threats that are usually carried out (pets killed, assaults on children and adult victim, family members, work surveillance, and monitoring daily movements) consistent surveillance and monitoring of victim movements and behaviours wearing down resistance (sleep deprivation, constant verbal abuse or manipulation, refusal to listen to another perspective, not allowing basic needs until compliance, food, sleep, toilet access etc.) jealousy and possessiveness and punishment for perceived misbehaviour distortion of the victim’s reality belief in the right and entitlement of the abuser to abuse

It is important to note two critical concepts about perpetrators who use these tactics: 1) Perpetrators are human beings who struggle with a profoundly complex and destructive set of problems (Bancroft, 2002) that have serious implications for their families and for themselves. We do not ‘demonise’ or pathologise those who use abuse – but view their behaviour in the broader context of a range of social thinking that sanctions male power over women (abuse supportive attitudes) as well as individual traumatic life experiences, gender related social influences and peer support that may also have impacted on individuals and contributed to entitlement thinking. 2) The evidence indicates that whilst behaviours may be intentional, ongoing and patterned, the underlying thinking that drives this behaviour is often unconscious (Bancroft, 2002) and needs to be made conscious in order to successfully begin the work of behaviour change (Bancroft, 2002). It is important to view people who use violating behaviours with professional understanding and an assumption that abusive and violent men also use non abuse on a regular basis with their family, friends and community – we know that change is not only possible, but desirable at times in their life. Summary Acting to Interrupt Violence and Abuse concept, drawing on the strengths of a multi systemic network that is ready to act in relation to perpetrator accountability offers a unique framework to address serious gaps in service system responses to consistent perpetrator accountability. The service system and community at present is moving towards a readiness for pragmatic interventions with men but approaches beyond justice models and men’s behaviour change programs are yet to be developed. How can we ask the question about whether men have changed when we have not yet created the social conditions where change is possible, validated and sustained by informal and formal social systems? Acting to interrupt violence and abuse is a key response by AnglicareWA to begin to address this gap and offers a unique opportunity to continue to think about and pilot innovative programs that target men in community and walks alongside women, children and young people about the patterned and systemic nature of the perpetrator’s abuse. Decision making is thus informed by the evidence base rather than misinformation or distorted information by perpetrators. An integrated, proactive collaboration between perpetrator services and victim services is critical if we are to engage in systemic and social change. We need to move away from the

ambulance at the bottom of the cliff and it is time to work differently, time to allow innovation in a tired, economically constrained and overwhelmed service system. The AnglicareWA AIVA model asks the question, are we brave enough to try something new? It is time now to propose and pilot a framework that works alongside policing, child protection and justice responses with a unique community focus, driven and funded by community initiatives that respond by inviting abusive men constantly and consistently to interrupt their choices to abuse and direct them to multiple strategies of change.

References: AnglicareWA Community Perceptions Report 2014: Family and Domestic Violence 2014, AnglicareWA. AnglicareWA Submission to the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia in response to Project Number 104, Enhancing Laws Concerning Family and Domestic Violence, 2014 Bancroft, L. (2002). Why Does He Do That? Inside the Minds of Angry and Controlling Men, Berkeley Books, New York Bancroft, L & Silverman, J. Ritchie, D. (2012). The Batterer as Parent 2nd Ed. Addressing the Impact of Domestic Violence on Family Dynamics, Sage Publications Inc, California Final Report: Enhancing Family and Domestic Violence Laws, Law Reform Commission of Western Australia, June 2014 Flaskas C., McCarthy I., and Sheehan J. (eds.) May 2007. Hope and Despair in Narrative and Family Therapy: Adversity, Forgiveness and Reconciliation, Hove: Brunner-Routledge Jenkins, A. (1990). Invitations to Responsibility, The therapeutic engagement of men who are violent and abusive, Dulwich Centre Publications, Adelaide No To Violence, What can be done to strengthen accountability for men who perpetrate family and domestic violence? Male Family Violence Prevention Association, avail online: http://ntv.org.au/wp-content/uploads/150603-FINAL_Family-Violence-Taskforce-FVRCsubmission_3-June-2015.pdf Paymar, M. (2000). Violent No More, Helping Men End Domestic Violence, Hunter House Inc, Alameda Wade, A. (1997). Small Acts of Living; Everyday Resistance to Violence and Other Forms of Oppression, Contemporary Family Therapy, 19(1), March 1997, Human Sciences Press, Inc. Western Australian’s FDV Prevention Strategy to 2022, Western Australia’s FDV Prevention Strategy to 2022, Achievement Report 2013 (Department for Child Protection and Family Support) i

On average, abused women attempt to leave their abuser 5 to 7 times before leaving for good (Primezone Media Network, 2005). One meta-analysis found that nearly 50% of abused women who had sought help for their situation ended up returning to their abusive partner (Strube, 1988).

CREATING A TASKFORCE: THE VICTORIAN EXPERIENCE

CAROLINE COUNSEL Family Violence Portfolio Family Law Section Law Institute of Victoria

Paper Presented at the The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7 - 8 December 2015

COUNSEL FAMILY LAWYERS, FAMILY VIOLENCE PORTFOLIO: FAMILY LAW SECTION: LAW INSTITUTE OF VICTORIA

Once every lifetime, a series of events occurs that give rise to opportunity for change. In Victoria, that opportunity was the Royal Commission into Family Violence which has recently concluded its hearings and is due to hand down its recommendations to the Victorian Government in February 2016. We started meeting in November 2014 and made a commitment to meet on a regular basis. Attendance at all meetings was extremely high and substitutes were in ready attendance if a regular member were unable to attend. This was not compulsory but it was indicative of the commitment and the recognition of the importance of the Taskforce to those in attendance and more importantly, those whose interests we hoped to represent at the table. The Royal Commission, whilst the brainchild of the incumbent Victorian Labor government was born of violence. Violent acts by individuals against those whom they were supposed to love and cherish. At the core of this work, whilst this paper may not state it, is an acknowledgement of all those who have suffered at the hands of those who have inflicted violence. Those who have suffered are many and varied; from those who have died at the hands of their partners, those who have had their children murdered, to those who have not known, stood by and then realised the horror of the lot of a friend or family member. Family violence engenders never ending ripples in the pool of our society. If you have ever looked at the surface of a pool of water that has been agitated, you usually see a distorted and ugly version of yourself. This is also true of how family violence reflects on our society as a whole. Whilst that pool continues to be unsettled, it produces a distorted and ugly version of who we are collectively. Whilst I have held the position of chair of the Family Violence Portfolio in the Family Law Section of the Law Institute for several years, there was very little connection with individuals or organisations in the area. As a young lawyer I was in two minds about my then chosen profession and flirted briefly with the concept of acting. What I learned in my years of acting study is applicable to understanding the benefits of a Taskforce. Many people attend theatre and are in awe of solo performances. They are in awe as the actor's ability to remember their lines and hold the stage. As an actor, the solo performance leaves me cold. Whilst it is a wonderful ego trip; you are ostensibly in control of the product. There are no surprises. There is no frisson. You are "it". It is akin to me meeting with the cheese platter. A collaborative work on the other hand, has within it all the ingredients for the unpredictable, the creation and reinvention of ideas, the possibilities of conflict and

resolution. In short, collaboration is rife with creativity and collective learning which elevates the end result. I say somewhat facetiously that I was attending meetings of "one" or "one and a cheese platter". I have had this experience previously when I held the position of Chair of Access to Justice in the then newly formed Victorian Women Lawyers. I recognised that whilst I could set an agenda and produce outcomes, being a committee of one is not a feasible or sustainable model. Hence I set about the creation of a Taskforce ahead of the Royal Commission's hearings. This paper is about a micro story which I hope produces some applicable and macro learnings. Finding a Champion I work in the legal sector and the first thing I needed to find was a champion and someone to introduce me to that potential champion. My job was to entice that individual into taking on the mantle of coordinating the conversation and playing a pivotal role: the leadership role. At the Law Institute of Victoria, we were fortunate enough to have Nerida Wallace about to assume the role of the CEO and with her came her connections that she had developed over the years of working with the legal profession. A meeting between Nerida and I quickly established the need to bring the Victorian Magistrates Court into the conversation and hence a meeting with Chief Magistrate Peter Lauristen. The Chief Magistrate and his colleagues have been responsible for an enormous revolution in how the justice system intersects with family violence. Based on my observations, the attention and skill that the Court has applied to a staggering work load and extremely difficult and personally taxing work is phenomenal. Their resources are strained and their capacity maxed out and yet they have managed to find creative and collaborative ways of administering justice in this most difficult of areas. The courts continue however to groan under the weight of work. It is interesting to note that this is also a by-product of the positive evolution in attitudes about family violence and the leadership shown in the top ranks of the Victorian Police. I acknowledge that as with all aspects of how society deals with family violence, there is room for improvement. There is definitely a need for greater resources and that applies across the sector from health, housing, supports, police, the courts etc

I do not intend to outline the many positive initiatives introduced by the Victorian Magistrates Court and Vic Pol but for those interested, there is ample information available on their respective websites. The submissions made by individuals and organisations to the Royal Commission also afford enormous insights as to the perspectives of those who participated in the Taskforce.

Establishing a Framework From the outset we needed to establish a framework. This is possibly the most essential ingredient in establishing any group be it a committee or taskforce. If the foundations are not clear then no amount of goodwill can keep the fabric of what you are trying to achieve on track. The framework was in the form of Terms of Reference. We were fortunate enough to have the commitment of the Law Institute to lend secretariat support of an experienced Legal Practice and Policy officer who has sat on a plethora of committees and taskforces. Gemma Hazmi was able to quickly provide a draft set of Terms which were then finessed. Once finessed, they were disseminated to the Taskforce and agreed upon. When the going gets tough in any organisation, it will be the Constitution or Rules or Terms of Reference that enable the group to address and move on from conflict or disagreement. Who is at the table? Who sits at your table is incredibly important. It is essential that when considering your given area of interest or endeavour in family violence that you take the time to invite not only the obvious but also those who will challenge conventional or usual thinking. A scan of who's who in your area is a must. Do not be tempted to invite only those who will agree with your world view. Like all areas of human endeavour, our knowledge of family violence is dynamic. It is constantly evolving. It is akin to the knowledge that is being amassed by Collaborative family lawyers and those doing interest based negotiation. (In this instance I am referring specifically to those who are trained in the dispute resolution method known as Collaborative Practice, a relatively recent phenomenon whereby lawyers sign a contract with the clients and each other not to represent clients in the Family Courts.) Once it was considered enough to know the law, the Family Law Act, the cases, how Court based outcomes might apply to your client's case. For Collaborative practitioners, you cannot hope to assist your client in negotiations unless you understand, amongst other skills, how the brain functions, the interplay between needs, interests and core beliefs and be self-aware. The most important step was to identify who should be invited to attend the Taskforce and contribute to the conversation. If anyone is contemplating replicating this concept, the "who" will be unique to your area of endeavour be it health/medical community services, legal, business sector, banking and finance, armed forces, member organisations etc. We needed to contain our conversations to where family violence intersects the administration of justice. Otherwise we would indeed be trying to "eat an elephant" and we would still be trying to chew through the hide.

We also needed to create a space in which those who had been identified as being able to contribute were not constrained in their discussions. In short, a safe and respectful space in which those with expertise could share ideas, have constructive and at times challenging conversations with each other. Due to the Terms of Reference, whilst I am not at liberty to discuss who said what, I can canvass some of the issues and more importantly, some of the collective learning and bridge building that occurred in those discussions. Our Taskforce had all the hallmarks of any group of people from differing perspectives. We had different language around family violence issues, we had different points of view, different agendas, differing levels of experience and understanding. In fact, just what you would expect when you identify people with expertise in any given area of human endeavour. What we did not have is experience at working collaboratively as a group. This is the dynamic afforded by the Taskforce and it provided rich ground which escalated collective learning. Those whose experience may have been narrowed by virtue of their field of human endeavour, had their blinkers removed or widened and were therefore able to countenance other perspectives. In a world of increasing specialisation, much is gained in a given area of human endeavour but in almost equal parts, much is also lost. A collaborative conversation enabled some members of the Taskforce to better understand the differing perspectives and differing agendas. Common purpose meant a sufficiently high degree of goodwill towards each other, even when at times there was disagreement. By way of an example of specialisation that had unintended consequences I discussed the consequences of the change in culture of the Victorian Police towards family violence. The Family Law Bar and its members used to represent both perpetrators of violence and survivors of violence in relation to Magistrates Court intervention orders. During our discussions I made the observation that due to the success of Vic Pol changing their culture, police officers more often than not were the first to intersect with situations of family violence. (I note that in cases of psychological abuse and physical abuse, the medical profession may well have been involved earlier or had suspicions of family violence occurring but have not systematically or indeed been able to actively implement the legal machinery available under the Family Protection Act 2008 (Vic)). By being at the coal face of family violence and using the powers available to them under the Act, Police have sought and obtained personal safety notices and then interim and final orders on behalf of affected family members. Statistically in Victoria approximately 70% of all such applications are initiated by Vic Pol. The corresponding and consequential shift which has had cultural ramifications is that barristers stopped representing both the perpetrators and victims of family violence. They

started increasingly to represent only the perpetrators of violence. This invariably changed the barrister didactic when it came to family violence.

Whilst all lawyers are prohibited

from simply being the mouthpiece of their clients, and whilst many lawyers perform an educative role with their clients concerning behaviours and outcomes, they are also bound by their instructions. Behind the scenes lawyers may challenge their clients and try to and apprehend the consequences of their actions, in Court they juggle the requirements of the legislation, the likely attitudes of the specific judicial officer before whom they are appearing, the instructions of the client and an awareness of the likely outcome of the case despite their submissions. I am here referring to the Magistrates Court work and not necessarily the Family Courts where the representation is alternately for survivor and perpetrator of violence.

Taskforce Representatives included:                       

Chief Magistrate, Peter Lauritsen (Chair) Acting Chief Judge, Michael McInerney, County Court of Victoria Deputy Chief Magistrate, Felicity Broughton Regional Coordinating Magistrate, Sue Wakeling Magistrate Kate Hawkins Magistrate Anne Goldsbrough Caroline Counsel, Law Institute of Victoria Family Law Section Megan Aumair, Law Institute of Victoria Criminal Law Section Gemma Hazmi, Law Institute of Victoria Legal Policy & Practice Jacqui Watt, CEO, No to Violence / Mens Referral Service Rodney Vlais, Manager, No to Violence Dr Melanie Heenan, Executive Director, Court Network Fiona McCormack, CEO, Domestic Violence Victoria Joanna Fletcher, CEO, Women’s Legal Service Liana Buchanan, CEO, Federation of Community Legal Centres Dr Chris Atmore, Federation of Community Legal Centres Libby Eltringham, Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoria Jen Hargrave, Women with Disabilities Victoria Bevan Warner, Managing Director, Victoria Legal Aid Leanne Sinclair, Family Violence Program Manager, Victoria Legal Aid Jacqueline Stone, Victorian Bar Megan Tittensor, Criminal Bar Association Darren Mort and alternate Caroline Paterson of the Family Bar Association While representatives from Victoria Police were consulted during the deliberation of the recommendations to the Royal Commission, they did not formally join the taskforce in its recommendations for obvious reasons. We made our separate and our joint recommendations to the Commission and such was the richness of our discussions and a recognition that our submissions were the start of a conversation, we have elected to continue to meet. Some of the individuals have changed due to usual organisational reasons.

Who is missing? Years ago I attended the IACP (International Academy of Collaborative Professionals) Annual conference in Vancouver Canada and the keynote speaker confronted us with the challenge of looking around the room and doing the analysis of who was not there. Who did not have a voice? Who was not represented? In what ways did we lack diversity? Sounds simple, right? Yes and yet complex as well because we all develop blinkers, we all develop personal preferences, and professional relationships. The thing about passing ones power to create something better is that you also pass control. You nonetheless have an obligation to continue to refine the thinking of any group, do regular scans of who might be missing and ensure that the conversation continues to grow in depth, complexity and remains relevant and holistic. In November 2014 when we first met we extended invitations to others to come to the table. Whilst that did not result in their inclusion, we have actively pursued those whom we believe should add their voices to the conversation.

We have added to the list to ensure that

Antoinette Braybrook from VFPLS (Family Violence Prevention and Legal Service Victoria) is included. Antoinette and the work that she does was recognised in the Law Institute of Victoria President's Awards earlier in 2015. She was nominated in two categories and won Access to Justice/Pro Bono award. The other sector not yet at the table but essential to ongoing conversations will be those who work with refugees and migrants such as inTouch Multicultural Centre against Family Violence and Immigrant Women's Domestic Violence Service.

Language As the skills and experience of those at the table differed, one of the unintentional outcomes was an upskilling of those whose exposure lagged behind the others. exponential learning impact.

This had an

Even the title of the Taskforce "Family" as opposed to

"Domestic" was a deliberate choice.

It was a recognition that whilst violence occurs

between domestic partners, impacts of violence are family wide, even in circumstances where a couple do not have children. Language is key to this area. Language is the external expression of thought. Whilst we may not know what some people "think" when they express themselves, it gives us insight. Violence is often expressed through language. How we speak to each other; the tone and the words we use. I have had the benefit of a full day workshop with Sharon Stand Ellison

who wrote a book and materials for training others entitled "Taking the War Out of Words" This was born of her experience as a young child detecting that violence was ever present in how humans communicate with each other. Sharon perceived that there was something wrong when she stood in a playground for the first time as a new student and listened to the conversations around her. Our world cannot wait for the level of individual consciousness to be raised. The world of family violence needs laws, those petition on behalf of those who have violence inflicted upon them and those who enforce those laws. However, the law and law enforcement is of course a method of dealing with the by-product of unacceptable or dysfunctional behaviour. It is not the cure. Changing unacceptable behaviour starts with changing thoughts and attitudes and the best expression of that is to instil a change in our language. Our Taskforce was a microcosm of the world family violence. Whilst surprising, it was also probably predictable that there were some in the group with antiquated and entrenched views born, no doubt, of given areas of expertise and experience. What they were able to demonstrate was a capacity to be challenged and educated by virtue of the Taskforce meetings. This was one of the positive by products of our meetings: those with narrow experience of family violence allowed themselves to be informed by those with greater expertise. Speaking the same language became essential. Taking the time to understand each other and our different terms enhanced our deeper understand of what mattered most to each of us. Misunderstandings were, in the main, dealt with respectfully. Common language, common intention and deeper conversations about our collective aims and objectives then gave rise to a united Recommendation to the Royal Commission. Whilst this is available on the Royal Commission's website, I have attached it to this paper for ease of reference. Recommendations Whilst many of us were hopeful of concrete and more far ranging recommendations, due to the diversity on our taskforce, the fact that organisations and individuals were making separate submissions to the Royal Commission, the recommendations were truncated to the essentials or overarching agreements of the Taskforce. They nonetheless form a framework or background against which the Taskforce will continue to meet and have discussions. For ease of reference I have attached the submission to the Royal Commission in its entirety. In short, the recommendations listed in the submission do not reflect the totality of the discussions we have had at the Taskforce meeting since forming in November 2014.

Other discussions We also had an opportunity to discuss a broad range of topics. I have added but a few in this paper such as safety areas in Court houses, new court house requirements and ideal facilities, video conferencing, GPS tracking, application of other laws such as Disability Discrimination Act and how it intersects with family violence, reports being produced by Universities, impact of violence on women in regional rural and remote Victoria, wind back of services for such women, how best to triage families in the justice system, ensuring early and continued representation of both respondents (perpetrators) and complainants (survivors) of family violence, need to conduct ongoing research in relation to risk assessment, research into the State's hotspots, allow those who can to access research to lobby for change, funding etc, need to ensure uniformity of risk assessment tools (CRAF), need to ensure opportunities for education are shared amongst Taskforce members, updating each other on the education occurring in our specific areas and ensuring wherever possible that the education is inclusive and far ranging, creating uniformity in security for survivors across the State, provision of advice to users of court services, better coordination between those working in the sector, need for consistency in justice system, fast track models, specialist legal services in all courts, CISP (court integrated services program), one familyone judge concept, infrastructure, discussions emanating from SCAG,

sharing of

information intra and interstate and development of and access to national data bases, men's behaviour change programs, current programs: in Australia and from overseas, training of lawyers to ensure risk identification. As indicated I am unable to comment on who has said what due to the Taskforce's terms of reference but I believe I have provided a sense of how far ranging those conversations have been. For those contemplating a users group or taskforce, the idea is to work out either ahead or collectively in the meetings what your priorities are and what you collectively do not know and ensure that those who have expertise are included in the conversation. There is no end of learning from each other as has been evidenced by this taskforce's conversations thus

far.

For lawyers there are very specific challenges and one such challenge is to learn not only from each other but those who work in the sector with differing perspectives on the issue of family violence and be prepared to learn from those people. Formal legal education does not include education on family violence. It does not include risk assessment tools. It has only been by dint of individuals who have had long experience and concern that sporadic education has been made available to all those who practise law. Even then, the education offerings seem to be confined to family law, child protection and criminal law. As we all

know, family violence know no geographical, socio economic, age, cultural, religious or other bounds and therefore the challenge for peak bodies such as the Law Institute and indeed the Law Council of Australia is to ensure uniform knowledge sharing and education on family violence and a recognition of its pervasiveness in all aspects of our society.

Domestic Violence and Disabilities - A Discussion Paper

Paul Crowe, B.Soc.Sc. (Human Services) John Hart, Director, Quality Lifestyle Support

Paper Presented at the The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7 - 8 December 2015

FOREWORD

This paper has been intended as an understanding of the complexities of domestic violence and people with disabilities in particular to those who society would deem as severely disabled, have minimal communication skills and challenging behaviours and those who would be considered the most vulnerable of the vulnerable. It does not intend to make the assumption that all people with disabilities are the same or detract from any person’s ability or disability, nor does it intend to detract from the achievements and un-relentless efforts of organisations and families whose work goes largely unrecognised. This discussion paper’s authors are not domestic violence specialists, they work in the field of disability in Queensland, Australia. This front line perspective is aimed at shedding a differing light on the complexities of domestic violence and disabilities.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the the following people: Carolyn Frohmader, Executive Director, (Women With Disabilities Australia) Michael J. Kendrick, PHD, Michael Kendrick Consulting Tanisha Cowell, Occupational Therapy Student, Monash University

The authors would also like to acknowledge the work, dedication and commitment to this cause by, among many others, the following organisations: Women With Disabilities Australia (WWDA) People With Disabilities Australia (PWDA) Australian Cross Disability Alliance (ACDA)

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to explore domestic violence in relation to people with a disability, particularly those where the impact of the disability is complex. It will examine statistics and research, disability and abuse types, symptomatology of abuse, parenting and families, support mechanisms, power imbalances, reporting and prosecution difficulties and suggestions to possibly assist in addressing the situation.

Statistics and Research Statistically, domestic violence in Australia, and around the world, is at unacceptable levels and recognition of this is finally at unprecedented levels in an effort to find solutions and supports for all involved. The Australian Senate is currently having an inquiry into domestic violence and disabilities. Information provided to the senate by experts in the field, including the Australian Cross Disability Alliance, provided a submission titled “Inquiry into Violence, Abuse and Neglect against People with Disabilities In Institutional and Residential Settings”, indicate the following: 

68% of women with an intellectual disability have been sexually abused by the age of 18.



90% of women with an intellectual disability have been sexually abused at some time in their life.



Women with a disability are 40% more likely to victims of domestic assault than women without a disability



Essentially there is no prevalent research in relation to Indigenous or Torres Strait Islander people with the impact of a disability in their lives, although in 2008, the rate of physical violence reported by Indigenous and Torres Strait Islander people with a disability or a long term mental health condition were at 55% for men and 60% for women in the past year



There is no known prevalent data on people from culturally or linguistically diverse (CALD) people with disabilities in Australia

To put a context to the human side of this, if you are a woman with an intellectual disability, your chances of not being sexually abused are 1 in 10.

The current concentration of effort revolves around traditional family settings, husband and wife, de facto relationships and girlfriend and boyfriend. However there is little to no information or support extending outside of these parameters despite, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, in 2009 there were nearly 4 million people in Australia with a disability (18.5%). This is not to say that concentrating on situations where the most people are involved is not necessary, as it is, however it cannot be at the expense of other sections of the community. As a result of this, people with the impact of a disability in their lives are excluded from the forefront of the discussion, along with other sections of the community. This concentration means there is very few statistics or research on domestic violence and people with a disability and what there is, is often a small proportion of specific research in relation to domestic violence as a whole. Identifying relevant research can be challenging as it often associated with similar topics or linked to topics that either address disabilities or domestic violence. This demonstrates that specific research and constant renewal of data need to be funded so that findings can be relevant to the times, adjustments can be made and determinations of progress or regression can be identified.

Unfortunately, any findings from research are extremely limited and provide only a cross section of the problem that faces people with a disability, as not all people with a disability have the capacity to give input due to their disability type. As such, some evidence is anecdotal, generational and therefore generalisations and assumptions need to be made or not factored into the research. This is not to say that all evidence and data is wrong, far from it, however it does leave findings open to interpretation.

Research specific to people with the impact of disabilities and domestic violence needs to be expanded. The authors cannot find any research on Indigenous Australians with a disability (specifically) or on people with disabilities from multicultural backgrounds and there is minimal data

on violence directly against disabled men. Unless research is conducted in relation to all people with disabilities and domestic violence, regardless of gender, race, age or demographic, the true extent of the situation may never be known. This is not to say that the figures currently available are incorrect but specific research may give further clarification.

Disability and Abuse Types The types of disabilities that affect people is lengthy. Some people have more than one, some have many. They can affect people’s mind, cognition, bodies, emotions, functioning and physicality. The general population may not even know that an individual had a disability unless they were told, whilst others have disabilities that are so severe and debilitating that they are unable to communicate effectively or via traditional means, needing everything in their life accommodated by others.

There are some forms of abuse that could be categorised as specific to those with disabilities. These could include examples such as medication abuse by either withholding or giving excessive amounts, refusal to assist individuals out of or into bed or a wheelchair or refusing to either assist with toileting or with personal hygiene. Even things such as ensuring cleanliness and appropriateness of living arrangements. These arise as specific forms of abuse partly because of the need and dependency on others and partly because much support is provided without supervision of the provider.

Domestic violence in relation to people with the impact of a disability in their lives is unquestionably at abhorrent levels in Australia and, despite the constant pressure and efforts of the many professionals who are experts in this field, the situation remains largely under the radar.

According to the Victorian Health Department, there is a social myth that “people with disabilities are often dismissed as passive, helpless, child-like, non-sexual and burdensome. These prejudices tend to make people with disabilities less visible to society, and suggest that abuse, especially sexual abuse, is unlikely”. It is not a common theme that people with disabilities are seen as

people, they are seen as disabled. It is not at the forefront of people’s minds that people with disabilities have the same emotions, needs, desires, fears, wants and dreams as everyone else. Just as in mainstream society, every section of society will have people with disabilities either in it or wanting to be in it. There are also many individuals who play little to no part in society.

The public perception of people with disabilities may be different to people within the field of disability support who have a different insight. This is understandable, just as a mechanic has extensive knowledge of the complexities of the working of a motor vehicle, that same knowledge is widely unknown to the majority of the population. People could research and gain the same knowledge, however unless there is an immediate need, people tend to leave it to the professionals. The same can be said for the human services sector. Unless there is a need, people tend to leave that knowledge to those in the field. As a result of this, knowledge gained by the general population is primarily via mainstream media, and as such the perception may be skewed, even to the point of being an unrealistic interpretation of people’s lives. Sobesy, D. (1994), expands on this stating “the history of these people remains largely unwritten, and therefore they remain voiceless, faceless, and nameless in the thoughts of society”.

It would be widely accepted that organisations and people who work and volunteer in the disability sector are doing great work and are in this industry for all of the right reasons. They have the knowledge, experience and commitment to enhancing people’s lives and working with the most vulnerable of people. A big part of this is the promotion of people with disabilities as contributing members of society. However, a case could be made that the industry is, at times, its own worst enemy. All too often in the sector we are afraid of what may happen if we take risks outside of what is considered usual practice when working with people with disabilities. Because of this we have a tendency to cushion the support mechanisms and interaction within the community. This reaffirms vulnerability and assist in ensuring a gap between mainstream expectations of people and those with disabilities, which reinforces vulnerability and difference.

Symptomatology of Abuse As with many people who are victims of domestic violence, people with disabilities show the same symptoms and behaviours, however this can also be problematic as some of these symptoms and behaviours often correlate with the impact of the individual’s disability. As an example, a person diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder may display characteristics that if not known to others, may be perceived as being the victim of abuse. According to the American Psychiatric Association, 2013 some of the signs of Autism Spectrum Disorder are “changes in sleeping or eating patterns, adherence to routine, self-harm, difficulty establishing independence and unsure of social interactions”. Feeling of anxiety or being afraid, eager to please, frequent injuries and unexplained non-attendance at appointments or social functions are not uncommon and may be due to either the specifics of a disability or an ingrained vulnerability which these behaviours demonstrate.

There are also added complications that may arise which further exacerbate the situation. Many people with disabilities have severely limited communication capabilities, and although there are people with essentially no communication skills, others communicate through other means that are generally not understood. A person may “hit out” or injure themselves, scream or wave their arms frantically, and to many the immediacy of these behaviours needs to be attended to. However for the person displaying these behaviours, it is a perfectly acceptable method of communication. They are, in their own way, telling others their thoughts and feelings, It is then the responsibility of the other person involved to try and determine what message is being delivered. Each person’s communication technique is unique unto themselves and it may take many years of experience in working with this person to gain any form of understanding of what they are saying. This constant dilemma puts workers and organisations in a “Catch 22” situation in relation to responding appropriately. Are we working with the impact of an individual’s disability or are we working with an individual who is a victim of abuse or is it both? If a supported individual does not want a specific worker, is it due to abuse? Or is it simply that they do not like that worker due to a personality clash or and preference to another worker? An added dimension to this, is how to raise possible concerns with the possible victim. Some may not have the capacity to comprehend what is

being asked, whilst others may not have been a victim of abuse but then take on the persona of an abuse victim.

Parenting and Families Supporting some people with a disability within the family environment can be extremely difficult. It can be time consuming and can result in lives revolving around the supported individual, leaving little to no time for personal time and space. Many parents and family members see it as their sole responsibility to raise and take care of their child/loved one throughout their entire life and that receiving support of any kind is a negative reflection on them personally, their ability and capacity to support.

Supporting individuals with severe disabilities can even be more of a challenge. According to Emerson, E, 1995, challenging behaviours are those that are "culturally abnormal behaviour(s) of such intensity, frequency or duration that the physical safety of the person or others is placed in serious jeopardy, or behaviour which is likely to seriously limit or deny access to the use of ordinary community facilities". They can display challenging behaviours that may be self-injurious, violence and aggression to name a few. The frustration that comes with this, as a parent and/or family member, can be constant and unrelenting. Repetitive reinforcement or intervention may be constantly required in the interaction between the individual with a disability and the caregiver. As an example, there are many individuals with disabilities who bite themselves. This behaviour is due to their disability and can occur numerous times per day. Parents and families have a constant need to intervene so that this does not occur, however frustration inevitably may happen where they lose focus and recognition of the fact, “even momentarily”, that it is a part of their disability and act out with violence at the fact the that their loved one cannot learn to stop. It could therefore be understood that there may be times where frustration turns to violence. Understanding how it can occur however, does not condone or accept that it should occur.

Violence can also occur in protection of others. It is not only parents and families of people with disabilities who may be perpetrators of violence, it may be the supported individual who is abusive towards others. When a person with a disability is displaying aggressive behaviours towards other family members, others may be inclined to step in to protect them, or even themselves, with violence in order to make the aggression stop. Attempts to assist the family unit, in combination with consistency of aggression and frustration, all contribute to the perpetuation of domestic violence. It would only be a rare occurrence where either the person with the disability or the family member is reported to authorities.

Support Mechanisms There is a significant section of the disability population who, due to no fault of their own, are unable to utilise standardised domestic violence supports. The supports are simply not appropriate to meet the needs of these individuals. The use of counselling is not always practical due to the cognition of the individual or communication difficulties that a domestic violence professional may not understand, and at times, even misinterpret. Trust can also play a part as it can take years to build but can be dissolved instantly by the individual for reasons that are unwarranted or even unknown. Other people with disabilities may be nonverbal or have communication skills.

Another problem facing people with the impact of a disability is the responsibility of support where there is an indication of domestic violence. With funding being constantly monitored to achieve exact results, a professional conflict may occur. As such, the debate revolves around should the disability service work with the individual as they have a disability or should domestic violence specialists work with the individual, as it is unrelated to the disability diagnosis. Both are specialists in their field, but neither necessarily have the skills to successfully assist the client in a meaningful way that brings positive outcomes. The loser in this system is the individual and many times, they fall between the gaps of service in the face of bureaucracy.

In this climate of fiscal responsibility driving productivity, the human services field, without exception, finds itself more accountable for monies spent in an overall productive manner than the specific need of an individual meeting of in isolation. However there is little discretion made between services relating to business and services pertaining to people. According to Carlyon,T, 2012, “There is a risk that economic drivers will drown out the goals and strategic intent that are really the most important, and are fundamental to the organisations that were established to serve people needing help”. The idea that reducing funding to meet immediate minimal financial expenditure simply does not work in the human services sector, in fact it is the opposite. Supplying adequate funding, not excessive, provides scope to create long term savings, by investing in people creates opportunities for people with disabilities to fully participate in all levels of community.

Power Imbalances For people who receive support to assist with the impact of their disability, there are frequently power imbalances, both genuine and perceived, however rarely is power in the hands of those with a disability. This is due to the nature of the relationship, in that, the person with a disability is in need of the support and therefore the reliance is what creates the imbalance. This is not to say that people providing the supports are utilising this power and most go out of their way to ensure that this is not a factor, however the perception or the possibility of change is enough to create the imbalance.

For those who provide the actual support to individuals, there is a possibility that they can abuse this power, as most supports for individuals are completed in the absence of other staff or supports. If a support person chooses this path, intimidation can be utilised to not only abuse the supported individual but to also ensure that it is not reported. This may result in the individual with a disability feeling that unless they submit, they may lose their supports and the violence may be enhanced. If the individual does report, they then face the prospect of not being believed, unable to express the situation in ways that will address the problem and find themselves in a position where nothing changes except the violence.

Reporting and Prosecution Difficulties There is the real possibility that reporting violence and abuse, whilst it may be believed and reported by supporting people or organisations, they will be subject to police involvement. This in itself may create fear for many people with disabilities as they may see themselves as “in trouble”, as police are a strong authority. Some even believing that they themselves may go to jail and that they have done something wrong given that this is often imprinted by the abuser. In many instances, when abuse is reported by a person with a disability, there appears to be a tendency by police not to want to proceed. This may not necessarily indicate that they think that the person is lying about what has happened, but that they may think that the person is either exaggerating what has occurred or that they do not fully understand what has occurred. It would appear that police involvement is perceived unnecessary and that support agencies should be able to handle the situation.

Police are also familiar with the realities and complexities of prosecuting a domestic violence case where a disabled person is involved and when they do get involved and alleged perpetrators are questioned, the decision to prosecute is not always made solely by themselves. The prosecution team look at the evidence and make a determination on the chances of a successful prosecution. Where there is little evidence, or where evidence is circumstantial, it is often a realistic chance that the defence will either want the charges dropped or will like to question the individual with the impact of a disability. Where the disabled individual has limited communication skills or is easily confused, the effectiveness of their evidence will be questioned. This may result in the burden of continuing with prosecution being too traumatising for the supported individual, even before charges are laid. Sobsey, D highlights that “People with disabilities remain one of the groups least well-served by the justice system”. Where domestic violence has been reported and prosecution has either been unsuccessful or not proceeded, organisations are left with an industrial dilemma. What do they do with the staff member who was reported as an alleged suspect? On one hand the organisation has a primary responsibility to the individual being supported, but on the other hand, the staff member has not been

proven to have done anything wrong and is entitled to retain their job with regard to natural justice. According to Queensland legislation, Part 5 of the Disability Services Act, 2006, “The paramount consideration in making a decision under this part is the right of people with a disability to live lives free from abuse, neglect or exploitation. If the staff member is fired, the organisation may be subject to industrial action, but if they remain employed, there is a possibility of abuse to other supported individuals.

In Queensland, the Department of Communities and the police have the capacity to proceed with refusing a suitability card to a worker on the basis of reporting alone. However the legislative requirements are extremely complex and require an intrinsic knowledge of multiple legislations to make a determination on whether this line is specifically justified for the previously alleged offender. An organisation may struggle to determine the correct path in relation to this, without legal assistance.

What can be Done? The authors of this discussion paper are in full agreement with all of the recommendations tendered by the Australian Cross Disability Alliance in their submission to the current Australian senate enquiry. The authors also believe that the following may assist: 

The Australian Government, the media and the elite minds of the sector are currently making positive changes to address the lives of the abused. Ensuring that people with disabilities are seen as a significant factor and must be a part of the focus of any change.



Ensure that relevant information on supports and advice is available to everyone, but also to ensure that people are aware of its existence and that it is easily accessible, so to remove the perceived stigma by family members and supports from utilising these services.



Establish a shared information system for organisations and service providers as one of the key factors when working with people with disabilities is a lack of shared accurate and up-todate information. As Kendrick, M, 2007 explains “When one lacks vital specific knowledge and understanding of a person it is likely impossible to do any more than just guess or

speculate about what someone might need. Guessing about people in the absence of knowing them well leaves organizations with the option of having to design their services based on generalizations drawn from other service users. Predictably, this will result in that person receiving something more akin to a “one size fits all” By utilising a shared information system between all relevant agencies and government, that abides by privacy legislation, an individual can be supported without guesswork, as a history is readily available including that of previous abuse. This in itself is a professional and person centred approach to supporting people. 

Provide families with adequate funding and or resources so that lives are not constantly subject to frustration, which may impact on the welfare of the individual.



Add to the CHC30408 Certificate III in Disability curriculum, a topic specific to domestic violence and people with disabilities.



Provide disability services, police and domestic violence agencies, nationwide with standardised training pertinent to domestic violence and disabilities in relation to identification, appropriate responses and counselling options



More specific research into domestic violence and disabilities, particularly around the most severely disabled, regardless of race, ethnicity, age or gender



Start seeing disabled people as people first

Conclusion There is little doubt that the state of domestic violence against those with an impact of a disability is a national disgrace and continues to be at crisis point. Whilst there is currently little research, there is enough available to determine that if nothing is done immediately by all people within Australian society, from government to organisations to individual citizens, people with disabilities will continue to be abused and violated.

REFERENCES American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2013). “4429.0 - Profiles of Disability, Australia, 2009”; Retrieved November 11, 2015 from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/4429.0main+features100232009 Carlyon, T. (2012). Queensland Community Services Future Forum, “Working Together, a Green Paper”; Brisbane, Australia Emerson, E. (2001).Challenging Behaviour: Analysis and Intervention in People with Severe Learning Disabilities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Frohmader, C. & Sands, T. (2015). Australian Cross Disability Alliance (ACDA) Submission to the Senate “Inquiry into Violence, abuse and neglect against people with a disability in institutional and residential settings”; Australian Cross Disability Alliance (ACDA); Sydney, Australia Kendrick, M.J. (2007) Standardized Service Models; Innovation And The Life Potential Of People Who Receive Services”; TASH Connections. Massachusetts, USA

Queensland Government, Office of Queensland Parliamentary Counsel, (2014). Disability Services Act, 2006 Sobsey, D. (1994). Violence and Abuse in the Lives of People with Disabilities. Baltimore, USA; Paul Brooks Publishing.

Victorian Government, Health Department. (2014). “Domestic Violence and Women with Disabilities”. Retrieved October 12, 2015 from https://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/health/healthyliving/domestic-violence-and-women-withdisabilities

Domestic Violence among Immigrant and Refugee Women in Australia: The Review of the Literature

Nafiseh Ghafournia

Abstract: The review focuses on the studies that have been conducted on domestic violence in Australian context. It also includes some local or national projects and reports undertaken by government departments or non-government agencies. The findings of the research and reports comprises some common themes such as challenges and barriers faced by CALD women to accessing services, the perception of domestic violence among different ethnic communities, gender roles, seeking help and some recommendations offered by the research and projects which have been discussed in detail. Introduction Violence against women has pervasive and traumatic effects on women’s lives; for victims from immigrant backgrounds, the situation can often be more complex. While there is a growing literature that reflects this complexity, much remains unknown about the experiences of abused immigrant women from different cultural and ethnic (CALD) backgrounds in Australia. Studies of domestic violence against immigrant women have produced mixed findings with regard to the nature and prevalence of violence among this group of women (Morgan & Chadwick, 2009). Some Australian surveys indicate that there is no difference in the experience of violence between Australian-born women and immigrant women (Mouzos & Makkai, 2004). While other studies reported that immigrant women were less likely to have experienced physical or sexual violence in comparison with Australian born women (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2013). In contrast, some International studies suggest that immigrant women experience higher levels of violence (O'Donnell et al., 2002). Nevertheless, it is widely acknowledged that cultural values and immigration status enhance the complexities normally involved in domestic and family violence cases. It is clear that lack of knowledge in this area may impede the development of appropriate prevention and intervention programs for this group of women. Yet, Australia’s population is diverse and changing. More than a quarter (27 percent) of Australia’s population was born overseas and 43.1 per cent of people have at least one overseas-born parent (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2012a). With the changes in composition of Australian population, it is likely that the proportion of victims of domestic violence from immigrant and refugee backgrounds will increase. Consequently, it necessitates services and support systems that are culturally appropriate and can address particular needs of CALD women.

Key Terms Domestic Violence: Definitions of violence against women vary widely and there is no single definition that is universally accepted. The United Nations uses the broad terms “violence against women” and “gender-based” violence and consider it as a human right violation. According to The United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women (1993) violence against women is:

Any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life. The declaration recognises that, “Violence against women is one of the crucial social mechanisms by which women are forced into subordinate positions, compared with men”(The United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women, 1993).This definition emphasizes the gender-based roots of violence. The National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010–2022 (2009, p. 5) defines domestic violence as:

Acts of violence that occur between people who have, or have had, an intimate relationship... It is an ongoing pattern of behaviour aimed at controlling a partner through fear, for example by using behaviour which is violent and threatening. In most cases, the violent behaviour is part of a range of tactics to exercise power and control over women and their children, and can be both criminal and non-criminal.

The National Plan is a 12-year strategy that aims to bring together commonwealth, state and territory efforts, as well as work being undertaken by civic society, the business sector and the wider community to achieve a sustained reduction in violence against women in Australia. The National Plan also (2009, p. 5) defines family violence “as a broader term that refers to violence between family members, as well as violence between intimate partners. It involves the same sorts of behaviours as described for domestic violence”.

Immigrant There is considerable diversity in the category of “immigrant”. For example, “immigrants” can be from well-established communities which have been in Australia for decades or the newly arrived. Immigration can be voluntary or non-voluntary as in the category of refugees. It can be permanent or temporary such as students and those on temporary working visas. “Immigrants” may be from different religious, cultural and ethnic backgrounds. An element of this diversity is language since immigrants can come from English or non- English speaking backgrounds. In Australia, there are two dominant terms for “immigrant”: NESB and CALD. NESB: The term Non-English Speaking Background(s) (NESB) “refers specifically to individuals whose first language is a language other than English” (Allimant & OstapiejPiatkowski, 2011, p. 2). CALD: The term Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) “refers to people from a range of different countries, races and ethnicities, who speak different languages and follow various religious, political and philosophical beliefs” (Allimant & Ostapiej-Piatkowski, 2011, p. 2). This term includes immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers and is now used more commonly than the terms ‘NESB’ or ‘Non-English Speaking Background’(Flory, 2012, p. 17).

Literature Review The review focuses on the studies that have been undertaken on domestic violence in Australian context. The literature comprises studies on domestic violence targeting different immigrant communities. It also includes some grey literature such as reports of projects and surveys carried out by government departments or non-government agencies. The studies differ in scope and purpose. Some are large scale studies involving large numbers of interviews or surveys, conducted at the national level or across different states. The rest are mainly small, locally-based research and projects conducted within a particular region or state.

Large Scale Surveys Personal Safety Survey In Australia, the main source of information regarding the prevalence of domestic violence is the Personal Safety Survey (PSS) which is based on a nationally representative sample and conducted regularly by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) (2012b), commencing in 1996 the survey focuses on physical, sexual and emotional violence and also covers the responses to partner abuse. According to the latest survey, in 2012, the Personal safety survey found that immigrant women experience domestic violence at a lower rate than Australianborn women. However, some groups of CALD women are likely to be under-represented in the survey, such as, if they are members of new, small and emerging communities and if participation is not facilitated by the use of interpreters and bilingual interviewers. For example, no professional interpreters were used in conducting interviews for the Personal Safety Survey (VicHealth, 2014b, p. 28).

Importantly for this literature review, the International Violence against Women Survey (IVAWS) provides information on women from non-English speaking backgrounds. The findings reveal that NESB women report lower levels of physical violence than women from English speaking backgrounds. However, when the period studied is expanded over their lifetime, NESB women reported lower levels of any kinds of violence including sexual abuse compared to English- Speaking women. Lower levels of physical violence among immigrant women were explained as being due to different perceptions and definitions of domestic violence among various communities. Also not reporting incidents of physical and sexual violence has been mentioned as another reason for the lower level of domestic violence found among this group of women in the survey (Mouzos & Makkai, 2004, p. 32).

The National Survey on Community Attitudes to Violence Against Women (VicHealth, 2009) examines community attitudes to domestic violence. The survey monitors changes in attitudes over time and builds an understanding of the factors contributing to the shaping of these attitudes. It aims to repeat at regular intervals and is one of the studies designed to monitor The National Plan to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children 2010– 2022. There were three key components to the national survey: the general community survey, the SCALD (selected culturally and linguistically diverse) survey and the Indigenous survey.

The findings showed that SCALD sample are less likely than the general community to consider nonphysical violence as forms of violence. Blaming the victim for violence was more a common response among the SCALD sample than general community. Less than one in five agreed that violence against women should be treated as a private matter. Many SCALD participants stated that they had little knowledge of formal services. Furthermore, there are gender differences in SCALD sample. For example, less than half of SCALD men believed that violence against women is common and a serious issue and men were less likely than women to report that women suffer the most physical harm (VicHealth, 2009). Towards the end, the survey outlined the complexity of addressing violence against women. According to the survey which was repeated in 2013, one group who are likely to support violence-supportive attitudes and who have the poorest knowledge of what comprises violence against women are people from non-English speaking background and especially those who have recently arrived in Australia (VicHealth, 2014a). This group are nearly twice (31%) as likely as the total sample to agree that ‘domestic violence is a private matter to be handled in the family’ and are more than twice as likely as the sample as a whole to believe that ‘it is a woman’s duty to stay in a violent relationship to keep the family together’ (19%) (2014b, p. 55). Another major study in the area of domestic violence, is Attitudes to Domestic and Family Violence in the Diverse Australian Community (Partnerships Against Domestic Violence 2000). The study was part of major domestic violence policy and research partnership between the Commonwealth government and states and territories. The findings indicated that domestic violence was mainly understood as physical, emotional and psychological abuse. But sexual violence was not identified as violence. There was an acknowledgement by all participants of the existence of domestic violence in their communities. The negative consequences of domestic violence were regarded as affecting mostly children; the family unit and community, with the effects on the victims were considered as a secondary effect. Leaving the abusive partner was seen as the last choice. There was a community perception that a woman’s duty was to endure and tolerate her partner’s abuse. The preferred source of help and support was identified as family members and friends ( 2000, pp. 38,39). One of the significant finding was that important community and religious values exist within all different ethnic groups. These values condemn domestic violence.This challenges the commonly expressed idea that some cultures or religions are inherently violent and that

domestic violence is encouraged and believed to be normal in certain cultural groups. Furthermore, there were gender differences in the findings: “Female participants were more likely than males to mention providing support, encouraging self-determination for the victim, and encouraging separation” (Partnerships against Domestic Violence 2000, p. 43).

However, it is noteworthy that findings of these surveys in regards to CALD and NESB people cannot fully explore the complexity of their attitudes towards domestic violence. As mentioned before, CALD people are usually underrepresented in these kinds of surveys. It is also important to bear in mind that the sample of CALD people includes individuals from many different countries, and so cannot represent the findings for any birth country or cultural background (VicHealth, 2014b, p. 77).

Small scale studies In spite of limited studies on domestic violence among CALD communities, some research has been conducted on domestic violence among specific ethnic groups (Cuneen & Stubbs, 1997; Fisher, 2013; Ogunsiji et al., 2011; Szczepanska, 2004) and in particular regions (Colucci et al., 2014; Lay, 2006; Zannettino, 2012) or on immigrant women in general (Chung, 2000; Easteal, 1996c; Poljski, 2011; Taylor & Putt, 2007). These research are mainly small, locally-based studies. Despite some differences in their samples, regions of the studies and methodologies, some common recurring themes, mostly immigration related themes, have been identified in the mentioned works.



Women’s understanding of the meaning of domestic violence

Reviewing the literature suggests that immigrant and refugee women have broad understandings of domestic violence. However, some preferred other terms such as family problem or family conflict (Fisher, 2009). In some studies ,CALD women understood domestic or family violence within the notions of physical assault (Immigrant Women's Domestic Violence Services, 2006) and others mentioned emotional, financial, economic and social violence (Easteal, 1996b; Pease & Rees, 2007; Szczepanska, 2004) as well as immigration-related, spiritual and in-laws abuse (Colucci et al., 2014). Ogunsiji, et.al’s (2011), who explored the domestic violence experiences of West African women living in

Australia, found that participants described domestic violence mostly as physical abuse, and did not consider their experiences of verbal and financial abuse as violent. In a study of Liberian refugees in Adelaide, women believed that rape cannot happen in marriage (Zannettino, 2012). Many of the women stated the before coming to Australia they were not aware that being forced by their husbands to have sex against their will was abusive, even though they felt uncomfortable (2012, p. 816). Taylor and Putt (2007), also investigated the perceptions of women from Indigenous and CALD backgrounds, who had experienced sexual violence in Australia. Findings indicated that many CALD women believed that rape could not occur within marriage since the marriage contract implied consent for sexual intercourse. However, CALD women who had lived in Australia most of their lives knew that sexual violence is a crime in Australia. Other CALD women, particularly newly arrived, did not know that sexual violence is a crime in Australia, particularly when it occurs in an intimate relationship (2007, pp. 2-3). Here, there is an assumption of connection between acculturation and condemning domestic violence particularly sexual abuse.



Seeking help

Many of the existing studies find that women from CALD background are less likely to report cases of domestic violence (Aly & Gaba, 2007; Chung, 2000; Fisher, 2013; Flory, 2012; Morgan & Chadwick, 2009; Mouzos & Makkai, 2004; Ogunsiji et al., 2011; Zannettino, 2012). It is due to some common immigration, cultural or other structural challenges and barriers. Immigrant Women’s Domestic Violence services (2006) reported that immigrant and refugee women in rural Victoria usually did not report violence; family problems were usually kept within the home and mainstream services were the final place where women go when they decide to take action. Abused women usually prefer to seek informal help such as talking to family members and friends (Immigrant Women's Domestic Violence Services, 2006; Taylor & Putt, 2007). As Ogunsiji et.al (Ogunsiji et al., 2011) found women in their study were accustomed to the informal network of extended family members as mediators in domestic violence situation in Africa. Consequently, the women faced the challenges of reporting their abuse to law enforcement such as Police in Australia. In case of seeking legal help and advice CALD women often are not eager to progress their complaints (InTouch: Multicultural Centre Against Family Violence, 2010). Also international literature confirm that immigrant usually report cases of domestic violence in a lower rate that

mainstream women. For example, most of the participants in Ahmad et.al (2009) and Ammar et al.’s (2014) study sought professional help after a long delay.



Gender roles

Gender inequality is one of the central considerations for many of the studies.Fixed gender roles lead to different responsibilities for men and women in family life. These roles have also implication for how women respond to family violence. Within the family it is usually women who have a role for keeping family together and ensuring marital harmony in ways that prevent women from seeking help for domestic violence. Radical changes to men’s traditional roles as husbands and fathers after immigration, has been identified as a significant contributing factor in marital conflict and domestic violence. In particular losing the breadwinner role of men and more social and economic opportunities for women in host countries may result in more tension in the family (Bui & Morash, 2008). For example, in Zannettino’s (2012) study women felt that expectations of women in Australia did not conform to those of the Liberian culture and therefore men were fearful that their wives would abandon their traditional gender roles. In particular, the payment of welfare to women was perceived by men as a threat to their breadwinner role in the family, which often led to women being financially and emotionally abused. This point was also explored by Colucci et.al’s (2014) study with Indian community and Fisher’s (2013) work with African refugee communities . 

Immigration and Settlement Challenges

In line with some international studies, most of the literature in Australian context reported that immigration related factors increase women’s vulnerability to domestic violence. It underlines how immigration has negative impact on women’s experiences of violence by setting up barriers for seeking help. Despite conducted within various ethnic communities, common barriers and challenges have been noted in Australian literature. One challenge reported by most of the studies is the women’s uncertain visa status which makes immigrant women legally as well as economically dependent on their abusive partners. This dependency is frequently utilised by abusers as a tool for control and intimidation, including threats of deportation and removal of children. Ogunsiji et al. (2011) found that many of the women in their study explain that their visa status was used by husbands to threaten them. Similarly, Rees and Pease (2007) reported that women expressed their concerns about their visa status

in case of leaving the relationship. These fears were repeatedly reported in other studies (Easteal 1996c; Bonar & Roberts, 2006; Szczepanska, 2004; Taylor & Putt, 2007). Fear of deportation and uncertain visa status is usually exacerbated by women’s lack of knowledge about their legal rights and available support services.

In another study that looked at the broader social and political context, Cuneen and Stubbs (1997), explored the specific vulnerability of Filipino immigrant women to homicide. The authors argued that Filipino women in Australia share the same experiences as other immigrant women and face similar challenges. Aly and Gaba (2007), in the only Australian study on domestic violence among Muslim women, investigated the specific needs of Muslim immigrant women in relation to crisis accommodation services. They identified a low level of knowledge and understanding about crisis accommodation services among Muslims as a main barrier to access these services. Another barrier which immigrant women often face is social isolation as part of immigration experience. Lack of social network particularly family and friends has been regularly mentioned in the literature. In most of the studies the isolation has been used by abuser to exert more control over the women and lead to more social abuse (Bonar & Roberts, 2006; Easteal, 1996a; Flory, 2012; Ogunsiji et al., 2011; Pease & Rees, 2007). For example, restriction from leaving the home, meeting friends and neighbours, learning English and attending classes were among common tactics used by abuser to isolate women. Social isolation can also resulted in limited contact with social support service systems (Raj & Silverman, 2003). Language barriers can also restrain women’s access to services. In a study conducted by Immigrant women’s Domestic Violence Services in Rural Victoria (2006) Immigrant and refugee women had limited access to interpreting services and often relied on inexperienced interpreters . Also some women in the study shared their concern about confidentiality of local interpreters. Moreover, In Touch (2010) reported that police usually did not provide interpreter when respond to CALD communities. A number of studies found that fear of police and legal system is another challenge for immigrant women to respond to the abuse. It appears that CALD women’s fear usually stem from their experiences in their home countries where there is a high level of police and legal system corruption. For example, in Zannettino’s (2012) study and Ogunsiji, et.al’s (2011)

work , women expressed concern about accessing support from the police and the legal system. In particular, women were worried that their engagement with police would be seriously undermined men’s opportunities for education and employment.

Another challenge for immigrant women is their experience of racism and discrimination while accessing services and the system. Some studies mentioned that immigrant and refugee women experienced discrimination in their contacts with service providers which discouraged them from seeking help (Aly & Gaba, 2007; Immigrant Women's Domestic Violence Services, 2006; Rees & Pease, 2007). Pease and Rees (2007) explained that refugees who come to Australia are aware of the negative view held about them in broader community. It can discourage them to access services. This is particularly a case for Muslim women. Aly and Gaba (2007) found that negative stereotype about Muslim community particularly after September 11 2001 caused barriers for women to seek help. In their study, Muslim women who accessed crisis accommodation described it as a negative experience. The inability to maintain cultural and religious practices in the crisis accommodation environment was the most significant barrier for Muslim women to access services. Similarly other international research confirmed this finding (Abraham, 2008; Abu-Ras, 2007).

In summary, most of the above mentioned works, despite being conducted among different ethnic communities, share common themes as main challenges for immigrant women. Barriers such as language, lack of knowledge about services and legal system, fear of police, social isolation, financial dependency to the abusers and fear of deportation were mentioned frequently. Areas of concern were mostly immigration –related factors. They all identified particular vulnerability of immigrant women experiencing domestic violence. Also, gender inequality was addressed as a challenge for abused women in some of the studies. Grey literature In addition to above mentioned studies, advocacy on behalf of CALD women in Australia has generated a number of project reports. These works were mainly carried out by government departments and institutions or non-government organizations and their samples consist of different groups of CALD women and in some cases in different states or regions in Australia. In view of the limited Australian research, these reports provide important sources of data.

Women surviving violence: cultural competence in critical services (Ethnic Communities' Council of Victoria, 2013) is a policy research project. It argued that family violence is often not reported by CALD women so there is ambiguity in the prevalence of domestic violence in immigrant and refugee women. However, the paper reflected on the complexity of experiences of abuse among CALD women and the gap in service provision. Some common barriers to respond to domestic violence among CALD women were identified (2013, 9-15). Another project in South Australia is Responding to Domestic Violence with New and Emerging Communities (Diamandi and Muncey, 2009). The central aim of the project was to “reduce domestic and family violence in new and emerging communities by increasing the awareness, knowledge and ability of community members of in accessing services and negotiating Australian systems” (2009, 13). The key themes derived from the consultations with African and Middle Eastern communities and service providers were: different legal system in Australia, role of agencies such as Centrelink, role of community leaders, individualise different communities, cultural differences, language, resettlement issues (2009).

The Right to be Safe from Domestic Violence: Immigrant and Refugee Women in Rural Victoria (Immigrant Women's Domestic Violence Services, 2006), focused on domestic violence among immigrants and refugees in rural Victoria. The findings showed that in terms of responding to domestic violence most of the women usually did not report violence; the majority had no knowledge of formal services and according to most of the interviewees, family problems were usually kept within the home and mainstream services were the place where women go when they decide to take action ( 2006, p. 12).

Another project is I lived in fear because I knew nothing conducted by In touch Multicultural Centre against Violence (2010) in Victoria. The aims of the project were to identify the barriers accessing the legal and justice system for CALD women. The findings indicated that CALD women face additional barriers accessing the legal system. The research discovered that “CALD women experienced barriers to the justice system on two levels: firstly, the barriers they face accessing the justice system and secondly, the barriers they face going through the justice and support systems”( 2010, p. 7).

Flory’s project , Whittlesea CALD Communities family Violence, (2012), focused on CALD communities in Victoria as well. The women as well as service providers in the project identified similar barriers to disclosing family violence. The report recommended the establishment of a model for early intervention and prevention of domestic violence against CALD women in the city of Whittlesea. The main elements of the model are: the empowerment of CALD women; building the capacity of community and religious leaders; early intervention in the settlement process; targeting young people; and increasing access to behaviour change programs (2012, pp. 9-10). You can’t hide it - Family Violence Shows (Versha andVenkatraman, 2010) is another project conducted in Western Sydney by the Hills Holroyd Parramatta Migrant Resource Centre and The Centre for Refugee Research UNSW. The focus of the project was mainly on refugees. The consultations were conducted with three refugee communities: Sri Lankan Tamil, Sierra Leonean and Afghan, workers who provide settlement support to new arrivals and mainstream domestic violence support services. One of the concerns of these three communities was the perception that domestic violence among refugee communities is considered as a cultural issue rather than a gender issue and these communities are judged on this issue differently from mainstream Australia. Other identified issues were: pre-arrival experience of war and related trauma, settlement post-arrival issues, visa, economic pressure, perception of police, children’s issue, changed gender roles, gaps in service delivery, lack of culturally sensitive support services and refuges, lack of coordination between settlement services and domestic violence services (2010:13).

In conclusion, these projects provide a rich source of data regarding the nature and prevalence of domestic violence among different CALD communities in Australia. Moreover, there are similar recurring themes in most of the projects presented above. Ambiguity on the prevalence of domestic violence among immigrant women, underreporting incidents of domestic violence, role of gender inequality in women’s experiences of abuse, barriers to access services, lack of culturally appropriate service provision, exploring existing primary prevention strategies are all among the frequent themes of these reports.

Prevention and early intervention strategies: overview the key themes

In order to respond to domestic violence in CALD communities, different prevention and intervention strategies were introduced by various researchers and stakeholders. The key suggestions were: 

Developing intervention and prevention initiatives should be embedded in cultural values of CALD communities rather than adopting a mainstream model. Culturally appropriate and holistic intervention will reinforce community values, such as family harmony and healthy relationships. Current research indicates that these interventions are much more effective than confronting messages, especially those that ostracise men. For example, in many CALD communities, “promoting ‘family harmony’ is preferable to focusing on ‘domestic violence when attempting to engage key stakeholders” (Bonar & Roberts, 2006: 6).



Another common theme to emerge from the literature was the need to engage key community and religious leaders in addressing domestic violence in CALD communities. However, it is significant that community leaders should represent the whole community particularly the interests of the women.



Community participation and leadership is another theme. A systematic effort should be made to involve communities to participate and lead the intervention programs. The best practice approach to these programs is to allow them to be designed and directed by the local CALD community. This approach ensures community ownership of the issue and the creation of a strong local leadership network. Particularly, the voices of women and survivors of domestic violence should be heard and the solutions they made need to be incorporated in any initiative to combat family violence. Community consultation needs to be a regular component of violence prevention efforts (Poljski, 2011).



Community education on domestic violence, Australian law and how to access support services needs to be provided to new settlers. It should target all members of the communities specifically men who perpetrate domestic violence. “This should be part of a comprehensive family support package for migrant communities and

refugees, particularly where severe trauma has been experienced prior to migration to Australia” (Bonar & Roberts, 2006: 6). The involvement of men is critical in changing behaviour programs. Also, there is considerable support in the literature for targeting prevention and intervention strategies at children and young people. 

Developing mentor programs and peer support groups can involve non-violent men (preferably elders who settled successfully) to build mentoring relationships with men who have been violent men or at risk of perpetrating violence .The mentors can address issues of domestic violence within their community. Mentor groups can be community-based, neighbourhood associations and men’s groups.



Empowering victims of domestic violence to recover their lives after violence can include counselling, relocation and accommodation assistance, credit support, social connection, employment and ensuring accessibility to services is not affected by language barriers. Some consultations conducted with women revealed a strong correlation between the level of empowerment survivors of family violence felt and their level of connection to other women and support groups.



Education and training for service providers on domestic violence and cultural difference. Regular cultural competency training is required for DV service providers as well as settlement services so mainstream workers can build capacity in cultural competency. Cultural competence can be viewed as a tool to guide service providers to be aware of personal and institutional biases, to support clients to recognise a service that suit their needs, and to invest in culturally safe services.



Collaboration and partnership among different stakeholders is essential in order to address the issue of DV among CALD communities. A comprehensive guideline needs to be developed so the role and responsibility of each service is clear and regular information sharing happens through meetings, forums and consultation sessions.



Cultural diversity of the service sector was another strategy identified by some reports and studies. Existing support services are not well equipped to respond to diversity

(Ethnic Communities' Council of Victoria, 2013). Establishing few Multicultural women’s refuge may be one of the mechanisms for cultural diversity of the services 

Some changes at structural level are needed. In this review, the role of structural factors particularly immigration related issues were recognised as dynamics that perpetuate discrimination and barriers for CALD women. Gaps in immigration policy, discrimination and lack of cultural competency among service providers, scarcity of material resources such as job opportunities, housing and childcare are among the major challenges that CALD women face while trying to deal with the abusive relationship. Also, reform in both immigration and domestic violence legislative is essential to fill the existing gaps.

Conclusion Review of the existing literature indicates the complexity of the experience of domestic violence among CALD communities. This complexity is due to the intersection of different factors particularly immigration and settlement issues, cultural values and differences and some other structural factors such as government policies, the legal system and gaps in service delivery. The literature confirms that difficulties that abused immigrant women face coexist with the challenges they face as immigrants. Immigration related issues were recognised as dynamics that perpetuate discrimination and barriers for immigrant women. Nonetheless, fixed gender roles and some cultural values play a significant role in how domestic violence is perceived, how CALD women respond to it and the options available to the victims. Furthermore, according to the finding of some of mentioned research and projects, mainstream services may not be well equipped to accommodate the needs of CALD women and the multiplicity of their experiences. Some common strategies and initiatives to address the issue of domestic violence in CALD communities have been discussed. In summary, in developing a holistic approach to respond to the issue of domestic violence among CALD communities, strategies and programs should take into account the multiple factors that impact CALD communities in their entirety.

Acknowledgement

The author acknowledges the financial support of NSW Government Community Relations Commission under the 2013/14 Multicultural Advantage Grants Program (Community Inclusion). The funding was provided to Hunter Women Centre (HWC) which is the peak body for health and domestic violence organisations in Hunter region. Part of the funding was allocated to do a literature review on domestic violence among CALD communities. This paper is a summarised version of the literature review.

Bibliography: Abraham, M. (2008), Domestic Violence and the Indian Diaspora in United State, Sage. Abu-Ras, W. (2007), 'Cultural Beleifs and Service Utilization by Battered Arab Immigrant Women', Violence against Women, 13(10): 1002-28. Ahmad, F., et al. (2009), 'Why Doesn’t She Seek Help for Partner Abuse?’’ An Exploratory Study with South Asian Immigrant Women', Social Science& Medicine, 69: 613-22. Allimant, A., & Ostapiej-Piatkowski, B. (2011). Supporting Women from CALD Backgrounds Who Are Victims/Survivors of Sexual Violence Challenges and Opportunities for Practitioners Retrieved 10/10/2011. Aly, A. & Gaba, G. (2007), No Place to Go, Report on the Needs Analysis of Crisis Accommodation for Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Background People (Islamic), [online]. [Accessed 23/06/2009]. Ammar, N. H., Couture-Carron, A., Alvi, S., & San Antonio, J. (2014). Experiences of Muslim and Non-Muslim Battered Immigrant Women With the Police in the United States: A Closer Understanding of Commonalities and Differences. Violence against Women, 19(12), 1449– 1471. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012a). Migration,Australia,2010-11, cat. no. 3412.0. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/3412.0 Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2012b). Personal Safety Australia. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2013) Personal Safety Survey 2012,cat. no. 4906.0. Bonar, M., & Roberts, D. (2006). A Review of Literature Relating to Family and Domestic Violence in Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Communities in Australia Retrieved 11 Nov 2008, from http://www.community.wa.gov.au/. Bui, H., & Morash, M. (2008). Immigration, Masculinity, and Intimate Partner Violence from the Standpoint of Domestic Violence Service Providers and Vietnamese-origin Women. Feminist Criminology, 3(3), 191-215. Chung, D. (2000). Home Safe Home: The link Between Domestic and Family Violence and Women’s Homelessness,’ Partnerships against Domestic Violence Retrieved 09/08/2010, from http://www.wesnet.org.au/publications/reports/0011HomeSafeHome.pdf. Colucci, E., O’Connor, M., Field, K., Baroni, A., Pryor, R., & Minas, e. H. (2014). Nature of Domestic/Family Violence and Barriers to Using Services Among Indian Immigrant Women. Alterstice – Revue Internationale de la Recherche Interculturelle, 3(2). Cuneen, C. & Stubbs, J. (1997), '‘Violence against Filipino women in Australia: Race, Class and Gender’', Sydney Law Review, 29. Diamandi, S.& Muncey,P. (2009), Responding to Domestic Violence with New and Emerging Communities, The Migrant Women’s Support & Accommodation Service. Easteal, P. (1996a), 'Domestic Violence in Immigrant Communities', Bureau of Immigration, Multicultural and Population Research Bulletin, 17): 42-46. Easteal, P. (1996b), 'Double Jeopardy: Violence against Immigrant Women in the Home', Family Matters, 45(Spring/Summer 26–30. Easteal, P. (1996c), Shattered Dreams: Marital Violence against Overseas-born Women in Australia’, Australian Government Publishing Service Canberra. Ethnic Communities' Council of Victoria (2013),Women Surviving violence: Cultural competence in Critical Services. Fisher, C. (2013). Changed and Changing Gender and Family Roles and Domestic Violence in African Refugee Background Communities Post-Settlement in Perth, Australia. Violence against Women, 19(7), 833–847. Flory, R. (2012). Whittlesea CALD Communities Family Violence Project. Immigrant Women's Domestic Violence Services (2006), The Right to be Safe from Domestic Violence: Immigrant and Refugee Women in Rural Victoria:Rural Research Project [online], Department of Human Services Victoria. Available: http://www.iwdvs.org.au/publications/FinalIWDVS-RuralReportMay06.pdf, [Accessed 21/09/2009].

InTouch: Multicultural Centre Against Family Violence. (2010). ‘I Lived in Fear Because I Knew Nothing’:Barriers to the Justice System Faced by CALD Women Experiencing Family Violence Lay, Y. (2006). Identifying the Woman, the Client and the Victim. ACSSA Newsletter, 12. Morgan, A., & Chadwick, H. (2009). Key Issues in Domestic Violence from http://www.aic.gov.au/publications. Mouzos, J. & Makkai , T. (2004), Women’s Experiences of Male Violence: Findings from the Australian Component of the International Violence Against Women Survey (IVAWS) (Vol. 56): Australian Institute of Criminology. O'Donnell, C. J., Smith, A., & Madison, J. (2002). Using Demographic Risk Factors to explain Variations in the Incidence of Violence against Women’. Journal of Interpersonal Violence 17(12), 1239–1262. Ogunsiji, O., et al. (2011), 'Suffering and Smiling: West African Immigrant Women’s Experience of Intimate Partner Violence', Journal of Clinical Nursing, 21: 1659–65. Partnerships against Domestic Violence (2000), Attitudes to Domestic and Family Violence in the Diverse Australian Community, cultural Perspectives [online], Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Unit, University of Queensland. Available: http://www.consumer.vic.gov.au/legalchannel/DOJFileLib.nsf/0/235980233cc7fcc0ca2573f6 0018c765/$FILE/FV_attitudes_dv_CALD_communities.pdf, [Accessed 15/12/2010]. Pease, B. & Rees, S. (2007), 'Researching Domestic Violence in Refugee Families', DVIRC Quarterly 1: 10-15. Poljski, C. (2011), On Her Way: Primary Prevention of Violence against Immigrant and Refugee Women in Australia [online], Multicultural Centre for Women’s Health (MCWH). [Accessed 08/11/2011]. Raj, A., & Silverman, J. (2002). Violence against Immigrant Women: The Roles of Culture, Context and Legal Immigrant Status on Intimate Partner Violence. Violence against Women, 8(3), 367-398. Szczepanska, E. (2004), Domestic Violence in the Polish Community: An analytical Approach to Defining the Nature and Prevalence of Domestic Violence in the Polish Community [online], Australian-Polish Community Services Inc. Available: http://www.apcs.org.au/attachments/publications/Before_its_too_late_DV_Report.pdf, [Accessed 05/06/2010]. Taylor, N. & Putt, J. (2007), 'Adult Sexual Violence in Indigenous and Culturally and linguistically Diverse Communities in Australia', Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 345): 16. The National Council to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children NCRVWC (2009). Background Paper to Time for Action: The National Council's Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and Their children’, 2009–2021: Canberra: Australian Government. The United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women. (1993). United Nations Resolution 48/104 (444). In p. o. t. t. P. Meeting (Ed.), (Vol. Geneva): United Nations General Assembly. Tually, S. (2008), 'Women, domestic and family violence and homelessness: A synthesis report’', Women, domestic and family violence and homelessness: A synthesis report’, Flinders Institute for Housing, Urban and Regional Research. Versha,A.&Venkatraman,R.(2010), You can't hide it - Family Violence Shows,The Hills Holroyd Parramatta Migrant Resource Centre & The Centre for Refugee Research UNSW. VicHealth. (2009). National Survey on Community Attitudes to Violence Against Women 2009 ,Changing Cultures, Changing Attitudes – Preventing Violence against Women, A Summary of Findings Retrieved 12/10/2010, from http://www.vichealth.vic.gov.au/~/media/ResourceCentre/PublicationsandResources/NCAS_ CommunityAttitudes_report_2010.ashx. VicHealth. (2014a). Australians’ attitudes to violence against women 2013 National Ccmmunity Attitudes Towards Violence Against Women Survey – Research Summary.

VicHealth. (2014b). Australians’ attitudes to violence against women:Findings from the 2013 National Community Attitudes towards Violence Against Women Survey (NCAS) Retrieved 03/11/2014. Zannettino, L. (2012). '' . . . There is No War Here; It is Only the Relationship That Makes Us Scared'' : Factors Having an Impact on Domestic Violence in Liberian Refugee Communities in South Australia. Violence Against Women, 18(7), 807–828.

Engaging Families – Crossing the Service Divide

Ms Julie Knowles Manager Families, Health and Wellbeing Windermere Child and Family Services Narre Warren, Vic 3805

Mr Danny Alcock Manager Clinical Services – South East Taskforce Community Agency Bentleigh, Vic 3204

Ms Leanne Kelly Research & Development Coordinator Windermere Child and Family Services Narre Warren, Vic 3805

Paper Presented at The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7-8 December 2015

ABSTRACT

It is commonly recognised that family violence, substance abuse and mental health concerns have high rates of comorbidity. Despite this knowledge, services addressing these issues operate from siloed frameworks within Victoria. Additionally, these services conceptualise the people they work with in different ways which affects service delivery. These varying conceptualisations are recognisable not only between drug and alcohol, mental health and family violence service areas but also within them such as the strong distinctions in language and paradigms within the family violence system between those working with ‘victims’ and those working with ‘perpetrators’. Families experiencing comorbid issues can attend family violence services that support separation from the perpetrator and safety planning while concurrently attending alcohol and drug services whose evidence-based best practice support the maintenance of family relationships. While harm minimisation is a critical underlying feature of all service delivery, when families are facing these co-morbid issues, services supporting them can be working in direct opposition.

In recognition of these siloes and the issues they present for service users, two Community Services Organisations, Windermere and Taskforce, have recently come together to develop the Engaging Families program to address the interface of family violence, drug and alcohol and mental health service provision. This model is holistic and includes counselling, outreach, parenting support and group work. It operates in the reality that not all people can or do leave violent situations (including children), and that parental relationships are usually life long, even in absentia. This paper provides an overview of the challenges and concerns faced in the initial planning and implementation period of this approach and highlights strategies being trialled to overcome them. While this model is at an embryotic stage, the considerations and preparatory questioning undertaken by Windermere and Taskforce can add to ongoing conversations regarding early stages of interagency interdisciplinary collaborations.

Keywords: Family Violence; Alcohol and Drug; Mental Health; Service Interface; Interdisciplinary

Introduction

This paper describes the process from conception to early implementation of an innovative new program, Engaging Families. The program aims to provide families with a holistic approach to family violence and its common comorbidities, substance abuse and poor mental health. To strive for better family outcomes and more streamlined access, two agencies with a complimentary suite of services have collaborated to design and facilitate Engaging Families. Windermere is one of the oldest and largest independent community agencies in Melbourne’s southern region with various services including counselling, victims’ assistance, disability and family services. Windermere’s significant contribution to Engaging Families is its long history of assisting families experiencing family violence. Over the past forty years Taskforce has become a leading provider of services to assist people experiencing addiction, mental illness, unemployment and high risk behaviours. Collaboration between Windermere and Taskforce has enabled a robust program design where staff with complimentary specialisations will be working side by side. As well as aiming to provide families with a streamlined, integrated and holistic service, this interdisciplinary model intends to enable skill-sharing between staff.

As Engaging Families is in its early stages, this paper is unable to comment on outcomes for families. Instead it reviews the rationale for the Engaging Families model by exploring evidence of common family violence comorbidities and establishing the need for an integrated service. Additionally, the paper discusses the new model and explains the process and thinking behind its conception up until early implementation stage.

Co-morbidity between family violence, alcohol and drug use and mental health issues

There is a widely known propensity for comorbidity between family violence and substance abuse (Morgan & McAtamney 2009; AIHW 2010; Mouzos & Makkai 2004). There is also clear comorbidity demonstrated between mental health and substance abuse (AIHW 2010; Pico-Alfonso et al. 2006). Additionally, research by Shorey et al. (2012) confirmed strong links between family violence, drug and alcohol abuse and all types of mental health concerns.

Research demonstrates that violence escalates with the consumption of alcohol. This is demonstrated by Morgan and McAtamney’s (2009) figures which show that forty-four per cent of partner homicides involve alcohol. Unfortunately the percentage of alcohol involvement rises to eighty-seven per cent for indigenous partner homicides (Morgan and McAtamney 2009). Findings from the International Violence against Women Survey report that women were four to seven per cent more likely to experience violence if their partners drank to inebriation a number of times per month than if their partners drank less (Mouzos and Makkai 2004). Mouzos and Makkai’s (2004) research demonstrates the strong links between substance abuse and family violence with forty-five per cent of family violence perpetrators reported as being under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol during the last incident of family violence. Figure 1: Percentage of substance abuse reported during last incidence of family violence (Mouzos and Makkai 2004)

6%

4%

Neither drinking nor using drugs

5% 50%

Drinking alcohol

35% Using both drugs and drinking alcohol Using drugs Not Stated

Research, including that by Dawe et al. (2007), indicates that parental substance misuse and family violence are key features in families identified by child protective services. Although figures vary considerably, it is notable that studies including Dawe et al. (2007) suggest that at least half of families identified by child and protective services have a profile that includes parental substance misuse. Goldsworthy (2015: 1) from the Australian Institute of Family Services states that, ‘Excessive alcohol consumption is associated with all the major forms of child abuse and neglect: physical abuse; emotional maltreatment; neglect; sexual abuse; and the witnessing of domestic violence.’ However there are very few alcohol and drug specific support services for families whose scope encompasses comorbid issues.

Comorbidity between substance abuse and poor mental health is also readily evidenced in the literature. The Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW 2010: 85) National Drug Strategy Household Survey Report states, ‘Illicit drug users…were more likely to be diagnosed or treated for a mental illness and report high or very high levels of psychological distress compared with those who had not used an illicit drug in the previous 12 months.’ Strong links between substance abuse and family violence is followed by empirical evidence that victims of family violence are more likely to experience symptoms of depression and anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder and suicidal ideations than control groups (PicoAlfonso et al. 2006). Additionally mental health concerns, including personality disorders, are prevalent in perpetrators of family violence (Shorey et al. 2012).

Whilst comorbidity between substance abuse, poor mental health and family violence is demonstrable, it is also clear that substance abuse or mental health concerns are not the main predictor of family violence. Chan (2005) states that isolated alcohol and drug treatments will not prevent family violence; instead advocating that power and control are the most significant risk factors for violence and they should not be overshadowed by a substance abuse scapegoat. This is corroborated by Mouzos and Makkai (2004) who agree that the strongest risk factors for family violence are controlling behaviour and high levels of aggression which can be exacerbated by drug and/or alcohol abuse and mental health issues.

Interagency collaboration

Integrated models, such as Engaging Families, work across a number of service areas to provide people experiencing comorbid issues with a more holistic and seamless service. There is an abundance of literature purporting the desirability of integrated and collaborative models; highlighting their positive effect on service provision and agency processes (OECD 2015; Statham 2011; Armitage et al. 2009). However existing research is only useful to a certain extent as integrative, collaborative models vary considerably and there is insufficient evidence from rigorous empirical studies demonstrating how they improve outcomes for service users (Statham 2011; OECD 2015; Breckenridge et al. 2015). This lack is an important gap as evaluations of integrated models are necessary for building the evidence base and ensuring that future versions of integrated models can be informed and constructed by evidence from previous integrated models (Armitage et al. 2009).

Research and policy conclusions from authors including Miller et al. (2005), Zannettino and McLaren (2014), the National Council (2009), and Humphreys (2007) advocate that people with complex concomitant issues are best served through integrated approaches to service delivery. Zannettino and McLaren (2014) state that collaborative interagency systems are specifically the most appropriate way to assist children and families experiencing domestic violence. The National Council to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children (2009: 28) state that services should ‘…meet the needs of women and their children experiencing violence by working towards a shift away from silos of traditional service delivery towards a joined-up, integrated service delivery.’ Miller et al. (2005) cites the usefulness of integrated services for people combatting substance abuse and mental illness.

While empirically supported service user outcomes for interagency collaboration are still few and far between there is significant evidence that interagency collaboration serves to improve agency processes and staff satisfaction levels (Bond 2010, OECD 2015; Statham 2011). Integrated systems have streamlined services, reduced waitlists and minimised referral complications (OECD 2015). Interagency collaboration has made access easier for service users and improved communication between agencies and their staff members (Bond 2010). This increased communication has fostered staff skill-sharing, improved work culture, helped breakdown silos and avoided duplication (Statham 2011). Whilst there is a lack of empirically derived data regarding service user outcomes, there is significant evidence that interagency collaboration, when done well, improves processes and the service experience for users (Statham 2011). Additionally, small scale and qualitative evaluations have shown strong positive outcomes for service users with complex needs accessing collaborative integrated services (OECD 2015). While intra-agency rather than interagency, Windermere’s previous experiences integrating services within the agency have met with successful service user outcomes (see Kelly and Knowles, forthcoming).

The Current Service System Response

Despite strong evidence of comorbidity between family violence, substance abuse and mental health, services within Victoria remain largely siloed with terminology, evidenced-based approaches and values specific to individual service paradigms. There are many reasons why

service responses remain siloed. The bullets below highlight reasons specific to Windermere and Taskforce although they are fairly transferrable across the sector: 

Government Funding and Program Guidelines – Windermere and Taskforce’s programs are specifically funded for targets and outcomes that are one dimensional for example alcohol and drug assessments or family violence counselling. These are often not holistic or responsive to the multi-faceted dimensions of complex issues. Unit costs usually do not allow for stretch into other areas. Often management themselves are stretched and whilst clear gaps in service provision can be identified, the time to respond to these in a strategically sound manner can be lacking – particularly when this capacity needs to be matched across multiple agencies.



Specialisation – Windermere, Taskforce and similar agencies have responded to long term funding streams by specialising in different areas. Some agencies do not have additional funding or the expertise required to provide a variety of wraparound programs. Partnerships to address these gaps can be complex, time consuming and difficult to manage in a highly competitive environment. Reversely, Breckenridge et al. (2015) notes a potential pitfall of integration to be considered could be the loss or diminishment of specialisation.



Threat to messaging about family violence - There have been significant concerns from staff within Windermere and Taskforce, and highlighted within the literature (Breckenridge et al. 2015), about anything that could be perceived as moving away from a ‘perpetrator responsibility’ approach. There are genuine fears that in the age of the thirty second media grabs, substance abuse or mental health concerns could be identified as a cause/excuse rather than a co-morbid or exacerbating factor. Coates and Wade’s (2007) illuminating discourse on the effect of language (mis)representing victims and perpetrators of family violence corroborates the importance of these staff concerns as language can effectively blame and disempower victims while obfuscating the responsibility of perpetrators.



Philosophical, evidence-base, practice clashes across different service specialities – There are clear differences in approaches across family violence, substance abuse and

mental health services and these take significant time, effort, flexibility and good will to address. People working in specific services become highly attuned to their approaches and their underlying philosophies and values. It can be difficult to have these challenged and requires time and open-mindedness to engage in dialogue and consensus building (Breckenridge et al. 2015).

Introduction to the Engaging Families Model

Engaging Families is an integrated model of service for families experiencing a range of issues such as family violence, substance abuse, mental health issues and poor general family functioning. This integrated model draws together work undertaken through currently funded services offered by both Windermere and Taskforce and provides additional and previously unfunded aspects to ensure families receive a holistic service response. Windermere has a history of working with people experiencing family violence while Taskforce are a specialist substance abuse and mental health service.

The Engaging Families response will appear seamless to families accessing the service despite funding coming from separate avenues. Seamlessness of the service means that families will not be required to retell their story to each new worker and they will not need to linger on waitlists as movement between specialists will be streamlined and coordinated. The model is designed to work with families with children under the age of twelve who have experienced family violence and comorbid factors of substance abuse and/or mental illness. The model involves an initial assessment, followed by a plan which may consist of any of the following: outreach, family support, counselling, family therapy, group work and where relevant, other external services.

Engaging Families is not designed to provide acute mental health services. However, it incorporates dual expertise regarding impact and management of mental health conditions regularly identified by practitioners across family violence and substance abuse services including anxiety, depression, some personality disorders, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Where acute mental health services are required, warm referrals and liaison will be provided; utilising existing formal partnerships when appropriate.

The guiding principles of this initiative are:

1)

Being safe is a right of all people

2)

The person who perpetrates violence is responsible for it

3)

Being under the influence of drugs or alcohol or alcohol/drug-seeking behaviour is not an excuse to perpetrate family violence

4)

Following family violence best practice guidelines

5)

Following alcohol and drug harm minimisation and therapeutic interventions

Methods

Rather than a traditional methods section, this section discusses the Engaging Families journey from nebulous idea to early implementation stage to provide practical information for how the alliance has flourished for Taskforce and Windermere. The two agencies were bought together by the key funder, Communities for Children (CfC). CfC received two individual tenders to help fill a gap that they had identified in family violence services in the region. They recognised the value of the individual tenders but saw that this was an opportunity for the tenders to combine and make the individual programs more than the sum of their parts. The relevant managers of Taskforce and Windermere were informed of this idea and CfC proposed that they work together on a joint submission. After several meetings to get to know each other’s agencies, flesh out program ideas, and explore the literature, the two agencies submitted their joint tender. Once this fortuitously opportunistic partnership’s joint tender was accepted and their key funding block secured they started working on clarifying specifics.

Both agencies recognised that, for the partnership to be effective, there would need to be flexibility and compromise. The relevant managers met on numerous occasions, initially to map out and become familiar with each other’s values, programs, tools, staff expertise, funding circumstances and other resources, then to work on combining elements from each of these to have a set of shared values, programs, tools, staff, funding and other resources specifically for Engaging Families. It was at this stage that they recognised the challenges they faced in creating an interagency program. These included funding and guideline challenges, existing siloed specialisation of staff, threats to messaging and language

surrounding family violence and alcohol and drug, and differences in philosophies and practice between the two agencies. These are discussed in more detail in the sections below.

Windermere and Taskforce have committed to working towards an evidence based model. As articulated, this program is in embryonic stages however significant time and energy has been devoted to investigating current practices and their evidenced outcomes, completing literature reviews around practice models, developing program logic, identifying outcome measurement tools that are demonstrated as reliable and valid and in documenting the process to enable replication and evaluation.

Government Funding and Program Guidelines

Governments are prescriptive in what approaches they consider to be acceptable for different service area specialities. There are usually sound reasons for these guidelines and program requirements however it limits the flexibility to respond to multiple issues impacting individuals and families. The Windermere/Taskforce partnership experienced this challenge as both agencies are tied to specific funding best practices and expectations. These include the agencies’ joint funding from Communities for Children Department of Social Security (CfC DSS) funding which is allowed to be utilised for parenting support, group work and outreach but not for counselling. Nor is family therapy considered an acceptable response to family violence through the State funding stream and yet it may be appropriate for some families; for example, sole parents redeveloping parenting roles and boundaries after separation from perpetrators of violence; or families working through alcohol and other drug issues.

To address these funding challenges Engaging Families has integrated targets from a variety of service areas held within both agencies. Funding sources for these programs vary from federal, state, local government and philanthropic. This enables a holistic approach whilst meeting all individual target and funding guidelines. The fact that both Windermere and Taskforce hold a variety of funded programs as enabled the possibility of this creative rejigging of funding requirements. It has required both agencies demonstrate commitment beyond the funding constraints to operate from a holistic approach. Further, the approach required tenacity with some tenders needing multiple amendments before approval from government funding bodies. To maintain this agreement Windermere and Taskforce have

implemented a transparent and strong system of tracking and target allocation to ensure all targets are met. Table 1: Merging funding sources to provide a holistic approach

Service approach within Engaging Families Parenting Support Outreach Family Therapy Counselling Care & Recovery Coordination Group work

Funding Source Federal Department of Social Services Federal Department of Social Services Local Government Philanthropy State Department of Health and Human Services State Department of Health and Human Services Federal Department of Social Services Local Government Philanthropy

Specialisation The Windermere/Taskforce partnership clearly demonstrates the ‘specialisation’ challenge described. Taskforce specialises in alcohol and drug, mental health, youth services, employment and training programs. Windermere provides specialist family violence and sexual assault counselling, victims’ assistance programs and family services amongst a variety of other services. To address service specialisation, we have utilised a strength-based and open minded strategic planning approach combining the knowledge, skills and resources of each agency. A phased planning and implementation approach with time set aside for dialogue and consensus building has enabled management to spend significant time understanding the other agency’s underpinning beliefs, evidence base and practice models. While time is always in short supply it has been invaluable for the co-creation of Engaging Families and a necessity of successful interagency collaboration as referenced in the literature (see Breckenridge et al. 2015). These meetings between management were used to formulate shared visions and aims as well as practical generation of shared decisions regarding best practice, tools, resources, necessary staff skills, staff location, supervision requirements and evaluation design.

As Windermere and Taskforce intend to facilitate skill permeation through the specialist siloes, Engaging Families includes joint service planning with staff from each agency. These

meetings are to occur fortnightly for each family with the aim of providing a platform for case reviews, keeping workers informed and facilitating skill-sharing between specialists.

Threat to messaging about family violence

Staff from both Windermere and Taskforce were concerned that the message about comorbidity could easily be misconstrued to become one of causation or as an excuse for unacceptable violence. Windermere and Taskforce have carefully considered this issue and have agreed the need to strongly reinforce three key statements: Substance abuse and/or mental illness do not cause family violence, cessation of substance abuse use will not automatically prevent violence and substance abuse and/or mental illness are not excuses for violence.

Philosophical, evidence-base, practice clashes across the different service specialities

Alcohol and drug and family violence services operate from very different paradigms. Alcohol and drug and mental health are underpinned by a health-based framework (see The Government of Western Australia 2014) whereas family violence is underpinned by a justice and feminist-based approach (see Tasmanian Government 2003; Women’s House Shelta 2009). These underlying frameworks often operate in direct opposition. They impact language, practice, outcomes measures, and service approaches.

To address these challenges, Windermere and Taskforce have spent significant time mapping and understanding the areas of consistency and conflict across the two service types and developing mitigation strategies. Open and curious communication again has been key to working through and merging these approaches. The first step was to articulate each agency’s values and priorities then co-create shared visions. Shared visions guided the development of strategies and consensus building to address other challenges and agree on shared frameworks, outcome measures, language and practice decisions. Using appreciative inquiry and a strength-based philosophy have helped the two agencies focus on positives and on continuing efforts that work well.

Examples of practice agreements include that Engaging Families staff will, within reason, work with people under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol. Windermere’s service

protocols included guidelines that consumers must not be under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol however Taskforce routinely work with inebriated consumers. Due to the purpose of Engaging Families it was agreed that turning away consumers who are under the influence could irreparably damage engagement. Another example of practice changes is that Engaging Families staff will disclose hidden drug and/or alcohol usage to other family members if appropriate and required. As an alcohol and drug service, in standard practice Taskforce would respect the confidentiality of the consumer and leave responsibility for disclosure to the individual. Windermere routinely advocates for the families’ right to be informed of their family member’s substance usage, particularly as this poses a risk to other family members of which they should be aware. These are two of many examples where Windermere and Taskforce have adapted their joint risk framework to more appropriately reflect the aims and needs of the Engaging Families program. Table 2: Examples of interface challenges and agreed responses

Family violence

Theoretical Framework

Language

Feminist Justice

Perpetrator, Victim, Clients

Substance abuse and mental Windermere and health Taskforce agreed response Health Agreed priorities Safety first Individualised approach

Client, Patient

(The language moves away (The language reflects from shame as unhelpful in that family violence is engagement or in the a crime and solely the therapeutic context) responsibility of the offender) Outcome measures

Prevention and cessation of violence, Improved wellbeing

Improved health and wellbeing

Feminist/Justice or Health as appropriate Person who uses violence, Person who survives violence May use family violence or alcohol and drug language as therapeutically appropriate Improved wellbeing Prevention and cessation of violence Measures against individually identified priorities Outcomes

measurement tools adapted and merged

Evidence based best practice approaches

Men’s behaviour change (160 hours including group work) showing approximately 10% improvement in men’s behaviour Case management often to support separation This may be safest option in long term however this can also have high risks and violence often continues post separation where coparenting relationships are required Counselling for women to understand family violence, its cyclic nature and causation and to treat trauma and mental health impacts Family violence occurs regardless of culture however some cultures accept it as reasonable behaviour

Consumer group trends - eg Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Impact of separation (CALD) dependent on visa trends class

Conclusion

Residential or nonTo measure outcomes residential based on an Detoxification/rehabilitation individualised approach Abstinence versus the harm minimisation approach Implement evidence based approaches Family relationships are based on valid supported and sustained outcomes measures,

For some CALD groups illicit drug usage is virtually non-existent however alcohol abuse may be common. In other groups there may be common usage of heroin or benzodiazepines

Share knowledge about trends and social information impacting people in the local community

There are significant cultural, structural and practice challenges in providing a holistic seamless response to families experiencing comorbidities between family violence, mental health and substance abuse. Utilising appreciative inquiry and a strength-based philosophy, the partnership between Windermere and Taskforce has addressed these challenges whilst remaining acutely aware of inherent risks in this work. The Engaging Families approach aims to support people in a variety of circumstances by providing consistent, individualised responses informed by combined evidence and best practice approaches of the different fields.

While future evaluations will demonstrate the extent to which Engaging Families is able to fulfil its aims, as a minimum the model will enable provision of information and skill-sharing between the two agencies. All aspects of the program, whilst they cannot at this point in time be described as evidence based are evidence informed with a view to moving towards an evidence based model.

Even in the initial planning and early implementation stages

Windermere and Taskforce have recognised significant learnings in their ability to engage in active dialogue with open minds and co-create a new collaborative paradigm. Both agencies recognise the vitality of this consensus building to the success of collaborative models and demonstrate that the most important factors to date have been commitment, time, openmindedness and creativity. Additionally, Engaging Families will continue to promote conversations about how the future could be different and how human services could work more effectively by collaborating for families and individuals experiencing comorbidities.

References AIHW (2010) National Drug Strategy Household Survey report. Drug statistics series no.25, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Canberra, retrieved from http://www.aihw.gov.au/publication-detail/?id=32212254712 Armitage, G., Suter, E., Oelke, N. & Adair, C. (2009) Health systems integration: state of the evidence, International Journal of Integrated Care, 9, 1-11. Bond, S. (2010) Integrated service delivery for young people: a literature review, Brotherhood of St Laurence: Fitzroy. Breckenridge, J., Rees, S., Valentine, K. & Murray, S. (2015) Meta-evaluation of existing interagency partnerships, collaboration, coordination and/or integrated interventions and service responses to violence against women, Landscapes: State of Knowledge (Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety), 11, 1-51. Coates, L. & Wade, A. (2007) Language and violence: Analysis of four discursive operations, Journal of Family Violence, 22, 511-522. Chan, C. (2005) Alcohol Issues in Domestic Violence, Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse (now ANROWS), Sydney, retrieved from http://www.adfvc.unsw.edu.au/PDF%20files/Alcohol_Issues.pdf Dawe, S., Frye, S., Best, D., Moss, D., Atkinson, J., Evans, C., Lynch, M. & Harnett, P. (2007) Drug use in the family: impacts and implications for children, ANCD Research Paper 13, Australian National Council on Drugs, Canberra. Goldsworthy, K. (2015) An overview of alcohol misuse and parenting, CFCA Resource Sheet— January 2015, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne. Humphreys, C. (2007). Domestic violence and child protection: challenging direction for practice, Issues Paper 13, Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse: Sydney. Kelly, L. and Knowles, J. (Forthcoming) The Integrated Care Team: A practice model in Child and Family Services, Journal of Family Social Work. Miller, W., Zweben, J. and Johnson, W. (2005) Evidence-based treatment: Why, what, where, when and how? Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 29(4), 267-276. Morgan, A. & McAtamney, A. (2009) Key Issues in alcohol-related violence, Practice Summary Paper No.4 Dec 2009, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra. Mouzos, J. & Makkai T. (2004) Women’s Experiences of Male Violence: Findings from the Australian Component of the International Violence Against Women Survey, Research and Public Policy Series 56, Australian Institute of Criminology, Canberra. National Council to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children (2009) Time for action: The National Council’s plan for Australia to reduce violence against women and their children 2009-2021, Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs, Canberra.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), (2015) Integrating social services for vulnerable groups: bridging sectors for better service delivery, OECD Publishing: Paris. Pico-Alfonso, M., Garcia-Linares, I., Celda-Navarro, N., Blasco-Ros, C., Echeburúa, E. and Martinez, M. (2006) The Impact of Physical, Psychological, and Sexual Intimate Male Partner Violence on Women's Mental Health: Depressive Symptoms, Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, State Anxiety, and Suicide, Journal of Women's Health, 15(5), 599-611. Shorey, R., Febres, J., Brasfield, H. and Stuart, G. (2012) The prevalence of mental health problems in men arrested for domestic violence, Journal of Family Violence, 27(8), 741-748. Statham, J. (2011) A review of international evidence on interagency working, to inform the development of children’s services committees in Ireland, Department of Children and Youth Affairs, Dublin. Tasmanian Government (2003) A criminal justice framework for responding to family violence in Tasmania, Tasmanian Government Department of Justice and Industrial Relations, Hobart. The Government of Western Australia (2014) The Western Australian mental health, alcohol and other drug services plan 2015-2025, The Government of Western Australia, Perth. Women’s House Shelta (2009) Domestic violence and child protection: Best practice from a feminist perspective, Women’s Community Aid Association QLD, Woolloongabba (Brisbane). Zannettino, L. & McLaren, H. (2014) Domestic violence and child protection: towards a collaborative approach across the two service sectors, Child & Family Social Work, 19(4), 421-431.

SUBM.0899.001.0001

Magistrates' Court of Victoria

Family Violence Taskforce Recommendations to the Royal Commission into Family Violence The Magistrates' Court Family Violence Taskforce was established in November 2014 with the sole purpose of forming a high-level leadership group to discuss issues relating to Family Violence in Victoria, and to undertake a scan of government and community resources that presently support the victims and perpetrators of Family Violence and formulate views to enhance or improve those resources. The members of the Taskforce are committed to the elimination of family violence in Victoria. Whilst each organisation will contribute to the work of the Royal Commission in it's individual capacity, the Taskforce has been working to reach a consensus on relevant issues where possible. This work is ongoing. It is proposed that there will be further engagement with the Royal Commission as this work progresses. However, given the time limits on submissions to the Royal Commission, the Taskforce determined to inform the Commission as to the agreement which has been achieved by Taskforce members to date. We, the undersigned organisations, share the collective view that a better response to family violence is one where: 1.

Legal and non-legal responses are integrated, monitored, and accountable to those impacted by family violence.

2.

Shared understandings and practices include prioritising victim safety (including risk assessment and management), perpetrator accountability and family violence prevention.

3.

A governance framework is established to coordinate a State-wide integrated family violence response, including permanent cross-ministerial governance and accountability, sustained partnership between Government, legal and community sectors, and shared understandings and practices across the family violence system .

4.

Funding is available to adequately and securely resource each component of the system, including courts, police, family violence services and lega l assistance services .

5.

Judicial officers, court staff, legal representatives, police and non-legal family violence support workers are provided with ongoing training and professional development to foster expertise and specialisation in family violence and sexual assault, includ ing knowledge and experience of family law. This includes training on identifying family violence risk factors and responding appropriately.

6.

The court process is:

7.

•

accessible to victims who need a justice intervention in response to safety concerns and identified risk factors;

•

a supportive environment that reduces risk to victims and perpetrators and their families through the effective management of court matters;

•

conducive to limiting victim and perpetrator interaction; and

•

Underpinned by the availability of services to promote victim safety and perpetrator accountability including the ability to order participation in behaviour change programs where appropriate.

The Family Violence Court Division is expanded State-wide so that victims and perpetrators in family violence matters are always treated within a specialist framework,

SUBM.0899.001.0002

and they have access to legal and all necessary non-legal support services, regard less of geographic location. 8.

Effective, safe and appropriate mechanisms are established for information to be shared between agencies and relevant jurisdictions, particularly in relation to risk , to ensu re timely interventions are made and to reduce system trauma for victims.

9.

Services provided in response to family violence are integrated and organ isations colocated where appropriate, informed by best practice evidence.

10. Organisations within the family violence system are coord inated in their response to risk. 11. Behaviour change programs for people who use violence are available to promote long term safety for victims of family violence and that these programs are informed by research and adopt minimum standards. 12. The Victorian Systemic Review of Family V iolence Deaths is statutorily established on best practice principles, adequately and securely funded, and fully integrated into the family violence governance framework, including risk assessment.

Signed:

Date: 4 June 2015

VICTORIAN BAR

'~

~

LAW INSTITUTE VICTORIA

Magistrates' Court of Victoria

Domestic Violence Victoria

Q Victoria Legal Aid

Poak body for domestic violenre soNicos for womon & children

No To Violence Male F;imily Violence

P1evcn tio n Associotlo n

'Fami{y Law ,'Bar YL5sociation 'h..J?menw ifhdisabilitiesvictoria empowertng women

V I CTORIA

POLICE

~

women'slefial serv1cuv1ctonaJ

Federation of Community Legal Centres VICTORIA ,

(

I

,

I

-;. , : :" ·'-·

(,

,. ',.

• I •)

.

.., \ ~~,_; J ;'

Court Network

DVRCV Domosl lc V lolonce Rcsou rce Cen tre V i cto ri a

) )

I

-

Domestic Servitude and Slavery Re-positioning the severity of power and control in intimate relationships

Allison Munro Solicitor Women’s Legal Centre (ACT & Region)

Margie Rowe Senior Lecturer ANU College of Law, ANU

Paper presented at

The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7 -8 December 2015

Domestic Servitude and Slavery Re-positioning the severity of power and control in intimate relationships

ABSTRACT: This paper considers how the Federal slavery and servitude offences apply to domestic violence, in both criminal and civil proceedings. Slavery and servitude are criminal offences in the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth). The definition of sexual servitude in that Act was broadened in 2013 to criminalise a broad range of exploitative behaviour, and can now found a criminal charge based on domestic violence. When the changes to the Act were being considered by the Senate Committee the Explanatory Memorandum discussed slavery and servitude only in terms of industry and workplaces and there appeared to be no legislative intention to include family violence. Women’s Legal Centres argued in submissions to the Senate inquiry that elements of both slavery and servitude are clearly found in cases of extreme domestic violence. The Senate Committee recommended that the Explanatory Memorandum be clarified so that the offences clearly include domestic violence. We argue in this presentation that the controlling nature of domestic violence and the sense of ownership that perpetrators can have over victims can be framed in terms of the definitions of slavery and servitude. In particular, we will explore the controlling nature of emotional abuse and how it can progress into servitude. We will consider how the severity and dangers involved with emotional abuse and control are frequently under-estimated, leaving women in danger without adequate remedies. We will explore how the recognition of power and control over a person in the criminal context can be extrapolated into other remedies, such as protection orders. We will conclude that there needs to be greater awareness of the slavery and servitude offences in order to obtain convictions in domestic violence. We will contend that the new servitude offence will assist to elevate and articulate the seriousness of power and control in intimate relationships to its proper level of gravity. Keywords: Servitude and slavery, coercion, nonphysical abuse, domestic violence

Introduction In this paper we seek to understand the levels of severity of nonphysical abuse in intimate relationships. We first consider state and territory legislation in both the civil and criminal sphere and the extent to which nonphysical violence is addressed. We then briefly discuss the purpose of criminalising behaviour and the benefits that might flow in domestic violence cases. We question whether the current terminology and language used to describe nonphysical violence appropriately captures the seriousness of the patterns of coercion and control experienced by some women. We consider the wide spectrum of behaviour that can constitute

domestic violence and look at power and control as a differentiating factor. We focus on relationships with high levels of ‘coercive control’ and consider the importance of nonphysical abuse in these relationships. We then examine how these relationships meet the elements of slavery and servitude as defined in the Federal Criminal Code. We conclude by considering whether nonphysical domestic violence should be categorised into levels of severity as a means of improving the police, courts and community response to this type of abuse. We recommend that the Federal offences of servitude and slavery be considered a ‘domestic violence offence’ in those jurisdictions that nominate offences in this way and that the elements of these offences and the language used in the Criminal Code be adopted when describing serious instances of coercive and controlling behaviour. Prevalence, significance and attitudes The Personal Safety Survey conducted in 2012 by the Australian Bureau of Statistics found that 25% of women over 18 had experienced emotional abuse. Emotional abuse was described as: certain behaviours or actions that are aimed at preventing or controlling … behaviour with the intent to cause …emotional harm or fear. These behaviours are characterised in nature by their intent to manipulate, control, isolate or intimidate the person they are aimed at. They are generally repeated behaviours and include psychological, social, economic and verbal abuse (Australian Government, Reducing violence against women and their children, 2015, p1)

The National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey, 2013 (the survey) (reported in Australian Government, 2015) found that 51% of respondents believed that most women could leave a violent relationship if they really wanted to (p7). The attitudes of young people were concerning in the survey. In relation to economic abuse, 47% of young men and 34% of young women did not agree that 'trying to control by denying your partner money’ is a form of violence against women. (27% for those aged 35-64). In relation to control of social life, 24% of young men and 13% of young women did not agree that ‘controlling social life by preventing your partner seeing family and friends’ is violence against women (14% for those aged 35 -64). In relation to ‘repeated criticism,’ 21% of young men and 14% of young women did not agree that ‘repeatedly criticising to make your partner feel bad/useless is violence against women’ (14% for those aged 35-64). The survey notes that it is the attitudes of young men that are particularly problematic in relation to these questions. (p7) The survey concluded that ‘young females also consistently minimise the experience of gender inequality, disrespectful and aggressive behaviour from males to females, and seek to

provide rational justifications and motivations for the behaviours, even when physical harm may be evident.’ (p29) One response sums this up: ‘It wasn’t that bad..it’s not like he punched her if there was an injury then it would be bad.’ (10-14 female). (p29) The NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team Annual Report (2013-2015) (the Report) analysed 40 domestic violence context homicides between March 2008 and June 2012(p ix)1 They found that: All cases involved male abusers using a range of coercive and controlling behaviours towards the female domestic violence victim prior to the homicide. Disclosed behaviours included verbal abuse (98%), physical abuse (90%), express threats to kill (45%), social control and isolation (40%), financial abuse (40%) and stalking (43%). Stalking was a characteristic of cases not only when the relationship had ended, but also while the relationship was on foot. This also included evidence of technology-facilitated stalking.(ix)

The Report notes that ‘a high proportion [of women] are killed by a domestic violence abuser in a context of ongoing coercion and control’ (p1) and confirms that ‘the period immediately following separation may be particularly dangerous for women who leave an abusive partner.’(p6). In relation to the 98% of cases involving verbal abuse, this was described in the Report as including language that was ‘belittling, derogatory, humiliating and insulting…with the intention of undermining the victim’s self-esteem and self-empowerment.’ (p48) Of the 40% of cases where there was social control and isolation this included ‘preventing the victim from seeing friends and family, systematically isolating the victim by way of being abusive or rude to friends and family and…intentionally relocating the victim away from support networks, friends and family.’ (p48) In the 40% of cases where financial abuse existed, this included withholding and controlling access to money, ‘scrutinising the victim’s spending and setting unrealistic expectations for the cost of groceries and other necessary expenditures…preventing the victim working or seizing and controlling the victim’s earnings from her work. (p48) State and Territory laws relating to nonphysical domestic violence Both criminal and civil laws are used to address domestic violence, with the criminal justice regime’s primary purpose being to punish the perpetrator’s behaviour, and the civil system to provide protection to victims and their children. In some jurisdictions (for example NSW and ACT) a domestic violence offence is defined by reference to specified provisions of the Crimes Act in that jurisdiction. To varying degrees, both the criminal and civil systems deal 1

In 80% of these cases the abuser killed the victim and in 20% of cases the victim killed the abuser.

with nonphysical violence. The definition and scope of nonphysical violence as a ground for obtaining a Protection Order is generally much broader than the definition and scope of criminal offences. Protection Orders and nonphysical violence All jurisdictions have nonphysical violence as a ground for obtaining a Protection Order. Most jurisdictions include emotional and psychological abuse and intimidation (for example 8(1) Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012(QLD), s 5(1)(a ) Family Violence Protection Act 2008 (Vic)) although the ACT only refers to ‘harrassing and offensive’ conduct.(s13(1) Domestic Violence and Protection Orders Act 2008). Economic abuse is not included in the ACT or NSW but it has now been included in most other jurisdictions. Most jurisdictions use the context of power and control to describe nonphysical violence aas grounds for Protection Orders. For example, Queensland and Victoria refer to: behaviour that is ‘emotionally or psychologically abusive, economically abusive or is threatening or coercive or ‘in any other way controls or dominates….and causes…fear for safety or wellbeing.’ (s8(1) Qld Act, s5(1)(a) Vic Act.) This definition includes ‘coercing a person to engage in sexual activity or attempting to do so,’ depriving a person of their liberty or threatening to do so, threatening to kill or injure the person or their child, ‘threatening to commit suicide or self-harm so as to torment, intimidate or frighten…’, causing or threatening to injure an animal ‘so as to control, dominate or coerce’ and unauthorised surveillance and stalking. (s8(2) Qld, s5(2)Vic ). In NSW a Court may make an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) where a person has ‘reasonable grounds to fear and in fact fears’ that the perpetrator will intimidate them or another person, such as their child (Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW) s16(1)(b)(i)). ‘In determining whether conduct is intimidating the court ‘…may have regard to any pattern of violence’ and especially violence which is a domestic violence offence (s7(2)). ‘Economic abuse’ is defined (s 12 Qld Act, s 6 Vic Act) as behaviour that is ‘coercive, deceptive or unreasonably controls another person… without…consent in a way that denies the person economic or financial autonomy…or by withholding or threatening to withhold the financial support necessary for meeting the reasonable living expenses of a person or a child’ where there is financial dependency.

Criminal law and nonphysical violence offences In most jurisdictions stalking is a criminal offence, and can include intimidating a person with the intention of causing them to fear physical or mental harm. (for example s 13 NSW Act, s21A Crimes Act (1958) (Vic)). In NSW the Court can have regard to ‘any pattern of violence’ in determining whether the offence of intimidation is made out (NSW Act s7(2)). Forcible confinement is an offence (for example s34 Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)) as is deprivation of liberty (for example s 355 Criminal Code 1899(Qld) ). Threats to kill, to cause grievous bodily harm or to cause a detriment are criminal offences in most jurisdictions (for example, s 30 and 31 Crimes Act (ACT), s 359 Criminal Code(QLD), s 20 and 21 Crimes Act (Vic)).’Detriment’ includes ‘apprehension or fear of violence’ and ‘serious mental, psychological or emotional harm’ (s359A Qld Code). Sexual servitude is a crime in both NSW (s80DCrimes Act 1900(NSW)) and in Victoria (s 57 Crimes Act) but only with respect to commercial sexual services. However Victoria also criminalises a threat to commit a sexual offence and procuring sexual penetration by threat or intimidation (s57 Vic Crimes Act). Tasmania is the only jurisdiction to directly criminalise emotional abuse or intimidation, referring to a ‘course of conduct’ that the offender knows ‘is likely to have the effect of unreasonably controlling or intimidating, or causing mental harm, apprehension or fear in, his or her spouse or partner.’ (s 9 Family Violence Act 2008 (Tas )). Economic abuse is also criminalised, ‘A person must not, with intent to unreasonably control or intimidate his or her spouse or partner….or cause…mental harm, apprehension or fear…’(s8) In SA and WA provision is made in criminal law for aggravated offences when committed in the context of domestic violence. (ALRC, 2012, 13.19). An aggravated offence also exists ‘where the offender abused a position of trust….and where the offender committed the offence in the course of deliberately and systematically inflicting severe pain on the victim.’ (Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) s5AA) As can be seen, reference in criminal laws to ‘control’ and a ‘pattern of violence’ are quite limited (primarily NSW and Tasmania.) It is beyond the scope of this paper to evaluate the extent to which crimes of nonphysical violence are charged and successfully prosecuted, although the experience of the writers and anecdotal evidence from women suggests they are not used often.

The effectiveness of the criminal justice response The ALRC notes the arguments of some commentators that the ‘predominantly incidentfocused nature of most criminal offences fails to take account of the ‘patterns of power and control’ in family violence cases and, consequently, ‘the full measure of injury that these patterns inflict’. As a result the ‘broader history of abuse may be perceived as irrelevant to the immediate offence charged.’ (ALRC, 2012, 13.6) The rationale for the inclusion of emotional and economic abuse in the Tasmanian legislation was said by the Attorney General to be a recognition of ‘the non-physical dimensions of family violence, addressing the tendency of such abuse to undermine victims’ capacity to take action, and acknowledging the need to take a more holistic view of family violence.’ (ALRC, 2012, 13.39) Other commentators have supported the inclusion of emotional abuse in criminal law noting ‘There are many anecdotes from within our sector of emotional abuse of women and children which would have the requisite seriousness and severity to suggest applicability of criminal laws.’ (ALRC, 2012, quoting submission from the Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse 13.82) The ALRC made no recommendation for the inclusion of offences of emotional or economic abuse in criminal laws. The ALRC was concerned about the feasibility of these offences and the justification for creating new offences – which perhaps is a reference to the existing parts of state and territory criminal law referred to above. In particular, the ALRC was concerned about defining the conduct with ‘sufficient particularity’ and enforcement proving offences beyond reasonable doubt. (ALRC, 2012, 13.107) Commentators have long been troubled by what they see as the diminishing role of the criminal justice system in the domestic violence sphere. The argument has been made that protection order legislation has been used ‘instead of’ rather than ‘as well as’ criminal laws and that ‘this in turn has impacted negatively on the seriousness with which violence in the home is considered in the community.’ (Wilcox, 2010, p3) The ALRC considered the purpose of criminal law in the context of domestic violence. In particular, the Commission looked at the purposes that sentencing laws are designed to achieve, for example, deterrence, community protection, punishment of the offender and rehabilitation. The Commission included ‘denunciation’ as one of the purposes of sentencing and that ‘a sentence that denounces the conduct of an offender represents a symbolic, collective statement of society’s censure of the criminal conduct. (ALRC, 2012, 4.73) The Commission referred to comments in Inkson v the Queen where Justice Underwood stated that

‘The community delegates to the Court the task of identifying, assessing and the outrage and revulsion that an informed and responsible public would have conduct (ALRC, 2012, 4.100)

weighing to criminal

If conduct is not a criminal offence, or if it is a criminal offence but police do not lay charges, or prosecutions fail, then the opportunity for denunciation, censure and education about the unacceptability of the behaviour is lost. Categorising power and control in intimate relationships, and the importance of nonphysical abuse While the term ‘domestic violence’ is defined in all jurisdictions to include nonphysical abuse, the word ‘violence’ has historic and cultural implications of physical force. This may be why physical violence is still often regarded as the core of domestic violence and why nonphysical abuse is still regarded by many as less serious than physical abuse. (Australian Government, 2015) Some researchers now suggest the focus should move from physical violence to controlling behaviours whether or not physical violence also occurs (Stark 2009, Anderson 2008). This would also allow for interventions of a more preventative nature, perhaps before there is physical violence or death. As we have seen, nonphysical abuse is defined in different ways in different states and territories. When terms such as ‘emotional abuse’, ‘economic abuse’ and ‘psychological abuse’ are used they do not always represent the severity of abuse that may be involved. For example, conduct underlying the term ‘emotional abuse’ may range from occasional verbal arguments to a lengthy and sustained campaign of coercive and controlling behaviour that results in the victim being deprived of personal freedom. These terms also tend to represent discrete areas of abuse, rather than the overall patterns of power and control that may be present. In order for the law to adequately address nonphysical abuse, there needs to be further understanding of the different levels of severity underlying it. There also needs to be appropriate terminology in both criminal and civil law that represents the different levels of the gravity of the conduct that is occurring. Research indicates that the effect of non-physical abuse can be just as devastating, if not more devastating, than the effect of physical abuse (McKinnon, 2008). In one study 72% of female victims of both physical and non-physical abuse rated the non-physical abuse as having a more negative impact upon them than the physical abuse (Folingstad et al, 1990). A separate study reported that psychological abuse had a much stronger impact on fear than

physical abuse (Sackett and Saunders, 1999). As one victim explained ‘I guess his way of terrorizing me was more intelligent because it went much deeper. It scared me much, much more than physical violence or sexual violence did. Because that had a beginning and an end, didn’t it, but this didn’t. No, this terrorising was there all the time, the fear was there all the time, wasn’t it?’ (Enander, 2011). Over recent years, researchers have studied underlying patterns and features of domestic violence to determine categories and scales of severity. McMinnon (2008) separates nonphysical abuse into three categories. The first category is non-physical abuse ‘as an event’ where verbal abuse is used to degrade, insult, humiliate, ridicule or diminish the dignity of the other person. The second category is ‘emotional abuse’ where there is an on-going process of hostile verbal and non-verbal behaviour that is likely to have an adverse effect on the victim’s emotional development and behaviour, and where the perpetrator attempts to gain compliance through acts of both commission and omission. The third category is ‘psychological abuse’ where there is an on-going process of hostile verbal and nonverbal behaviour which, over time, erodes or destroys the victim’s psychological sense of self. Kelly and Johnson (2008) categorise intimate partner violence into ‘coercive controlling violence’, violent resistance’, ‘situational couple violence’ and ‘separation-instigated violence’. ‘Situational couple violence’ is identified as the most common type of physical aggression in intimate relationships. Here, parties lack skills to manage conflicts or control anger and arguments between partners escalate into physical violence. This violence is not embedded in patterns of power, coercion and control, and fear is not characteristic of victims. This is distinguished from ‘coercive control’ which is identified by patterns of power and control, and where abusers use a combination of control tactics such as intimidation, emotional abuse, isolation, minimising, denying and blaming, use of children, asserting male privilege, economic abuse, coercion and threats. As these control tactics may be effective without the use of violence (particularly if there has been violence in the past), coercive control does not necessarily manifest in high levels of physical violence. While domestic violence may be categorised in different ways, control appears to be a common differentiating factor that indicates the severity of abuse. Control is a predictor for continued and increased violence, as well as for death (Kelly and Johnson, 2008 and Stark, 2009). It is made up largely of non-physical behaviours, such as those identified by Kelly and Johnson (2008) above. An early one off incidence of violence may be enough to establish an ability to intimidate thereafter (McKinnon, 2008). Control has therefore been considered as

the foundation of abuse, with physical violence as an additional factor (Stark, 2009). This may more accurately represent the experience of victims who have long been claiming that emotional control is the ‘deeper and more central form of abuse’ (Anderson, 2008). As Johnson (2005) states it is ‘no longer scientifically or ethically acceptable to speak of domestic violence without specifying, loudly and clearly, the type of violence to which we refer’. We cannot continue to treat all cases of ‘emotional abuse’ in Australia the same way, elevating their seriousness only when physical abuse has also recently been involved. We need to gain a greater understanding of the depth of control underlying a relationship in order to provide an adequate legal and social response. High levels of power and control in intimate relationships, coercive control Domestic violence with high levels of power and control has been termed ‘coercive control’. Stark’s study of coercive control is based on his experiences working with women who killed their partners in self defence (Stark 2009). He describes coercive control as a liberty crime, rather than a crime of assault. He defines coercive control as ‘a malevolent course of conduct that subordinates women to an alien will by violating their physical integrity (domestic violence), denying them respect and autonomy (intimidation), depriving them of social connectedness (isolation) and appropriating or denying them access to the resources required for personhood and citizenship (control)’. Victims are ‘subjected to an on-going strategy of intimidation, isolation and control that extends to all areas of a woman’s life, including sexuality, material necessities, relations with family, children and friends, and work’. Stark’s interviews with victims reveal the prevalence of rituals of degradation, including humiliating sexual examinations, forced confessions, lockdowns, periods of forced silence and being denied access to everyday requirements such as personal hygiene, eating, sleeping and toileting. Physical violence is only one element of coercive control and Stark argues that despite the occurrence of severe assault, it is the ‘frequency, relatively low-level, and cumulative effects of minor violence that distinguishes coercive control’. The concept of property rights and ownership underlies much of Stark’s analysis of coercive control (Stark 2009). He discusses patterns of property rights over women accompanied by ‘ownership’ contracts that may be characterised by verbal agreements, by training victims to react in certain ways to cues such as finger snapping or by symbolic marking, such as where a victim gets a tattoo, burn or other visible mark of ownership. Stark argues the ultimate expression of property rights is the right of disposal in the statement that frequently precedes femicide ‘If I can’t have you, no one will’.

Kelly and Johnson (2008) contend that tactics of coercive control may be effective without violence and Ludsin and Vetten (2005) argue that while violence may be a feature of coercive control, it need not recur constantly, nor to the same brutal degree each time. Stephens (2014) contends that coercive control eventually leads to the abusive partner becoming omnipotent and omnipresent with complete control over the victim. Hazelwood, Warren and Dietz consider the abuse suffered by a sample of women in intimate relationships with sexual sadists. Some of the women interviewed were forced to write and sign documents of slavery or servitude. Some were ‘scripted’ by their partners, meaning they were required to repeat words or phrases given to them, were forced to verbally describe sexual acts, plead for sexual or physical abuse, use derogatory terms for themselves or develop obscene fantasy scenarios for their partners. Much of the in-depth analysis on coercive control has been conducted in the context of women who kill their partners in self defence or assist their partners to commit crimes against third parties. Coercive control now needs to be studied to explore and identify the full extent of the crimes committed towards the victim herself. Coercive Control and Federal Slavery and Servitude Crimes Division 270.1 of the schedule to the Federal Criminal Code Act 1995 (the Code) defines slavery as ‘the condition of a person over whom any or all of the powers attaching to the right of ownership are exercised, including where such a condition results from a debt or contract made by the person’. In 2013 the Crimes Legislation Amendment (Slavery, Slavery-Like Conditions and People Trafficking) Act 2013 (the Act) was passed. The Act introduced a number of new slavery-like offences, and broadened the definition of servitude so that it is now defined in division 270.4(1) of the Code as follows: the condition of a person (the victim) who provides labour or services, if, because of the use of coercion, threat or deception: (a) a reasonable person in the position of the victim would not consider himself or herself to be free: (i) to cease providing the labour or services; or (ii) to leave the place or area where the victim provides the labour or services; and (b) the victim is significantly deprived of personal freedom in respect of aspects of his or her life other than the provision of the labour or services.

Slavery has long been associated with industry and workplaces and servitude was previously restricted to commercial sexual practices. When the amendments to the Code were first proposed, the Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill discussed servitude only in terms of industry and workplaces and there seemed to be no legislative intent to include family

violence. In response to this, women’s legal services argued in submissions to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee (the Committee) that there needed to be clear and specific legislative intention to include family violence in the offences (Munro, 2013). The Women’s Legal Centre (ACT & Region) provided evidence to the Committee that the elements of slavery and servitude can be found in intimate relationships. An addendum to the Explanatory Memorandum was consequently issued stating: The new offences apply irrespective of whether the proscribed conduct occurs in the victim’s public or private life. For example, provided the elements of the offence are established, it is immaterial whether the victim and the offender are married or in a de facto relationship. Where a person freely and fully consented to enter into a marriage, but was later coerced, threatened or deceived into remaining in the marriage, or the powers attaching to the right of ownership were exercised over the person, this may also amount to a servitude or slavery offence, or a domestic violence offence under State and Territory legislation.

There is now a clear legislative intent to include domestic violence in these offences. A case is currently before the ACT Supreme Court involving sexual servitude and other charges where the parties were in an intimate relationship. Some of the alleged conduct includes forcing the victim to clean, forbidding her from talking to other men, controlling her mobile phone and money, forcing her into depraved and violent sexual acts, using a knife to carve his nickname into her arm and threatening to kill her if she disobeys him (Canberra Times, 2015). Domestic violence has long been considered in the context of power and control, and the recent studies into coercive control above demonstrate how deprivation of personal freedom and a sense of ownership can pervade abusive relationships. When coercive control is present, sexual coercion is often a prominent feature in the exercise of control (Stevens 2014). In an English study of women who had sought refuge from their partners, 27% reported they were forced to have sex against their will often or all the time (reported in Stark 2009). Provision of labour or services can also be found in domestic violence contexts (Munro, 2013). Housework, such as cooking and cleaning, and childcare, can also be regarded as a service that victims are coerced into performing. In regards to captivity, fear of personal safety is one of the primary reasons why women do not leave an abusive relationship (Meyering 2012). This fear is well founded as it is widely known that the risk of injury or death increases following separation (NSW Death Review Report 2013-2015). Concern for the safety of children or other loved ones is another primary reason why women may stay in an abusive relationship (Meyering 2012).

Theories such as Stockholm syndrome and post traumatic stress disorder highlight that many of the psychological symptoms experienced by victims of coercive control are a normal response to an abnormal situation and can also be a reason why victims don’t leave relationships of coercive control (Ludsin and Vetten 2005). As victims live in an environment where danger and threat are always present they may develop ‘situational reason’ or ‘survivor logic’, and although their decisions may be viewed as irrational or as a psychological weakness, they are in fact rational within an environment of highly unreasonable behaviour and demands (Ludsin and Vetten 2005). When examining the reasonableness of actions of women who kill their abusive partner in self defence, Hopkins and Easteal (2010) argue that it is necessary to ‘walk in her shoes’ and draw conclusions with reference to the victim’s experiences. It is similarly necessary to ‘walk in the victim’s shoes’ when considering whether ‘a reasonable person in the position of the victim would not consider himself or herself to be free’. In addition, it should be noted that division 270.11 of the Code states it is not a defence for a victim to have consented to, or acquiesced in, conduct constituting any element of the offences.

Conclusion Nonphysical aspects of domestic violence can be more severe than terms such as ‘emotional abuse’ imply. The experience of the authors and recent research indicates that many women consider nonphysical abuse as harmful, if not more harmful, than physical abuse. Yet, without recent physical abuse, it can be difficult for victims to obtain protection orders, support from refuges and community organisations and convictions for criminal offences. Nonphysical abuse ranges in severity. At the severe end of the spectrum, nonphysical abuse consists of behaviour that controls the victim and deprives them of personal freedom. This level of control is a predictor of femicide and can constitute the federal slavery and servitude crimes. Yet, the use of terms such as ‘emotional abuse’ tend to place all levels of nonphysical abuse at the less severe end of the spectrum and make it difficult for victims to access the legal system. The NSW Death Review Report (2013-2015) comments on the importance of language and the need to properly describe patterns of violence and controlling behaviour. As Professor Patricia Easteal noted in the ALRC (2012) report ‘any one ‘incident’ is in actuality just a small part of a complex pattern of control and cannot be adequately understood nor its

gravity measured in isolation from that background. At the centre is disempowerment and degradation’. Legal terminology and criminal offences that adequately represent the severity of abuse assist to create cultural change, allow victims to speak up and clearly identify the type of abuse to which they are subjected and assist them to obtain better responses from the legal system.

References Abrahams, H. (2007) Supporting Women after Domestic Violence: Loss, Trauma and Recovery, London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Anderson, K. (2008) ‘Is Partner Violence Worse in the Context of Control?’ Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol 70, No 5: 1157-1168. Arias, I and Pape, K. (1999) ‘Psychological Abuse: Implications for Adjustment and Commitment to Leave Violent Partners’, Violence and Victims, Vol. 14, No 1: 55-67. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2012) Personal Safety Australia, released 11/12/13, available from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/4906.0Chapter8002012 Australian Government Department of Social Services (Nov 2015), Reducing violence against women and their children: Research informing the development of a national campaign, November 2015 Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) Family Violence - A National Legal Response [2010] ALRC 114 Canberra Times (7 July 2015) ‘Man to stand trial for allegedly forcing vulnerable migrant in sexual servitude’ available from http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/man-to-stand-trial-for-allegedly-forcing-vulnerablemigrant-in-sexual-servitude-20150707-gi6ua9.html Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW)Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) Crimes Act 1900(NSW)) Crimes Act (1958) (Vic) Criminal Code 1899(Qld) Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 (SA) Domestic Violence and Protection Orders Act 2008 (ACT) Domestic and Family Violence Protection Act 2012 (Qld) Douglas, H. (2012) ‘Battered Women’s Experiences of the Criminal Justice System: Decentring the Law’, Feminist Legal Studies, Vol. 20, No. 2: 121-134. Enander, V. (2011) ‘Leaving Jekyll and Hyde: Emotion work in the context of intimate partner violence’, Feminism & Psychology, Vol. 21, No. 1: 29-48.

Family Violence Protection Act 2008 (Vic) Family Violence Act 2008 (Tas ) Follingstad, D. R and Rogers, M. J. (2014) ‘The Nature and Prevalence of Partner Psychological Abuse in a National Sample of Adults’, Violence and Victims, Vol, 29, No. 1: 3-38. Follingstad, D. R., Rutledge, L. L., Berg, B. J., Hause, E. S. & Polek, D. S. (1990) ‘The role of emotional abuse in physically abusive relationships’, Journal of Family Violence, Vol. 5, No, 2: 107-120.

Hazelwood, R. R., Warren, J. I. and Dietz, P. E. ‘The Disturbed Mind: Compliant Victims of the Sexual Sadist’, available from http://canadiancrc.com/Newspaper_Articles/FBI_USA_Disturbed_Mind_Compliant_Victims_of_Sexual_Sadist.aspx Henning, K and Klesges, L. M. (2003) ‘Prevalence and Characteristics of Psychological Abuse Reported by Court-Involved Battered Women’, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol. 18, No. 8: 857-871. Hopkins, A and Easteal, P. (2010) ‘Walking in Her Shoes: Battered women who kill in Victoria, Western Australia and Queensland’, Alternative Law Review, Vol. 35, No. 3: 132-137. Johnson, M. (2005) ‘Domestic violence: it’s not about gender – or is it?’, Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 67, No. 5: 1126-1130. Kelly, J. B. and Johnson, M. P. (2008) ‘Differentiation Among Types of Intimate Partner Violence: Research Update and Implications for Interventions’, Family Court Review, Vol 46, No. 3: 476499. Ludsin, H. And Vetten, L. (2005) Spiral of Entrapment, Abused women in conflict with the law, South Africa: Jacana Media (Pty) Ltd. McKinnon, L. (2008) ‘Hurting Without Hitting: non-physical contact forms of abuse’, Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse Stakeholder Paper 4. Meyering, I. B. (2012) ‘Staying / Leaving: Barriers to Ending Violent Relationships’, Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse Fast Facts 7. Munro, A. (2013) ‘Slavery and servitude within intimate relationships’, Alternative Law Review, Vol. 38, No. 1: 44-46. NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team Annual Report (2013-2015) available at: http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/DVDRT_2015_Final_30102015.pdf NSW Ombudsman, (2011), Audit of NSW Police Force handling of domestic and family violence complaint - http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/NSWOmbSRP/2011/1.pdf O’Leary, K. D. (1999) ‘Psychological Abuse: A Variable Deserving Critical Attention in Domestic Violence’, Violence and Victims, Vol. 14, No. 1: 3-23. Sackett, L. A.and Saunders, D. G. (1999) ‘The Impact of Different Forms of Psychological Abuse on Battered Women’, Violence and Victims, Vol. 14, No. 1: 105-117. Stark, E. D. (2009) Coercive Control, How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life, United States: Oxford University Press Inc. Stevens, P. (2014) ‘Recent Trends in Explaining Abuse within Intimate Relationships’, The Journal of Criminal Law, Vol. 78, No. 2: 184-193. Wangman, J. (2011) ‘Different Types of Intimate Partner Violence – an Exploration of the Literature’, Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse Issues Paper 22. Wilcox, K (2010) ‘Recent Innovations in Australian Protection Order Law – a Comparative Discussion’, Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse Topic Paper

“But he’s a good father….” The intersection of domestic violence, complex trauma and child protection.

Ms Zoe Sharman Clinical Consultant NSW Family and Community Services (FACS) Ms Kathy Horne Manager, Clinical Issues Team NSW Family and Community Services (FACS)

Paper Presented at the The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7 - 8 December 2015

Many clients who come into contact with statutory child protection systems have histories of complex trauma. This is particularly true of clients who are impacted by mental health issues, problematic use of alcohol and other drugs, and domestic violence. This paper will focus on the impact of domestic violence on the lives of families who are engaged in statutory child protection services, and will consider the way that domestic violence can sometimes be minimised or denied by services working with families. There will be a particular focus on understanding the reasons why men who use violence may present favorably to organisations such as police, courts and assessing clinicians, as well as understanding the reasons that victims of violence may find these same systems overwhelming, punitive and difficult to navigate. We will conclude by considering innovative ways to work with families in the child protection system that will redress this balance, acknowledge the history of complex trauma and hold the child at the centre of practice. Domestic Violence is a gendered crime. Statistics overwhelmingly indicate that the majority of domestic violence is perpetrated by men against women, although we acknowledge that some women do use violence against men, and that domestic violence also occurs in same-sex relationships. The term “domestic violence” encompasses a range of behaviours which include physical and sexual assault, verbal abuse, emotional and psychological abuse, financial control and social isolation, which are all used to maintain power and control. There is a significant correlation (45 – 70%) between domestic violence and child abuse and neglect (Holt et al, 2008). Much like Police services across the country, it is true to say that domestic violence has become “core business” for child protection workers. Since the NSW Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 was amended in 2000 to include domestic violence as grounds for removal, domestic violence has been the most frequently reported risk issue to FACS. This means that it is an issue for the majority of children that we work with, whether or not there are other risk of significant harm issues present. We acknowledge that this is an extremely complex area of work, and that staff need to make difficult decisions that potentially impact every member of a family. The Clinical Issues Team (CIT) is part of the Office of the Senior Practitioner, Family and Community Services (FACS) and consists of five Clinical Consultants, and a Manager. The CIT’s role is to support frontline child protection workers who are working with complex child protection matters where there are issues of domestic violence, alcohol and other drugs, and/or mental health concerns. This paper is not intended as a critique of the work of FACS, Health or the NGO sector, but is more intended to examine the issues that sometimes lead to the denial or minimisation of domestic violence in families, and to highlight the complexities of work in this area. We will argue that the safety of mothers is intrinsically linked with the safety of children, and that men’s use of violence is not separate from their roles as fathers/carers. Furthermore, we will attempt to understand the ways in which men who use violence can often present quite well to systems and decision-makers, whereas women survivors of violence can often present in ways that mean that they

are constructed as dangerous to their children. Finally we will consider how exploring men’s behaviour towards their children can not only ensure that their fathering role is examined; but can also create expectations that they are responsible for and can change their behaviour towards their children and their partners. Commonly held beliefs There are many commonly held beliefs about domestic violence and its causes. These include that domestic violence is “caused” by the use of drugs and alcohol, or that domestic violence only happens to particular types of women, or that women sometimes provoke men and are therefore partly to blame. Some of the results from the National Community Attitudes Survey (2013) support these views: 64% perceive that the main cause of violence against women is some men not being unable to manage their anger; 21% believe domestic violence can be excused if the person regrets it; 78% find it hard to understand why women stay in violent relationships, and 51% believe that women could leave if they wanted to. These beliefs are further complicated by the struggle with how to define the behaviour, which include terms such as “domestic violence”, “family violence”, “intimate partner violence”, “domestic terrorism”, “violence against women and girls”. All of these descriptions are an attempt to clarify who is doing what to whom. However, such clarity is often lacking in the reports that we receive, and in the way that we talk about domestic violence. We hear the following on a daily basis: -

“domestic violence relationship” “domestic violence incident” “domestic violence between the parents” “they are violent to each other”

The use of this type of language serves to mutualise and minimise the violence, and obscure the impact on women and children. Alan Wade (2015) proposes that using language such as an ‘abusive relationship’ mutualises violence and fails to identify who is being abusive to whom. The woman is in a relationship with someone who has abused her. Consider the difference between the following descriptions of the same incident: “Last night there was a domestic violence incident between the parents. Mr X verbally and physically assaulted Ms Y. The children were in bed at the time”. “Last night, Mr X physically and verbally assaulted Ms Y. He shouted loudly at her, called her a “fucking whore” and punched her in the face, causing her nose to bleed immediately. Ms Y was crying and attempting to protect her face with her hands. Ms Y’s two children were in bed at the time, in an adjacent room, but it is highly likely that they would have been woken by the loud shouting, crying and sounds of Mr X assaulting their mother. The next morning the children would have noticed that Ms Y’s face was swollen and bruised, and that there was a hole in the kitchen wall.” The first account fails to clarify who is hurting whom and implies that the children were not affected by the violence, because they did not directly witness it. The second account assigns responsibility, demonstrates impact, and clarifies the likely experience of the children.

David Mandell, who developed the “Safe and Together” Model in America, emphasises that to use violence is a choice. Often, when professionals talk to women about domestic violence, we say things like “We are here because we have information that there was a recent incident of domestic violence”. If violence is a choice, then all of our interactions with women survivors of violence and with men who use violence, need to avoid making the victim responsible for her partners’ violence, and need to hold the man using violence to account for his behaviour. How might our interventions be different if we began by saying “We are here because of your partner’s behaviour”? [Slide with Safe and Together Continuum] Take a moment to think about our service system, and where on this continuum each part of it may sit. It is not surprising that the experience of many women and children journeying through this system is fragmented, and that many victims of violence make conscious efforts to avoid entering the system, for fear of the response that they will receive. What difference might it make to a woman and her children if we asked the man about his behaviour; what message could it give to men that we not only hold him responsible for his children but also hold an expectation that he can do things differently for his partner and children and help to provide healing? Impact of Domestic Violence on Fathering Historically, for men, there has often been a disconnect between his use of violence against his partner, and his role as a father, particularly if he has not also been physically abusive to his children. “But he’s a good dad”…is a comment often used not only by survivors of violence, but also by professionals working with the family. They are also implied in some decisions made by the Family and Children’s Court, where often co-existing concerns such as parental use of drugs and alcohol, or concerns about mental health can be constructed as more dangerous to children than their father’s use of violence against their mother, particularly if the children have not been physically assaulted themselves. This disconnect also extends to the literature on fathering and domestic violence. “Unhelpful fragmentations run like a vein through the scholarship on this subject. For example, the mainstream fatherhood scholarship has largely neglected the subset of men who perpetrate domestic violence while the mainstream domestic violence scholarship has neglected to consider these men’s identities as fathers” (Heward-Belle, 2015). This fragmentation leads to the belief that men can be “poor partners” but “good fathers”. While men who perpetrate family and domestic violence can have a genuine desire for warm and closely connected relationships with the children they also abuse, practice guidelines such as those produced by the Western Australian Government (2013) warn that the identity of fatherhood among men who perpetrate violence should not be idealised.

“Entitlement thinking prevails in their attitudes and they often see their child as their investment or possession, or as someone who should love them unconditionally. While a perpetrator of violence might express love for his child, it is important not to mistake this for empathy for his child’s needs and experiences” (Bancroft & Silverman 2002; Bancroft, Silverman & Ritchie 2011). Problematic fathering and a sense of entitlement can co exist with a genuine desire for a good relationship with their kids. However, those same men who use violence can behave in a gentle, caring and attentive manner in public and during supervised access; yet behave very differently towards their children in private (WA Government, 2013). Regardless of the perceived intentions of the choice of behaviours by men who are violent, the outcome of these behaviours can have a significant impact on the children, which include, but are not limited to: -

Risk that the child will be physically harmed when attempting to intervene; Risk of emotional/psychological harm to the child; Difficulties with sleep; Compromised relationships with siblings and peers Modelling violence as a means of problem solving; etc.

In addition to these impacts on children, domestic violence has been described by Cathy Humphries (2009) as “an attack on mothering”. Men who use violence choose to use behaviour that attacks the child’s relationship with their mother, and that is deliberately undermining of her authority as a parent. A result of this is often that the victim of the violence is reluctant to leave the relationship, as she may have real fears about her ability to manage the children’s behaviour, particularly as challenging behaviours are likely to escalate when she and the children are safe. Additionally, women become less available to their children, either as a result of being physically harmed, or as a result of being less emotionally available due to anxiety and depression caused by ongoing assaults. Bancroft and Silverman have clearly set out the characteristics of fathering by men who use violence. These include: -

Developmentally inappropriate expectations; Authoritarian, rigid. Likely to use harsh physical discipline; Own needs and wants first; Want to be centre of attention Physically and verbally undermine mother; Shifts blame; Unpredictable, either under involved and less affectionate or powerfully present in child’s life; Disconnect between professed emotions and reality of actual behaviour (Bancroft and Silverman, 2000)

When we consider these actions as purposeful, it becomes harder to separate a man’s violence towards his partner from his role as a father, as it becomes clear that part of his violence is to misuse his role as a father to undermine the mother of the children. Drug and Alcohol and Mental Health Issues In many families where there is domestic violence, there is also co-morbidity with either drug and alcohol issues and/or unstable mental health. This is true for both victims and perpetrators of violence. Golding‘s meta-analysis found that victimised women were almost six times more likely than non-abused women to misuse alcohol and five and a half times more likely to misuse licit or illicit drugs than other women (Golding 1999 in Laing, et al, 2010). Levy, in Braaf (2012) talks about the “use of substances by abused women as a normal reaction to terrifying and coercive situations and that such behaviour is demonstrative of grieving and coping strategies that may be more socially acceptable than asserting oneself or fighting back.”

There is also evidence to suggest that men who use violence often have difficulties with mental health and or drug and alcohol issues. It is difficult however to make a causal link between them, as not all men who drink alcohol use violence, and many men who are violent when they are intoxicated are also violent when they are sober. One Canadian study indicated that alcohol use was a predictor of violence against women, only when there were co-occuring cultural norms that supported violence (Johnson, 2001). Although there doesn’t appear to be a causal link between substance use, mental health issues and domestic violence (despite their co-occurance), mental health and drug and alcohol use are often used as a way to minimise or explain violence. Braaf and Barratt Meyering (2013) have documented the increased incidence of mental health issues in women living with domestic violence. Australian and international research suggest that women subject to violence from their partners are more likely to experience mental illness over the course of their lifetime, with risk of mental illness increasing for women with the greatest exposure. Unfortunately, some of the service responses to these women have discounted the violence, and reinforced inappropriate treatment eg seeking information from the woman’s carer who also abusive towards he, and this in turn increases the risk of ongoing and/or escalating violence (Laing and Toivonen, 2010). Many women also cite examples of their mental ill health (as a result of the trauma of coercive control) being used as evidence that they are ‘unfit mothers’ (Laing and Toivonen, 2010). We acknowledge that in many cases where there is domestic violence, there are coexisting concerns about drugs and alcohol and mental health for both parents. Often child protection practitioners may see the drug and alcohol issues or mental health issues as more risky for children, or perhaps as more pressing than the domestic violence. There may be a number of reasons why this may happen, including the following: -

Drug and alcohol issues or mental health issues are often visible during an initial consultation or home visit. A parent may appear intoxicated, drug paraphernalia may be observed, or someone may present in a way that is consistent with the symptoms of a diagnosable mental health issue. Unless a

-

-

woman has physical injuries, or there is obvious property damage as the result of an assault, this is less likely to be the case for domestic violence. This situation can be further exacerbated by the actuarial tools that many organisations use for assessing safety and risk, which frequently focus on immediacy, meaning again, that other dangers may be prioritised over the violence, as they are seen as more acute, whereas domestic violence is more likely to be chronic and ongoing in nature. Talking openly about domestic violence to either the woman or man is extremely challenging, particularly early on in the intervention, when caseworkers hold a balance between not wanting to collude in the violence, while simultaneously not wanting to make the situation more unsafe for the woman and children. There are dominant ideas about the roles of parents – although this is a dynamic area, it is still often seen as the role of the mother to undertake the role of primary caregiver. This means that if there are identified risks to the children, any “deficits” perceived to be intrinsic to the mother are more likely to be highlighted. Conversely, male care givers tend to receive a disproportionate amount of admiration for undertaking basic caregiving tasks, meaning that their contributions are more likely to be highlighted positively. Mandel (2015) states that in contrast of our expectations of mothers, “we ask and expect little of men as parents which effectively relieves them of their parenting responsibility”. The impact of personal experiences of violence within the workforce. The workforce in health, social work and welfare work is predominately female, and statistics suggest that the prevalence of domestic violence is such that approximately 30% of women will experience domestic violence at some point in their lives. It is therefore highly likely that many staff have witnessed violence in their families when they were children, or have experienced violence in at least one of their adult relationships. Although workplace attitudes to domestic violence are currently changing, there is still a long way to go to assist welfare staff to integrate their own experiences in a way that helps them to work effectively in this area. It is highly likely that many staff (whether they have a personal story of domestic violence or not) will find that their response to perpetrators of violence is either fear or anger, and it can feel both easier and safer to focus on other problems in the family (Stanley and Goddard, 2002).

All of these issues make intervention in families where there are co-existing mental health, drug and alcohol concerns and domestic violence challenging and complex. Care needs to be taken to carefully assess the impact of the violence on a woman’s mental health and drug and/or drug and alcohol use, as well as acknowledging that the ongoing impact of the violence may make it too difficult for her to care for the children and reduce or address these concerns, especially in the short term. Both parents may have struggled with addictions, but the men may ‘manage to get clean’ in a shorter time frame (Scott, in press). They can then be seen as a more ‘protective’ parent and a safer option than the children’s mother. Careful assessment also needs to be made of the man’s capacity to parent, in the context of the violent behaviour in which he has engaged. Rather than attempt to respond to each separate issue, we suggest that it may be more helpful to attempt to understand how these different issues interact with one another.

David Mandel (2010) offers a ten item checklist to understand the impact of domestic violence, substance abuse and mental heath issues. This focuses on understanding the relationship between these issues, as well as considering how the violence has created or exacerbated the mental health or drug and alcohol issues for the survivor. It also helps to focus on how the case plan can address domestic violence when the presenting issues appear to be drug and alcohol issues or mental health concerns. Impact of developmental and ongoing trauma Many of the families whose children come into contact with the statutory child protection system have their own histories of abuse and neglect in childhood. It is important to consider the impact of this developmental trauma, in order to understand the woman experiencing violence’s response to the violence, and to the intrusion of the service system in her family life. [Slide on simple, complex and developmental trauma] Research into the impact of trauma on the brain indicates that abuse and neglect in childhood can have profound impacts on the organisation of the brain, the production of stress hormones, and the over-sensitisation of the fight-flight-freeze response. When anyone is exposed to trauma, their body responds by releasing stress hormones, diverting blood to the trunk, and using the limbic system of the brain to process information. It is highly likely that many of our clients, who experienced repeated trauma and threat as a child, will be acutely sensitised to threat as adults. We are often presented with police narratives that suggest that when they attended an incident of domestic violence, the victim was screaming and shouting, perhaps at police, or perhaps at the perpetrator. There are often reports that she has also assaulted her partner – again, perhaps in self-defence. If we look at this behaviour through a trauma lens, we are likely to see this is a “fight” response, but if a trauma lens is not used, we may see this as a situation in which the impact of the man’s violence is minimised, perhaps because the woman’s behaviour does not fit our template of how a victim of violence is supposed to behave. Women whose response to violence is on the continuum of “flight” rather than “fight” may appear withdrawn, shut-down, and not willing to engage in making a statement to police. They may also appear to “minimise” the violence when they are approached by service providers, possibly because they do not have a clear episodic memory of events. These clients may be constructed as “non-compliant” by professionals, or in some cases, queries may be raised about their mental health, as they may appear to be dissociative. Many clients (both men and women) who come into contact with the statutory child protection system have an enormous trauma load, and may struggle with executive functioning particularly when they are stressed or fearful, meaning that the very act of negotiating the system is likely to pose major challenges. So how can we engage men who use violence to change their behaviour, in ways that elicit a narrative of how his violence impacts on the family, and holds him accountable? We know that many women want the violence to end, rather than the relationship. We also know that leaving the relationship is often not the safest option for women, as the

chances of being murdered or seriously injured by an ex-partner increase significantly in the twelve months following the end of the relationship. Additionally, we know that in a child protection context, it is highly likely that most men who use violence will continue to play some role in their children’s (or other children’s) lives, and so we need to consider ways in which this can happen safely. Scott (in press) also suggests that intervention while fathers are involved with one family might prevent men’s abuse in a subsequent family. Historically ideas about how violent men can safely interact with their children following separation have focussed on an external locus of control, such as supervised contact, or handover taking place at a safe location such as a police station or contact centre, rather than focussing on understanding ways to assist men to change their behaviour. We would suggest that an evidence-based Men’s Behaviour Change Program is a key part of behaviour change, but that it is only one part of the picture. If we can successfully engage men at many different levels in behaviour change, this will be a powerful way to help them to model non-violence to their children, and in many cases, help to break intergenerational cycles of abuse (Scott, in press). In Invitations to Responsibility, Alan Jenkins provides the following as a guide to how to engage men in conversations about their violence: “It is tempting to challenge perpetrators of violence directly; but at the point of initial conversation your task is to get him talking and explore his underlying beliefs and attitudes. You don’t want to collude but you do want to elicit his narrative, rationalisations and belief system, which will inform the risk assessment” (Jenkins 1990). At all levels of the service system, we need practitioners who are confident to engage men in purposeful conversations about their violence, which do not increase risk to women and children and do not collude with or excuse violence. This is highly skilled work, and requires ongoing professional support, supervision and development for staff. [Introduce Caring Dads slide]

Research suggests (Scott, in press) that men are more likely to make changes around their violence when they recognise the impact on their children, rather than the impact on their partner. This seems to be particularly true if they are able to make connections between their own experiences of being fathered, and the type of father that they want to be. Caring Dads, a Canadian initiative, has developed a seventeen week group program which works with men who have used violence and abuse in their families. The program also works with women and children to measure change and ensure safety. The program is based on the following key principles: 1) Overly controlling behaviour, a sense of entitlement and self-centred attitudes are primary problems of abusive fathers; thus, the development of child management skills should not be an initial focus of intervention; 2) Abusive fathers are seldom initially ready to make changes in their parenting; 3) Fathers’ adherence to gender-role stereotypes also contributes to their maltreatment of children;

4) The relationship between abusive fathers and the mothers of their children requires special attention; and 5) Because abusive fathers have eroded children’s emotional security, the need to rebuild trust will affect the pace of change and potential impact of relapse on the child (Scott and Crooks, 2004) The UK National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) has carried out an interim evaluation of the Caring Dads program. Although further analysis of the data is still needed, the early results are encouraging, and include the following: 





Over a quarter of mothers had symptoms of depression at the beginning of the program, but depression and anxiety among mothers had reduced by the end of the program. Most mothers said that fathers' abuse towards them reduced during the program. Fathers believed that their behaviour towards their children and partners improved across a number of areas. Mothers reported that there were fewer incidents of the father using emotional abuse, isolation, violence, injury or using children to abuse her by the end of the program. (NSPCC 2014).

It appears that interventions focussing on father’s relationships with their children have the potential to bring about a greater level of perceived safety for women as well. Emerging work in engaging men around their violence towards their children, holding them accountable but doing so in ways that may make change possible, is providing some new directions to approach this challenging issue. Rodney Vlais (2015) suggests that we should simultaneously hold both optimism for change, and pessimism for the difficult task. It may be difficult to change the man’s behaviour towards children and their mothers but it is crucial to try to engage the man in this process “… if fathers can improve their relationships with their children, their children stand to benefit socially, cognitively, and emotionally” (Scott, in press). Respectfully engaging men around their parenting role, their expectations for their children and the father they would like to be expands our understanding of him and provides new opportunities for interventions (Mandel, 2015). Conclusion Our service system in the main, reflects the views and attitudes of our society. There is currently an increased focus on domestic violence in the media, due in no small part to the efforts of Rosie Batty to bring about a change in how media reports violence, which seems to be leading to a shift in public perception and discourse about the issue. We would argue that there is still some way to go in continuing these changes so that men’s violence against women is seen both as a choice, and therefore something that can be changed, and that men’s fathering is not seen as separate from their violence. Hopefully we will move to a position where if a man is known to be violent, his behaviour will no longer be excused with the words “But he’s a good

dad…” where men are responsible for and can change their behaviour towards their children and their partners.

References Braaf, R and Barrett Meyering, I, 2013, Domestic Violence and Mental Health, Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse, Fast Facts, May Braaf, R, 2012, Elephant in the Room: Responding to Alcohol Use and Domestic Violence, Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse, Issues paper 24. Department for Child Protection,2013), Perpetrator Accountability in Child Protection Practice: A resource for child protection workers about engaging and responding to perpetrators of family and domestic violence, Perth Western Australia: Western Australian Government Heward-Belle, S (2015): The Diverse Fathering Practices of Men Who Perpetrate Domestic Violence, Australian Social Work, DOI: 10.1080/0312407X.2015.1057748 Holt et al, 2008, The Impact of exposure to Domestic Violence on children and young people: a review of the literature, Child Abuse and Neglect, 32 Humphries, C et al, 2009, Bad Mothers and Invisible Fathers, DVRCV, Discussion Paper no 9. Jenkins, A, 1990, Invitations to Responsibility, Dulwich Centre Publications Johnson, 2001, Contrasting Views of the Role of Alcohol in the Case of Wife Assault, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 16, 1, pp 54-72 Laing, L., Toivonen (Kennaugh), C., Irwin, J., Napier, M. (2010). They Never Asked Me Anything About That: The Stories of Women who Experience Domestic Violence and Mental Health Concerns/Illness, accessed 22.11.15 Mandel, D, 2015, safe and Together, Research to Practice Notes, FACS Mandel, D, 2010, 10 item checklist about the intersection of domestic violence, Substance abuse and mental health issues, www.endingnviolence.com, accessed 22.11.15 McConnell et al, 2014, Caring dads safer children: interim evaluation report Evaluation of group work with domestically abusive fathers, NSPCC Scott, at press, Why Fathers are an Essential Target of Intervention to End Children’s Experiences of Violence and Abuse Within the Home, accessed 22.11.15 Scott, K and Crooks, C, 2004, Effecting change in maltreating fathers: Critical principals for intervention planning, in Clinical Psychology, 11, 1, Wiley Stanley, J and Goddard C., (2002) In the Firing Line: Violence and Power in Child Protection Work, John Wiley & Sons Ltd., West Sussex.

Vlais, R, 2015, Research to Practice Notes, FACS

Safe and Well: Responding Across Generations to Families Impacted by Domestic and their Mental Health needs

Ms Jennifer Wood Manager BoysTown Ms Karen Edwards Manager BoysTown

Paper Presented at the The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7 - 8 December 2015

Safe and Well: Responding Across Generations to Families Impacted by Domestic/Family Violence and their Mental Health Needs

An overview of BoysTown’s responses to family/domestic violence in two accommodation programs and perspectives and insights from the lived experience of families who have resided in these community settings, when DFV is further compounded by mental illness.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction .......................................................................................................... 4 Overview of the Refuge Model ................................................................................. 5 Trauma and Domestic and Family Violence ............................................................... 5 Mental Health........................................................................................................ 6 BoysTown’s Refuge Model ....................................................................................... 6 Why work from a trauma informed practice in a refuge setting ...................................10 Some of the key challenges women and children are impacted by when entering refuge11 Refuge can assist women and children ....................................................................12 Case Study A .......................................................................................................13 The prolonged and recurring abuse resulted in a range of physical and mental/emotional scars on the family members .................................................................................14 The San Miguel Family Centre ................................................................................18 Service Responses to Families with Children ............................................................22 Case Study B .......................................................................................................23 San Miguel’s Response ..........................................................................................25

Prepared by BoysTown Service Managers: 

Karen Edwards (BoysTown Family and Domestic Violence Refuge Service) [email protected]



Jennifer Wood (The San Miguel Family Centre) [email protected]

Introduction This paper presents BoysTown’s responses to family/domestic violence in two accommodation programs and provides perspectives and insights from the lived experience of families who have resided in these community settings, when DFV is further compounded by mental illness. Workers across all agencies who are seeking an understanding of the interface of these issues and responding to families with children will benefit from the models of practice that our Service Managers will present. BoysTown's framework of response will be presented demonstrating the common elements the two services utilise to respond to families with children. Role similarities across the two services are demonstrated below, with service models reflective of the complex and multiple issues that vulnerable families with children experience. Every front line staff member of BoysTown is provided with ongoing modelling and training to work from core principles of safety, respect, trust, collaboration, empowerment which in turn informs their own pro-social modelling. Staff are further developed and supported by Clinical Practice Supervision (CPS) and receive regular supervision as well as formal and informal debriefing. Staff well-being and self-care is also fostered and supported by BoysTown. Both core skills training and CPS are resourced by the organisation through a professional practice team.

Overview of the Refuge Model BoysTown’s Domestic/Family Violence Refuge provides more than emergency accommodation and support to women and children. Many who present at the refuge have experienced multiple, unresolved and complex traumas which have been compounded and reinforced over time by further experiences of violence/ abuse. As a result of this complexity, the families present traumatized with many people experiencing mental health issues. BoysTown’s refuge practices from a trauma informed, strengths based framework, i.e. understanding the need to respond to individuals impacted by domestic/family violence and the resultant trauma. A collaborative, wrap around approach creates opportunities for family members to rebuild their self-concept and experience control and empowerment over their own lives.

Sexual Assault and Domestic and Family Violence (DFV) are among the most pervasive forms of violence. Almost two women die every week in Australia as a result of DFV. This is approximately 100 women per year.

DFV knows no

geographical, socio-economic, age, ability, cultural or religious boundaries.

The first three months after leaving a violent relationship is the most dangerous time for women, as this is when women are most likely to be killed by their partner. This is the time when the person using violence perceives that they have lost control.

DFV is about

power and control. It is about one person strategically controlling another person through coercion, intimidation and fear. Research tells us that the majority of people who experience DFV are women. Understanding the gendered nature of DFV is vital in designing the response model to support the families experiencing DFV.

Refuge sometimes is the only option for women

and children to ensure their safety.

DV Connect is the main referral pathway into the refuges throughout Queensland.

DV

Connect report that they receive on average 300 – 400 calls per day, with some days receiving over 500 calls. Unfortunately the demand is higher than resources available, leaving many families in Queensland

in motels on average 4-7 nights whilst waiting for

a refuge vacancy.

Trauma and Domestic and Family Violence

The relationship between domestic and family violence, child abuse, substance abuse and mental health is well researched.

Domestic and family violence can include a range of

abuses that cause trauma. Trauma can arise from a single or repeated adverse event

that threatens to overwhelm a person’s ability to cope.

Trauma can begin a complex

pattern of actions and reactions which can continue to impact a person over their life time unless there is an intervention. When a person is exposed to unmanageable stress, they can become intolerably distressed, impacting their ability to modulate arousal, regulate their internal states, organize their physiological responses and categorize experiences in a coherent fashion. When the traumatic stressors are interpersonal, premeditated, planned and perpetrated in relationships of care, it is more damaging and constitutes complex trauma. Experiencing and/or witnessing domestic violence is a form of complex trauma (Kezelman & Stavropoulous, 2012)

For children, research clearly shows that the younger the child is, the more harmful the traumatic experiences are in terms of the child’s brain development (Levine & Kline, 2007). Those affected by violence as children may also incorporate abuse into their relationships as adults (Van der kolk, 2007). Abusive patterns, including gendered attitudes, can seem normal. The use of power and control, secrecy, silence, fear and shame are common within families who are exposed to violence. This in turn can perpetuate the cycle of violence.

Mental Health

There are many studies that point to negative and often long term mental health consequences for women and children experiencing domestic and family violence (Braaf & Meyering, 2013). These impacts include depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, personality vulnerabilities/disorders, substance abuse to self-medicate and suicide. Van der Kolk, (2007) argues that childhood trauma increases destructive behaviours, including aggression, adolescent suicide, alcoholism, substance misuse, sexual promiscuity, physical inactivity. Many women and children entering refuge present with mental health concerns. In families where there are trans generational histories of violence, presentation of mental health concerns is both more pronounced and more common

BoysTown’s Refuge Model

In 2004 BoysTown established and continues to resource a refuge for women and children who have experienced Domestic and Family Violence (DFV). The refuge practices from a strengths based and trauma informed case management and therapy model.

Emergency accommodation for women and their children is enhanced

by an individualised program that provides professional, evidence based responses alongside material and practical needs responses.

The core purpose behind the domestic and family violence refuge is to provide a therapeutic environment where mothers and their children can come to escape situations of violence.

The Refuge aims to provide:



a high quality and innovative supported accommodation service where women and their children escaping DFV can be housed in safe and secure independent housing . The service provides four houses and three cabin style properties in a rural setting. Families can stay in the refuge for up to twelve weeks until other housing options are secured



specialised collaborative case management with services within the community to provide an integrated response to meet the families’ needs. The model is child and family centred, and the team works with respect and sensitivity to the families’ trauma histories. Case Management is ongoing throughout the duration of residency and includes comprehensive assessment, goal planning, safety planning, legal and court support, financial support, advocacy and housing support etc. As part of case management the following supports are also available: o

Specialist DV Counselling - the women are provided with a range of evidence informed therapeutic interventions, individually tailored and informed by developmental, attachment and trauma theories to support emotional wellbeing

o

Specialist Child Therapy - the children are provided with integrative expressive therapy based on an understanding of neurobiological development. This includes a wide range of creative therapies such as art, music, sandplay, play, movement, writing and emotion-focussed therapies. This response assists the children to process challenging or traumatic experiences that they may otherwise be unable to verbalise. Therapy, especially for very young children, is enhanced by family therapy with a focus on the attachment relationship between the mother and her child/ren. There are rare exceptions in the refuge experience, impacted by the timeframes within which families are supported, where family therapy is not of benefit, e.g. where the mother’s mental health results in disorganised attachment in the child

o

Educational workshops - the women attend workshops focusing on emotional health, healthy relationships and emotional and physical safety

o

Life skills and social skills programs – education and encouragement is provided to women and children to recognise and develop their strengths in areas such as play, communication, cooking, budgeting, digital safety, self-esteem, personal care, homework, etc.

Activities are provided onsite

and offsite that support and strengthen the family’s social well-being. Individual children are also provided with activities by Social Skills Activity Workers so that women can participate in counselling and other case work without children overhearing trauma stories o

Mental Health Support - Homeless Health Outreach Team (HHOT) – A multidisciplinary team including Psychiatric Doctors, Occupational Therapists, Social Workers and Nurses provide assessment and intervention to women onsite. This service supports women who experience a diverse range of mental health concerns including psychosis, mood disorders, anxiety and substance misuse.

The HHOT staff work

collaboratively with refuge staff to provide ongoing care and support whilst living in refuge and continue to provide support post refuge until relevant referrals have been completed to mental health services. Every psychiatrist so far engaged with the refuge families through HHOT has a practice informed by trauma and attachment o

Referrals to specialist services off site - including GP, child health nurse, child care, legal and court support, etc.



a co-ordinated outreach response for families who have exited refuge to support the family’s engagement with services post refuge as needed. This is offered predominantly via phone and email from the refuge, recognising both the geographic spread of families and safety issues for refuge staff

Regular case management meetings occur to ensure all staff work from a collaborative and informed practice base.

Why work from a trauma informed practice in a refuge setting

Many women presenting at refuge enter in chaotic states. This is a significant time of change for them and their children, not always viewed positively. They have often experienced multiple unresolved traumas, compounded over time by further experiences of violence and abuse. Often presenting most distressed and vulnerable, the women and their children are easily triggered and struggle to regulate their emotions.

Many women

have misconceptions about what refuge is, stating they thought they were coming to a shared house, a refugee camp or thought they would be living with ‘a type of person that is not like them’.

Trauma informed practice is a responsive approach that supports and accommodates the vulnerabilities and sensitivities of those who have experienced DFV and trauma.

It is a

practice that does not judge or blame individuals for their attempts to use adaptive strategies to manage their stress responses. It is also a practice that attempts to minimize potential re-traumatization.

Predictability is very important to feeling safe. The service provides a predictable routine and approach including consistent guidelines and support. Each family is provided with the same quality of care and support regardless of which staff member is supporting them as a result of an assessment process that provides a thorough understanding of the history, presenting concerns and safety issues.

When families exit refuge, the same care and consideration extends in referring the families to external services which can continue to provide quality support.

Outreach

only concludes when either the family is linked with an external service, the client chooses to end outreach or the client disengages from contact with our service.

Working within communities that have an integrated response to domestic and family violence can be critical to ongoing and safe outcomes for families. The benefits of an integrated response include a cross section of every agency that actively responds to DFV, e.g. Court registrar, Legal Aid, police, probation and parole, child protection, Women’s DFV specialised services, etc.

Some of the key challenges women and children are impacted by when entering refuge include o

Leaving personal items behind that are important, e.g. special toys for children, ID, other important documents or personal possessions. Property retrievals may not always be a safe option to progress

o

Feeling initially isolated from family and friends, as refuge is a confidential space, resulting in the women and children being unable to share with anyone where the refuge is or to meet friends or family members at the refuge to maintain security for all families and staff

o

Expressing anger that they are the ones that have to leave their home and take their children out of their school due to risk of harm, and that the person using violence often remains in the property

o

Minimising risk of harm as often they underestimate the actual safety risk

o

Feeling refuge is challenging as they are living with a firm set of safety rules, initially perceiving refuge as another controlling environment

o

Feeling sympathetic and having strong emotional links to the person using violence, especially if violence has been their norm throughout their life or relationship experiences

o

Being directed to seek refuge or risk having their children removed from their care by Protective Services

o

Entering refuge in a state of fight, flight and/or freeze. This may result in women and children having difficulty settling initially, wanting to either withdraw, flee (making it difficult to engage them in case management), or fight, either with staff or other residents who may trigger their trauma histories

o

Perceiving a negative response from staff which can lead women and children to react to their internal working model of rejection and abandonment

Staff are challenged regularly and are supported and encouraged to respond with sensitivity throughout all conversations and engagements with the women and children as they are aware of these internal states.

Refuge can assist women and children to

o

Increase safety – physical and emotional

o

Develop insight into domestic and family violence, into the role of trauma and the impact on their mental health (e.g. many women have been heard to say ‘I thought I was crazy, he kept telling me I was crazy, now I know I’m not crazy’)

o

Build an alternative model for future relationships

o

See a world that can be reliable and helpful, creating trust and an openness to accepting help from other services

o

Increase capacity to manage internal and external states

o

Improve Mental health

o

Recognise and develop their own strengths and resources

o

Be informed which in turn increases knowledge, awareness and future options, particularly in relation to safety, housing, judicial responses and legal rights

o

develop new skills and strategies to navigate the systems, particularly the legal system

o

experience parenting in a safe environment which can strengthen the relationships between the mother and her children

o

explore new and positive experiences which can aid in trauma recovery and interrupt trans generational patterns

Outlined below is a case study demonstrating the presenting issues of a family entering BoysTown refuge and the support they received during their refuge experience. Case Study A (mother with 5 children aged 13, 10, 8, 5 and 3 years)

Family were in refuge with BoysTown for 12 weeks, leaving their violent husband/father. Cultural identity is from the African subcontinent, arriving as refugees in 2002. Referral via DV Connect (State phone line): Mother became aware that her husband had organised for 13 year old daughter to be sent to Africa to marry this year; had attempted to organise a passport for the girl; the family had already received a dowry. Their own marriage had been arranged when she was young, married at 15 years. Abuse started just after the birth of first child (2001) and continued throughout the relationship. She experienced coercive control; often physically assaulted (beaten and hit with sticks and non-lethal strangulation on many occasions); isolated from friends; he controlled all finances often resulting in mother and eldest girl going hungry while other family members ate in front of them. The father was violent to the children, and would physically punish them if ‘displeased’. Their mother attempted to stop him and he then physically assaulted her. The eldest daughter was most at risk (often physically assaulted to the extent she could not go outside or attend school due to the swelling from injuries). Police were not informed due to fear that his violence would increase; he was very controlling and forced his daughter to do excessive cleaning and house hold activities. The father “favoured our sons”, and whilst he hit them from time to time, he often blamed the 13 year old girl and her mother for the boys’ behaviour. The 13 year old

stated she was “sadder than anyone” and prayed to god daily to let her sadness be over. When she learnt that her father intended to send her to marry, she thought about how she could end her life, made a plan and decided to carry it out one day after school, the same day her mother picked her up early from school to bring her family to the refuge.

The prolonged and recurring abuse resulted in a range of physical and mental/emotional scars on the family members

The mother: obvious scars from beatings with sticks and presented with feelings of hopelessness, prolonged sadness, little energy or interest in participating in activities and reduced responsiveness to her children. Symptoms of anxiety and post-traumatic stress were reported, as reoccurring flashbacks including auditory hallucinations. She would hear her husband’s voice yelling at her and the children and initially found it difficult to feel safe in the refuge with these intrusive thoughts, coupled with the fear that her husband would locate her; at the same time she feared isolation and the remote location of refuge triggered this fear further. At the same time the mother heard her uncle’s voice – referring her back to other family violence within her family of origin. The mother experienced a range of signs and symptoms such as dissociation (spacing out), difficulty focusing and engaging in case work at times, psychosomatic symptoms such as muscle tension, shortness of breath, fatigue, as little as 2 hours sleep per night, reduced appetite, low confidence, loss of interest in her own care/appearance. Behaviours included minimal communication and supervision of her children, difficulty communicating her feelings to her children and to staff, reduced capacity to maintain her house and her eldest daughter would be instructed to clean when staff undertook scheduled property inspections. Youngest daughter was also pressured to help, and both girls were often expected to be responsible for their youngest brother.

The 13year old girl: physical scars from beatings with sticks and other items; appeared depressed and anxious with post-traumatic stress; had suicidal ideation; disturbed sleep through nightly nightmares and would wake up screaming, terrified her dad would find them. These thoughts intruded each day. She also had auditory hallucinations. These contributed to psychosomatic experiences including headaches, general pain throughout her body, fear, dread, constantly on edge, wary, and obsessive thoughts about been overweight

The 10 year old boy: was sad, withdrawn and full of worry and grief. His anxiety included feeling guilty for missing his father, as he was favoured by his father and

singled out for gifts. He struggled at times with this confusion of missing his dad and love for his dad, at the same time knowing what harm his dad was capable of causing to his mother and sisters. He stopped eating when he first arrived at refuge and his mother would have to sit and watch him to ensure he ate. He also was anxious regarding isolation of refuge, fearful that his father would locate them.

The 8 year old boy: struggled with language and literacy; at home his father would hit him for being illiterate. He stuttered when under pressure and as the second son he was given far less attention. He had a lesser connection with his dad and did not want to see him again. He also minimised the abuse, at first pretending he knew nothing about it. He appeared more resilient than his siblings and managed conflict by laughing and showing outwardly that he was not impacted by other people and their comments. However he would also would wake up through the night afraid dad would find them.

The 5 year old girl: showed symptoms of depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress. She described visual hallucinations, would see black shadows moving towards her and felt afraid. She also had disturbed sleep and would wake up screaming at night (her nightmares were that dad would come and kill her or come and take her sister away and kill her). At times she would also minimize the abuse, and would laugh to cover her feelings.

The 3 years old boy: appeared very flat in affect when the family first arrived, appearing at times to dissociate (freeze and stare off into the distance). He was fearful of new places and new people, including staff. At times selectively mute, he would stand and watch other children during site activities and appeared unsure how to join in and play with or beside other children. His language development was delayed. His mother did not attend well to his needs, he presented with poor hygiene, inappropriate and unsafe clothing (e.g. clothes too big, exposed body parts and genitalia) and was not supervised by his mother, e.g. monitoring, toilet training, toilet hygiene.

Interventions in refuge were extensive and individualised, including financial (Centrelink); Health and Oral Health (local Medical services); Mental Health (Homeless Health Outreach Team); Legal (Legal Aid for DVO and Family Law matters, including airport watch to prevent children been removed from Australia); Counselling and Child Therapy. Also linked to Kids Helpline Counsellor (after hours) for ongoing support for 13 year old girl; Housing (Department of Housing); Case work; Social Skills Activities; Group Work (workshops to increase understanding of impact of trauma; how trauma

impacts behaviours; improved understanding of domestic and family violence, including impact on the family members; strengthening self-concept; developing safety planning including digital safety and site safety).

Outcomes for the mother: Overall, fear of isolation reduced, family members were more settled as flashbacks and nightmares reduced, but would swing from seeking or accepting support from staff to resisting or rejecting support dependent on mental health impacts. A considerable level of trust developed from having no trust to stating “I trust you with everything”, feelings of safety increased and engagement increased. The mother was introduced to onsite counselling, which minimised the need to re-tell the individual and family story of trauma. Overall confidence increased, fear reduced, she appeared happier, would spend time on her appearance and started to attend to youngest child’s hygiene and improved supervision with children. Mother’s parenting confidence increased, she set boundaries, appeared to enjoy and be more available to children.

Individual children’s needs were responded to with children stating: “When we arrived our house was really nice and we had toys there to play with and it made us feel welcome. The manager understands everything, even when things are difficult she listened to me and supported me and made me feel heaps better. Everyone cares about my family here. It was good we stayed here as there were other families from our culture who stayed too”.

The mother stated in her feedback: “I felt safe in the refuge away from the violence, but I found it hard to settle when I first arrived. It took me a couple of weeks to feel safe as I kept hearing my husband yelling at me and I couldn’t sleep. I first felt isolated being in the bush and was scared he would find us. My children were also scared he would find us. What helped me the most was knowing there was a community of people to talk to when I felt worried. They understood my fears and didn’t judge me when I thought I was going crazy. I was worried about this, but they seemed to understand and helped me understand more about why I felt like I did. The workshops helped a lot too. The children enjoyed their counselling. I would see them leaving to go to counselling sad, but they always seemed to come back feeling happier and always looked forward to their sessions. I am also very grateful for the help with the legal support. I didn’t know about taking out a DVO, family law or getting an airport watch. I am still learning about this, but am getting help from a Solicitor now.

The staff helped me find a new house.

They filled it with furniture for me and helped make it feel like a home. We felt part of

an extended family. We are all sleeping better, the nightmares have stopped and we are making new friends. Refuge helped protect me and helped me protect my children”.

References

Braaf, R., & Barrett Meyering, I. (2013) Domestic Violence and Mental Health, Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse:10

Levine, P., & Kline, M. (2007).

Trauma through a child’s eyes. Berkley, CA: North

Atlantic Books

Kezelman CA 2013, Trauma Informed Practice: How important is this for Domestic Violence Services in Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse:52

Van der Kilk, B. (2007). Developmental impact of childhood trauma. In L. Kirmayer, R. Lamelson, M. Barad (Eds.), Understanding trauma: Integrating biological, clinical and cultural perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

The San Miguel Family Centre San Miguel Family Centre is a short term and transitional Specialist Homelessness Service located at North Richmond NSW. San Miguel offers families with children who have experienced homelessness short term and transitional accommodation and support (including case management, child and youth, and specialist housing supports). San Miguel also offers outreach support to families who have exited the accommodation service for an agreed period dependent on the needs of individuals and families.

On average, San Miguel Family Centre accommodates around thirty five families each year. Fifteen to sixteen families can be accommodated at any one time. This usually equates to approximately 20 parents or carers being provided with a service at the Centre at any one time, with up to 40 to 45 children and young people.

Families are referred to the service upon presentation at (or upon coming to the attention of) other services, such as housing providers or Family and Community Services; or through informal referral networks such as “word of mouth”. San Miguel traditionally receives around 300 requests for accommodation each year. Families referring to the service are frequently experiencing a presenting crisis in their ptions for accommodation and are typically “rough sleeping” or “couch surfing. As eflected in research on homeless populations, families presenting to the service frequently have had experiences of domestic and family violence, and commonly have co-occurring mental health issues1.

Children and young people also may have been exposed to parental alcohol or other drug issues, and may have experienced abuse or neglect. Parents accessing the service often have had similar experiences in their family of origin which resulted in family 1

See for example:

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2008), Demand for SAAP Accommodation by Homeless People 20067: A Report from the SAAP National Data Collection, Cat. HOU 186, AIHW, Canberra McLachlan, R., Gilfillan, G. and Gordon, J. (2013), Deep and Persistent Disadvantage in Australia, rev., Productivity Commission Staff Working Paper, Canberra. Mental Health Council of Australia (2009) Home Truths: Mental Health, Housing and Homelessness in Australia, mhaustralia.com.au Tually, S. Faulkner, D. Cutler, C. Slatter, M. (2008) Women, Domestic and Family Violence and Homelessness: A Synthesis Report, Flinders Institute for Housing, Urban and Regional Research, Flinders University, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra

homelessness, and commonly have experienced institutionalization in the Out of Home Care, Hospital and Criminal Justice systems. The experience of being homeless is an experience of trauma additional to other traumas each family and individual has already experienced prior to the episode of homelessness.

Upon entering the service, staff work with families to identify their barriers to accessing and sustaining permanent accommodation. Staff scope the needs of each family (and individual within the family) to ensure that the case management journey is responsive to the needs and goals of each family and each individual within the family unit.

In responding to children and young people presenting to the service, staff at San Miguel immediately make links with education, counseling and other specialist supports as per the child or young person’s need; as well as seeking to strengthen parenting capacities to ensure the best outcomes. The profound effect of exposure to domestic and family violence that may have impacted on each child and young person’s neurological and social development is considered in each response to their needs.

Responses to families are supported by a team of client services staff that includes Child and Youth Development Workers, Families Case Workers, a dedicated specialist Housing Case Worker, a Coordinator and a Manager.

Service Responses to Families with Children

The influence of a life history of these complexities coupled with homelessness means many families have significant barriers in trusting others. For workers and families it is the process of forming a relationship that builds trust, support and appropriate engagement that is of the most benefit to addressing further issues. Appropriate engagement does need to include awareness that vulnerable children at times overidentify and attach themselves quickly to adults without caution. Providing family members with alternative and non-abusive frameworks for interacting with each other is an essential extension of the support provided to families by staff. As San Miguel provides responses to a wide variety of families, work with families in relation to the varied presentation of family and domestic violence (F/DV) can include: 

Supporting families who have been exposed to F/DV in the past (including multiple episodes of violence in a variety of settings)



Supporting

women

who

(with

their

children)

have

recently

left

violent

relationships 

Men who have their care of their children, but may have been perpetrators of F/DV in the past



Families who are currently experiencing F/DV

Due to the varying effects of F/DV, work with families is (as noted) individualised and responsive to the family’s needs. This is especially true for families with co-occurring experiences of mental health illness. The safety of family members (and staff) remains paramount, and work with those who perpetrate violence is always risk assessed. Overt physical violence cannot be responded to in a general family support setting.

Some of the key challenges for staff working within this space include: 

Attempting to assess any risk to the family – at times victims of F/DV will be clear in how they assess the risk to themselves and their children - at other times they may be unable (or it may be unsafe for them) to express any risks to their own or their children’s safety. This can result in a self-report that understates the actual risks to the victim or victims.



Attempting to assess the diverse forms of F/DV that may be affecting the family unit (for example economic control, isolation from family supports, reliance on assistance with parenting from the perpetrator of violence) that families may not identify or define as a F/DV dynamic and therefore not disclose.



Building trusting relationships with families who are traumatised, and have no trust left for the “system” they feel has failed them so far. This lack of trust can be especially heightened for individuals experiencing a mental health illness.



Working with predominately men who were perpetrators of abuse, and are seeking to change their behaviors, in consideration of the lack of ongoing support or specialist counseling for men.



Working with those who have been victims of F/DV who state the relationship has ended - when in-fact the “silent partner” is dominating the case management process, and continuing to perpetrate abusive behaviors.



Working with those who have been victims of F/DV who cannot step away from the perpetrator of violence due to the caring role they have for the person (e.g. for a perpetrator of violence who has mental health issues).



Working with perpetrators of DFV who hold anti-social views with a heightened sense of righteousness and self-entitlement. These individuals do not wish to address their own behavior or be challenged about their behavior, especially by a service worker.



Attempting to work across systems that are not well resourced, and do not work together collaboratively – for example seeking mental health or AOD support for a perpetrator of violence when the mental health issues (or AOD issues) that directly impact their behavior toward the victim is attended to in isolation from the issue of F/DV, and the lack of mental health interventions available.

Case Study B

An example of the complexity of the needs and experiences of individuals and families who have been profoundly affected by domestic violence and mental health are illustrated by the case study of “Cassie”. The following case study details only became known in full as an outcome of a tragic death.

Cassie was born to young parents, her mother Jane was 16 years old at her birth, and her father Tom was 17 years old. Tom had grown up in a family where his mother, Tom and his siblings were subject to family and domestic violence from their father. Tom had developed a drug problem and engaged in a range of offending behaviors to support his drug use. Jane had grown up also being exposed to domestic and family violence, and in particular was witness to her grandparents perpetrating violence toward her own mother and maternal aunty (her mother’s twin).

Jane’s aunty was murdered by her grandparents in an event of DFV, and the death of her aunty was ever present in Jane’s childhood. Jane reported that she began to exhibit signs of an emerging mental health issue from her early teens.

Upon Cassie’s birth Jane and Tom sought to build a life of their own in their own space. However, Tom entered the prison system and continued his AOD use and offending behaviour. Jane and Tom’s relationship was also marked by domestic violence, and this

represented Cassie’s earliest childhood experiences. When Cassie was 2 years old her father (aged 19) received a six year prison sentence. Cassie remained in the care of Jane (age 18), whose mental health issues escalated, and who often used alcohol and other drugs to self-medicate.

Jane re-partnered, and Cassie soon had two brothers. This relationship was also marred by DFV, resulting in severe physical injuries to Jane and her leaving the relationship with Cassie. Cassie had been exposed to the ongoing physical and emotional abuse of her mother during this period. Cassie’s two brother’s remained in their father’s care, as his extreme violence and further threats of violence included death threats if she attempted to take Cassie’s brothers.

Over time, Jane commenced a third relationship resulting in another two children (a brother and sister to Cassie). This relationship was also violent ended with Jane leaving the relationship with Cassie as well as her newest siblings.

After Jane’s third relationship, Jane, Cassie and her new siblings moved to Jane’s mother’s house. This was now overcrowded, being only a 2 bedroom property, and was unsustainable for the family to remain in.

San Miguel’s Response

Tom (now 25 years old) was released from jail and commenced a new relationship. His new partner, Kate, had left a long term violent marriage (where she and her children had experienced ongoing physical and psychological abuse). Tom and his new partner were referred to San Miguel by Housing NSW as they had applied for accommodation together, and were currently living as a family (with Kate’s children) in her car. San Miguel accommodated the family, and began to offer support.

Staff at San Miguel had concerns for the risks that may be present for of Kate, Tom and their children due to Kate having recently left a previously violent relationship. Kate’s family was supportive of her spouse, as they felt she had shamed her family by leaving her husband. Kate had also experienced ongoing family violence in her family of origin.

Tom forbade Kate to talk to staff about any possible safety concerns she might have had in relation to her ex-husband or her family of origin, as he believed that this service

would make reports to FACS and the children would be taken. As a result, in interactions initiated by staff about past experiences of domestic and family violence, and any indicators of current risk, Kate was unwilling to disclose any details. Kate self-reported she had no concerns for either her own safety or the safety of her family. In later conversations with staff Kate disclosed she was fearful for her own life and the lives of her children throughout this time.

As a result, providing specialist support to the family to fully assess and address their safety needs was difficult, as any safety concerns staff may have had were dismissed as irrelevant by Tom and Kate. No indications were present to staff that Tom was overtly violent even though control existed in the relationship.

Kate and Tom were both offered referrals and support to access specialist services pertaining to their individual experiences of childhood trauma, and for Kate concerns began to emerge about her state of mental health. Both declined referrals or support. Kate was also offered support for the children to access therapeutic interventions, again this was declined. Strategically, staff commenced building engagement with the family through case management and assisting Kate to address her family law issues via a referral to legal aid. Staff assisted the children to access childcare, and assisted Tom and Kate to complete a Housing NSW application for housing. Staff remained vigilant for any indicators of risk the family may share, however none were forthcoming.

Shortly after the family moved to San Miguel Cassie (by this time aged 8) began to visit her father on weekend access visits. Cassie seemed happy in her father’s company and enjoyed spending time with Kate’s younger children. Tom stated to staff he was concerned for Cassie in her mother’s care saying her mother was “mental”; but again did not elaborate to staff what this meant for Cassie. Staff continued through engagement with the family to try to review any information that might suggest Cassie was at risk in Jane’s care, but no information was forthcoming from the family.

Kate’s children continued to visit their father, the drop off point being Kate’s parent’s home. One evening, Tom attended Kate’s parent’s home to collect the children for Kate. Kate stated to Tom on that evening that all her brothers were at the house, her father and her ex-husband were also at the house; and (knowing the pattern of her family’s violent behavior) stated to Tom he should not attend the family home as the presence of all the family members may indicate “trouble”. Tom discounted Kate’s warning of the acute risk in the context of her family experience, and went to the home anyway. Tom

was attacked and murdered upon attending the home to pick up the children. Kate’s children were witness to the murder and Cassie lost her father.

Cassie remained in the care of her mother solely from this time on, and did not return to San Miguel. There was no farewell to the younger children and no way for any of the children to process the change in their lives.

Cassie and her mother (and siblings) were unable to sustain their accommodation at Cassie’s

grandmother’s

home.

Jane,

Cassie

and

her

siblings

were,

ironically,

accommodated by San Miguel due to their own experiences of homeless approximately a year after Tom’s death. San Miguel staff have been working with Jane, Cassie and her siblings since this time. The outcomes for Cassie and Jane have included:



Transitioning to permanent independent accommodation



Building and maintaining an engaging and pro-social relationship with the family that models respectful interactions with each other (and others)



Identifying an ambivalent attachment pattern between Cassie and her mother, and continuing to assist both mother and child to establish a health and safe bond



Addressing the impact of complex trauma and grief for both parent and child, including referrals to specialist supports



Addressing Jane’s mental health issues which now include depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, hoarding disorder, and Borderline Personality Disorder



Addressing emerging mental health issues for Cassie



Building a sense of belonging and identity for Cassie, and addressing perceptions relating to the normalization of violence within relationships and a distorted understanding of gender roles in relationships (victimization and control)



Building parenting capacity and decision making skills for Jane

Although the example of this case study includes a fatality, the dynamics of intergenerational DFV and mental health issues is a common presentation for many families supported by San Miguel. San Miguel Family Centre continues to provide support to homeless families affected by these issues. We also continue to advocate for the development of policies and implementation of services that seek to prevent and address family and domestic violence, and for holistic mental health responses that assist vulnerable families.

Healing Circle Work – Empowering Aboriginal Woman to Break their Cycle of Abuse from Domestic Violence.

Mrs Cheri Yavu-Kama-Harathunian Director Indigenous Wellbeing Centre

Edited by Janette Young: Proof Reader; Maureen Timmons

Paper Presented at the The Australian 2015 STOP Domestic Violence Conference Canberra, (ACT) 7 - 8 December 2015

INTRODUCATION This paper is not an academic treaties. It is about the experiences ‘in-situ’ of the author and others who have worked in the Aboriginal community from which this paper has come about. If a Chaplain works in Aboriginal Affairs, sooner than later a woman who lives in a cycle of Domestic Violence (DV) will come through the doors. I work for the IWC Ltd Bundaberg, an Aboriginal Community controlled organisation. My primary duties are to the staff and their families (93) and then to the clients whom staff refer to me. How, as a Practitioner, you deal with this first encounter will either assist the woman to break out of the cycle or throw her back into it. Often the women who have sought me out came because of the ‘Murrie Grapevine’. “You helped my sister. My Aunt told me about you. My friend said you would listen.” Some displayed heinous marks of abuse: facial, arms, legs, shoulders, head, neck and torso injuries. Others displayed emotional, mental and spiritual trauma. Some came with children in tow. Others sneaked in when their partner was elsewhere and their children were at school or were being looked after by a family member or friend. Whatever the circumstance of their coming to this Chaplain, what I found were common themes of a subjective and objective nature. Victims of DV require courage to stay or to go. They require resilience to accept what they need to accept. They require emotional acquiescence to put up with being abused. I used to look at these woman through the lens of ‘victimised’ womanhood. I don’t anymore; because when they came to me they have taken the first step into the warrior woman stance: the woman who is taking back herself. DV takes away so much of a person’s spirit, humanity, sense of self, value of self, self-respect and, for a woman, an appreciation of being born a woman. DV can start at a physical or an emotional level and eventually enters a woman’s spirit and soul. DV is an epidemic in Aboriginal Australia and it ravages women as well as children; it also ravages the perpetrator. The damage affects not only the physical - it also affects the cognitive, emotional, spiritual essence and soul of a person. It can be the cause of problems ranging from aggression, depression, mental disorders, dis-ease and disease or illness. When a woman is faced with violence, sexual abuse, family conflicts, drugs, lack of positive stimulation and too much negative stimulation, aggression and actions that demean, disenfranchise, and disempower, tremendous difficulties in just coping with daily life will arise. The entrapment into the cycle of DV is the point where Lateral Violence begins to express itself in the relationship and for some women they remain entrapped for life. Lateral Violence is the silent, hidden, historical and unconscious Violence that has been passed down in the oral histories of many

of our people. In many instances Lateral Violence lies dormant in a person’s psyche. More than likely, if Lateral Violence is not firstly understood, recognition of the cultural nuances are ignored. Then addressing DV in these families will see violence escalate in the next generation. Because of the colonial past, and how our ancestors were taught to survive the traumas of first contact, Lateral Violence began to entangle itself within other forms of violence such as DV. For years DV has been seen as the Core Factor to be addressed in regard to violence in Aboriginal Australia. However Lateral Violence is the intergenerational element of DV that, if not recognised or addressed, will continue to victimise Aboriginal women and children. This paper explores what has been shared by both victims and perpetrators who are entrapped in DV and who role model their behaviours to the next generation. It deals with experiences shared in the Bundaberg regions of Central Queensland from which the author is given recognition as a Traditional Owner. Background Information The Bundaberg community has a history of strong spiritual ties with the Traditional Owners and the First European Colonists. This spirituality, rather than diminishing, has over generations and time strengthened. However, the current reality in the Bundaberg regions is that families from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds, as a consequence of their struggles, experience discrimination (racial or other forms of discrimination). ABS data and IWC data indicates high rates of disease and illness resulting from families caught up in the cycle of DV. The number of Bundaberg families affected by this issue is reflected in data conducted by the Queensland Police in Bundaberg which shows: 

Domestic Violence Breach Offences are up 27.7% from 07/08 to 08/09, compared to an increase in 5.1% across the State



Breaches per 100,000 population are up 24.2%, compared to an increase in 0.5% across the State



Total Domestic Violence Orders across all types are up 22.8% from 2007 to 2009



Domestic Violence Referrals by Organisation are up 72% from 07/08 to 08/09 (Queensland Police Social Report: 2014)

The Bundaberg region has a population of 97,762 with a diversity of cultures. In the region, 83% of the population is within the SEIFA Index most disadvantaged quintile 1 and 2, making this region one of the worst affected DV areas in Australia. The key issues are chronic illness, including diabetes, cardiovascular disease and mental health, drug and alcohol problems, exacerbated by higher levels of socioeconomic disadvantage. This

includes lack of housing, transport, inadequate DV services and unemployment/long term unemployment (LTU) issues. LTU now stands at fourth and fifth generation Social Service recipients in a family. It is these key social determinant and social disadvantages that place extreme pressures on families in the region as can be seen by the data presented below: 

Bundaberg region unemployment rate 9.6% (Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations DEEWR 2014) - however anecdotal evidence suggests this figure is much higher



Average household earnings $789 per week (ABS 2011)



The average age of people in the region is 44 years versus 37 years for the state of Queensland. 20% are over 65 years of age.



Out of national regional areas the Bundaberg region has: 

3rd highest prevalence of mental health issues



Very high ranking in Australia for incidents of mood disorders.



Ranked 2nd for very high psychological distress



3rd for depression prevalence



7th highest rate of suicide in Australia, as detailed in the Wide Bay Hospital and Health Service Strategic Document. As a result of mental health issues, the Bundaberg Base Hospital continues to have high hospitalisation rates of self-harm, spousal harm, children harm and injury.

 

5th highest prevalence of diabetes

19% of people are smokers in the region versus 14% for Queensland, with high levels of alcohol consumption and illicit drugs.



7 out of 10 people are overweight, falling closer to obesity levels.



Hospital Utilisation – The Bundaberg Hospital has significantly higher episodes of care, when compared to Queensland as a whole.



Mortality Rates – significantly higher for all causes, all cancers, injury, poisoning and intentional harm.



Disease Prevalence – chronic preventable hospitalisations are statistically higher than elsewhere in Queensland for total chronic conditions.



Maternal and Infant Health – higher proportion of teenage mothers (8.5% versus 5.4% for Queensland), with perinatal mortality rates higher for Indigenous (29.4% vs

19.9%), Infant death rates for Indigenous (20.4% vs 7.9%); and mothers who smoke (27% vs 19%).

For the 2014/15 year, IWC delivered 71,800 Episodes of Care to 10,500 clients. Many clients who have attended IWC’s Medical, Dental, Child and Family Safety, Psychological, Chaplaincy and Community services access the services as a consequence of Domestic Violence, both Spousal and Family related. It is difficult to refer these clients to appropriate DV services given that the stories they share about access to services available to them are for many reasons inappropriate to the client’s perception of meeting their needs. Clients have strongly articulated their issues for not accepting an IWC referral to another agency for the following reasons: o Lack of appropriate and confidential services; o Inability to service the Perpetrator and the Victim either individually or as a family unit; o Lack of appreciation for the whole family to be in therapy; o Long waiting lists where existing DV services are at capacity; o Systematic issues as a deterrent because lengthy paperwork and documentation are required for a client to initiate legal proceedings (DVO) and lack of supports to complete this i.e. contains many personal questions o Numeracy and literacy issues - this issue is both an Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal issue o Lack of a continuum quality of care to meet the client’s needs; o The blinkered nature of existing services i.e. failing to address the client's holistic needs; o Lack of locally available shelter services for men (and women) when the last resort is to remove him/her from the home. This results in breaches of orders because the man returns to the family home because he has nowhere else to go; o Under-resourcing of current DV support services i.e. accommodation, crisis and emergency shelter for women, children and men. o Staff lack appropriate qualifications in particular Cross Cultural issues because of the type of client; o Services tend to focus overly on the rehousing of Victims to new locations, causing upheaval and break down of family foundations i.e. relocating children from school to

school, seeking new employment/unemployment benefits and breakdown in social and family networks; o A clear lack of understanding by agencies around the principles of victimology, restorative/therapeutic justice principles and family/community reconciliation; o Programmes provided for clients were developed in the 20th Century and do not clearly define the 21st Century needs of the client. For example, theories of DV such as Exchange, Culture of Violence, Resource, Patriarchal, Ecological, Social Learning, Sociobiological, Social Conflict and General Systems Theory, do not embrace understandings of 21st Century knowledge around DV. o A key factor in this area is fear that children will be caught up in Departmental interference. The Victims fear that if they report, the Perpetrator will be sent to Prison, and the victim will have no support networks available to them to work through the issues they face within society o Elder abuse has also increased particularly against elderly females. o Depending on the status of the Perpetrator in the community, a woman’s safety becomes vital because if this is the case, fear would override a woman’s right to report DV. The knowledge regarding DV has caused a shift in paradigm for IWC. To embrace Best Practice Principles, practitioners and agencies have to have an understanding of the perceptions of DV from a client’s perspective involving: 

Cultural Philosophical Ethos



Terms of Reference



Cultural Nuances



Collectivity Therapy – Perpetrator, Victim, Family, Children and Community



Language of a Healing Paradigm



Resilience birthed from a spiritual awareness and awakening

Understanding a Cultural Philosophical Ethos Theory – A necessity to understanding Lateral Violence and the symptom of DV A Cultural Philosophical Ethos (CPE) tells an Aboriginal person that when country was taken away without consent, it also meant that our spiritual connections to all that made us who we are, was severed to a point in our life where we learned to live in the background, learned the safety of living in ‘limbo’. As a child we learned that DV in the Aboriginal world was okay because when we saw a man and women beat each other up, no police, no services, not even the church stepped in to say, ‘Violence is not good. Violence is not the way.” In Aboriginal communities across Australia, DV has moved itself into a powerful position in a person’s sense of self because the historical and contemporary interventions do not address the repercussions of Lateral Violence as a ‘spiritual malaise`. When a person’s spirit is wounded, it requires healing - not an intervention, not a therapeutic programme; it requires healing at a very deep level, far deeper than cognitive, behavioural or emotional consciousness.

Many Aboriginal people call that place Dadirri – place of deepness, place of listening, place of the deep sounds of silence. If an intervention is not inclusive of Dadirri it is just an intervention, nothing more or nothing less. Contemporary interventions around the issues of DV do not address Lateral Violence or the culturally nuanced blockages created by Lateral violence. An intervention has to address what was historically taken, then historically passed down to generation after generation. An intervention has to include addressing Lateral Violence and there has to occur a positional change between a service provider and the Aboriginal clients. The Aboriginal person, if he/she chooses to become a client of a service, gives to the professional or the service provider a personal right to enter the client’s space where their spirit and soul can be awakened by the Language of a Healing Paradigm (LOAHP). This Healing Paradigm Language has cultural nuances and for each group the nuances will be different, or similar, but not the same. LOAHP reveals that it is not about the intervention that a service provides. It’s about a man's or women’s trust that what is shared about their experience of DV will be addressed with respect; that the culture from which the Aboriginal person comes for help will include addressing Lateral Violence from within their Aboriginal Terms of Reference Framework. It is from understanding the perceptions of a person that the cultural nuances will articulate to a professional, what DV means to them, in the cultural context. So if the culturally nuanced ‘text’ is taken out or ignored by the professional or service provider, then what is left to be dealt with is a ‘con’ and the client and the agency will suffer. A Cultural Philosophical Ethos Theory is represented by colours that represent the different spheres from which an individual is motivated. Aboriginal cultural knowledge tells us that each of us exist in time in seven spheres of life energies, and we draw from each sphere when we live out our life with thanksgiving, grace and love. Starting from the centre we are always aware that we are dealing with people through their own sense of their spirit, the essence of their life. The core of a person, irrespective of creed, religion, belief or philosophy, is their own sense of their Spirit. Spirit is their breath of life. Many Aboriginal people have shared: “I am a Spirit being, I possess a Soul and I live in a physical body.” (Minniecon, S.J. 1978 – 2008; Unpublished “Family Conversations.”)

For our Aboriginal people it is their Aboriginal Spirituality that is their connection to their Sacred Lands, their parents, their relations, their community, their environment. If that is healthy then what will develop as they mature is a healthy world view. They will be able to explain to themselves their own sense of wellness and wellbeing, or their dis- ease and disconnection. This is their personal CPE. When a person understands their own story about who they are, where they come from and what their purpose is, they have a scaffold that will identify to them, their personal Aboriginal Terms of Reference. It is from their Aboriginal Terms of Reference that they practice what has been handed on down to them from their ancestors. Their Terms of Reference is what keeps their culture, their histories, their knowledge and understanding about themselves alive. It also is the sphere in which people move with the dynamic changes that occur in their world. If they are working within their own Aboriginal Terms of Reference, they will have the language to yarn about the adversity, ill-health, disease, wellness and wellbeing that they feel in their bodies and they have their own language to yarn about it so that they can work with the other to deal with it. The four spheres are essential to a person if they are to understand their own ‘sense of being’. When a person understands their sense of being, it is very easy for them to identify not only dis- ease in their body - they are able to recognise the source of the dis-ease and identify where their wellness and wellbeing has disconnected with their Spirit. To acquire self-awareness, collective awareness and holistic wellness a person has to know and understand their connectedness to their spirit, their spiritual connection to their country and their CPE - otherwise violence will become a major part of how they deal with the challenges of life.

Issues around DV and working within a Transformational Management Model The issues surrounding DV often create a compartmentalisation of services simply because there are not enough services. Agencies and Police do work together, as does IWC and other services. However, the framework by which IWC operates - a Transformational Management Model - requires a clear and concise understanding of Meditational Processes, Reconciliation, Restorative Justice and holistic principles and practices. This often becomes juxtapositional where agencies are concerned, particularly when it is about what the services can provide to Perpetrators and Victims.

The dynamics of domestic and family violence - where either party is physically, psychologically, sexually, emotionally, mentally and/or spiritually violent so as to dominate/control with abusive power, within relationships in their spheres of influence - echo historical facets of Lateral Violence. The behaviour expresses a range of tactics to maintain power and control. Our service at IWC reaches out to all people Indigenous and NonIndigenous middle class, upper middle class, the most vulnerable, at risk, low socio-economic and disadvantaged community members. The evidence that is being collated by IWC has uncovered emerging issues in the dynamics of DV through the services provided to victims and perpetrators. The author acknowledges first and foremost that “Lateral Violence is the underpinning violence that creates causal effects for the symptom of DV to manifest. DV is a spiritual malaise that is expressed in cognitive, behavioural, social and emotional manifestations”. (Yavu-Kama-Harathunian 2013: Unpublished “Family Conversations.”). The author further acknowledges that “Lateral Violence is not just a spiritual malaise` in Aboriginal Australia who became a Conquered people in 1788. Lateral Violence is also a spiritual malaise` in non-Aboriginal Australia, where the Conqueror peoples who invaded Australia, continue to maintain colonising practices, amongst themselves and others thus ensuring that Lateral Violence in non-Aboriginal Australia is still experienced. However, research of the Conqueror Lateral Violence paradigm is minimal and because of this lack of understanding little is known about it.” (Yavu-Kama-Harathunian: 2014 Unpublished “Family Conversations”). DV has manifested overtly in perpetrators' behaviour, and an expressed factor has been the perpetrators' fantasy world. To a perpetrator, DV and violence in general are their ‘recorded’ mind and memory fantasy. So much time, effort, therapy, support has been given to reducing DV events, which is a good thing. but as far as Aboriginal people are concerned, very little has been done about the cultural nuances of Lateral Violence and its impact on DV. Many Aboriginal men who commit violent acts will disclose that they expect their victim to be like the type of person they are having intimate relationships with in their head. Their expectation is that their victims act like the type they have in their heads and if their victims do not fit with their fantasy, violence will occur. Add alcohol and drugs to the mix and the perpetrators actions quickly become Lateral Violence which is the power, the motivator, the hidden element that they express in the form of DV.

Cultural Nuances in Behavioural Manifestations: • • • • • • • • •

Manipulates others easily - uses ‘sweet talk’ with women and messes with a person’s head Uses violence to stay true to their fantasy of why they have to use violence so as to maintain the fantasy for their expectations to be met Culturally pro-criminal and anti-socially intelligent - knows what to do to get away with inappropriateness in communications, actions, innuendos, manipulations, grooming engaging and in contact Very plausible - easy going on the surface Blends in with non-violent behaviours to groom the vulnerable Confident that victim will not expose him/her Has created an informed fantasy for their violence to be seen in terms of assertiveness, defence, and personal protection Irrational behaviour is rational to the perpetrator Minimisation and/or denial

DV is not a disease or sickness, but it is a dis-ease and it hides and protects the very thing that gives it power, motivation and life. In the Aboriginal world, amongst so many groups of our people, DV is the manifestation of a cultural nuance of Lateral Violence. The damage of Lateral Violence, affects not only the physical, cognitive, emotional aspects of a person, it also impacts upon the soul and spiritual essence of Aboriginal people. When you understand that DV is a symptom of deeply hidden, deeply layered, deeply entrenched Lateral Violence, experiences, awareness and understanding will be that Lateral Violence, not DV, is the cause of violent behaviours including aggression, depression, mental disorders, dis-ease and disease or illness. Unless Lateral Violence is acknowledged for treatability, any intervention will only reach into the surface of a person’s psyche, their pseudo- identity, and gender based value of who they are. As this definition articulates: “Lateral violence is the power and control used by a dominating authority and/or individuals, to disconnect and decimate a people’s or person’s nationhood birthrights, as well as their spiritual and cultural heritage, self and cultural identity and ‘sense of being’. This is done by means of colonisation processes that ‘normalise’ institutionalised systems of violent intimidation, manipulation and deception personally, politically, environmentally, religiously, legitimately, governmentally and socially.” (Yavu-Kama-Harathunian 2010-2012; 2015: IWC - Restoration Dreaming Project)

You cannot give something of value back to a person if you only give attention to deal with their surface symptoms. “When you’ve got pus on your skin from a wound, don’t just wipe it off and think you have done something about healing the wound. You’ve got to wipe the pus off, and then look into the wound to see where the pus came from, and why the wound is there.” (Yavu-Kama-Harathunian: 2014: Unpublished “Family Conversations.”)

The power of the DV entrapment point for some women and the depths of what they experience is so deep that rather than seek help, the cultural nuance of this power causes them to remain entrapped for life because it is easier to hide behind silence. Messages to empower entrapped women have to come from the language of a Healing Paradigm if a glimmer of a response can occur. The glimmer of a response is all that the women can offer sometimes, to those who are ready to stand beside her because she is only just beginning to recognise her own sense of being a woman, a daughter, an aunt, a niece, a friend, a wife, a lover, and mother. This definition has assisted us to look into what the meaning of power, control, authorities, and disconnectedness means to Aboriginal people. It was discovered that the normalising of systems that perpetuate Lateral Violence exists not just in the Aboriginal World but in the world of any person whose own birthrights to the spiritual and cultural heritage that is theirs is manipulated in some way. Our research has assisted in understanding the cultural nuances that are expressed in DV. Lateral Violence is a Culturally Nuanced ‘Hidden Violence’ IT:

• • • • • •

It is held in the histories of Aboriginal people and erupts from a minor incident in relationships, in families and in communities where DV, feuding, and community violence was rampant It escalates very quickly not just amongst Aboriginal adults and teenagers, but also older people It erupts in groups of children as young as five years of age who were not users of drugs or alcohol It comes up, in, and then out of us, up, and around us, and goes down, and surrounds us It takes its form from the legacies of violence that our ancestors passed down in the historical and oral histories to us their descendants It is a Spiritual malaise` that is expressed in cognitive, behavioural and emotional manifestations.

Emerging Culturally Nuanced Issues in Aboriginal Australia Emerging culturally nuanced issues are becoming evident within the dynamics of the visible and invisible cultural, social, economic and intermarriage relationships that have evolved in

the demographic for which IWC provides services and from which this paper has evolved. The emerging cultural nuanced issues, arising from contact with families, victims, perpetrators, and partner relationships are: 

A common articulation by perpetrators has been their struggle with seething rage and anger through childhood, teenage and young adult growth and years. They believe that there has been little opportunity in their lives to express these emotions in a prosocial manner. From the stories handed down to them in childhood, anger at what happened to their parents became rage, while in their teenage years they lashed out in juvenile delinquency.



As young adults where no pro-social outlet for anger was available, rage began to seethe under the surface of their adult anti-social behaviours and as a result seething rage often manifested violence toward themselves and others particularly, in DV behaviours, because the unmet expression of seething emotions was to lash out at what was good in their lives because ‘good’ seemed so boring and did not fit with their own ‘mind-reality’ where they became the anti-hero persona.



Grief and loss at family and community levels continue to impact on men, women and families, due in part to high mortality rates. Families bury someone on Thursday, and come Monday, they’re at someone else’s funeral. No respite from grief and loss internalises these emotions and the grieving community members lash out to those closest to them because of feelings of powerlessness, helplessness, and unbelongingness.



The perpetrators' perceptions of their reality is one where they develop perceptions, views, and values around their notions of having complete control and power within a relationship. Drugs and alcohol are not the triggers. However, they do contribute an enhancement factor to perpetrator perceptions. One key factor is that they believe they have an inalienable right to commit a violent act to maintain their dominance.



The perpetrator, having created a mind-reality, a dream perception, where their expectations will be met without question, will react with violence if someone close to them does not act or speak according to their mind-reality.



When the victim does not meet the perpetrator's expectations, the perpetrator reacts to the victim’s behaviour by using acts of violence in order to return the victim to the status quo of their expectation and their mind-reality within the relationship, because

this is where they see themselves as powerful, authorative and with rights based upon their own sets of values.

Dynamics of Cultural Nuances Women and children caught in the cycle of violence become alienated from real connection to others, to some degree, because of negative emotionality i.e. self-hatred, guilt and shame. The cultural nuances used by victims of DV is to alienate themselves from themselves, and they tell themselves they will survive. Victims have survival instincts that are very sophisticated. They have a communication system that ensures that they:   

can hold a conversation in their head about themselves whilst talking with others can hold a conversation with people who support them whilst discussing what people are saying to them, through a self-talk communication system can hold a conversation with the perpetrator but will maintain their own perspective of the reality they are in

They alienate their identity from within, because being a victim, is not who they see themselves to be - other people label them victims. It is almost as if they self-hate. Inside their heads their self-talk reiterates to them that they are not victims of the violence perpetrated against them. Rather, their self-hatred leads them to develop notions that, “It is my fault. He loves me and that is why he bashes me. He’ll stop. I can take this, so I’ll stay.” Victims perceive people outside their circle as people who do not want to know or get involved. Because of this perception, they silence their own voice against speaking out. Further, if people outside do get involved, they perceive that as victims they will lose control of what is their reality. They will have nothing to live for. In their heart of hearts, Aboriginal women in DV relationships form a belief that they are obligated to stay with the man because no one else will understand him like they do. These perceptions increase where ethnicity; physical location; sexuality; cultural status; disability and language differ from mainstream communities. IWC’s evidence supports National data collated by the Australian Bureau of Statistics ABS, where one in three Australian women experience physical violence, and almost one in five women experience sexual violence over their lifetime (Australian Bureau of Statistics, Personal Safety Survey, ABS Cat. No. 4906.0, Canberra, 2005). As a result of evidence collated thus far, engaging in particular with Aboriginal victims of DV, has to be done in a way where risk to their safety is limited.

Within the Transformational Management Model upon which all IWC services are underpinned, a Model of Care has been developed where victim’s safety is paramount. Throughout the work that is done cultural nuances are investigated and are integrated into the processes of the services that are provided if the ‘cultural nuances ‘reflect back to the victims a hope for their ‘highest good’ .

(Developed by Yavu-Kama-Harathunian C.D; Haworth S; Mulvany W. & Clarke C: © IWC 2015)

Practice Approaches that exclude Aboriginal Wisdoms. IWC’s evidence reveals that in Domestic and Family Violence, general programmes do not consider the cultural nuances triggered by the underlying causes and effects of violence in the Aboriginal home and family. This is a key to understanding Domestic Violence in Aboriginal Australia. The historical Intergenerational traumatisation of parents by their ancestor parents, continues to impact upon present and future generations because the current parents still practice what their parents taught them. Families in the Bundaberg regions are culturally unique in their diversity through their connections to Islander, Sri-Lankan, Middle Eastern, African, English, German, Scottish, Irish, Italian, Asian and other European intermarriage connections with Aboriginal people. The influence of these inter-cultural dynamics must be understood by service providers because in many cases these factors increase the cultural nuances around the vulnerability to the risk of violence and its effects.

Current practice approaches to DV highlight the need for prevention as a central focus with Perpetrator Programmes, Safe at Home Programmes, education for children and young people and engaging men and boys as key. IWC’s Best Practice approach thus far has been successful in that, domestic and family violence is dealt with in Healing Circle Work (HCW) which is incorporated within their unique Model of Care. HCW’s approach is holistic and therefore supports both the Perpetrator and Victim towards healing, reconciliation and restoration. In some cases, healing will mean a break up between the Perpetrator and Victim and may involve both parties forming intimate future relationships with others. It has been proven that the HCW 8 week programme of group participation in healing work is essential. In that time, participants learn new skills which reinforce personal empowerment, personal responsibility, resilience and pro-sociality to engage both socially and spirituality in the wider community. The HCW approach is strengthened by the additional support of IWC’s twenty - three other programmes and services. These assist DV Victims and Perpetrators, through either direct participation, access to services or referral to identified professional agencies outside the scope of IWC services. HCW is the result of much deliberation, much discussion, much consultation and planning at the grass roots with victims and perpetrators as well as families. The result has been the Implementation of this IWC community project as a cultural answer to, Time for Action: The National Council’s Plan for Australia to Reduce Violence against Women and their Children. The Plan of Action, reports that it aims to reduce the levels of violence against women and their children by 2021. Healing Circle Work (Bundaberg) – Being part of the Solution Healing Circle Work (HCW) is a proven successful approach to Domestic and Family Violence. It caters to Indigenous and non-Indigenous community members. HCW supports safer and stronger communities and families by addressing precipitating and underlying factors that trigger DV. Participants who engage in HCW are referred to staff with the appropriate training and experience. This includes IWC’s trained Counsellors, Family Workers, and Psychologists. The HCW Chaplain/ThetaHealing Practitioner (B.App. Sci Indigenous and Community Health (Major) Mental Health and Counselling; Masters Criminal Justice) facilitates participates in the eight week programme. HCW is a programme, where Perpetrators, Victims and families come together to understand the core

factors and root causes of Domestic and Family Violence. Modules deal with: Cultural Nuances of Violence-Introducing the Adult to the Child Within; Lateral Violence, Queenie Power Panels (Panel of women who are trained to deal compassionately with male perpetrators); Intergenerational Trauma Impact; Parenting Implications in Spousal Relationships; Values of Man-making Rites and Rituals through Respect and Caring; Transforming Gender Identity –Violence is Weakness, Caring and Peace is Strong; and an introduction to Meditation. The Course covers 6 Modules with individual Follow-Up processes. It is intensive healing work and participants commit to 8 weeks to complete it. Participants are educated and informed to explore, experience, and work through their own values and perceptions of Domestic Violence; to understand the legacy of Lateral Violence, and are educated to recognise other forms of violence e.g. stealing, violent language use, stalking, gossiping, venting, jealousy, and enmity. DV requires early intervention and prevention services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people who are at risk of DV. Any DV intervention has to be inclusive of improving the wellbeing and safety of children, young people and their families because families and children are the most vulnerable of those affected by DV. A Case Scenario DV in many cases, is like a ‘seeping spiritual malaise`, which when the violence occurs again, it will be far more damaging, far more injurious, and marring to the victim who lives in fear of her own life and the lives of those who support her. A woman, who was a patient of IWC Medical Services, was once again attacked by the same perpetrator. The perpetrator holds a status position in the Aboriginal community, and is supported by other Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal men in the community. This ‘man-gang’ phenomenon has emerged as a result of perpetrator disclosures. The dynamics of a ‘man-gang’ are far removed from the historical ‘gang’ phenomena. To understand it, a Practitioner has to come in blind when men talk about it, otherwise the men go silent about it. The victim tried to access DV accommodation services but they were full and she had no place to go. If she left Bundaberg, she would lose her children, her support networks, become homeless, and be another statistic of Social Services. Staff of IWC, in attempting to assist this victim, had to report this incident, because of the criminality involved, and strategies with the woman to remove her and the children to a safer environment. However, throughout the whole process, the perpetrator, his family, his male friends, and other members of the community were

observing what took place, thus increasing the risks this woman faced of further attacks and not just from a single perpetrator. The perpetrator, supported and protected in the safety of his ‘mates’ stalked the woman by car when she was out and about in the community, sometimes showing up at her places of leisure and harassing her covertly. After dealing with her injuries, reporting the DV and attempting to make herself and her children safe she worked with IWC staff: by accessing the following services. 1. Families, Psychology and Chaplaincy (Bundaberg) IWC’s Family, Psychology and Chaplaincy services have qualified Indigenous Health Workers, Psychologists and a Counsellor/Theta Healing Practitioner, who work together to provide early intervention and crisis counselling, case management, as well as interventions to families and children affected by Domestic and Family Violence. Through thorough assessment, complex case management and group/individual education, the support staff sought to remove the associated stigmatisation of DV. Being able to approach issues at the early intervention stage posed a major obstacle to this client. Prior to reaching crisis level - without the barriers of feeling shamed, costs, threatened, losing her children and being “watched” - assessments by the IWC services, enabled officers involved on the case to be called in to give their accounts. The following ‘in-situ’ outcomes resulted and IWC was better able to serve the client's needs, and able to review their services as well. 

Ensure children have the best start in life by focusing on early intervention approaches that result in positive family functioning, safety and child development outcomes.



Build effective parenting and relationship skills.



Deliver group/individual education programs.



Provide advocacy for increased access to pathways for Victims of DV who require assistance.

Attention to the Victims needs is paramount in IWC’s service delivery across all service provision and geographics. That is, the needs the Victim articulates at any given time in the process of engagement with any service staff is; compassionately actioned; followed through; and concluded with the option for further engagement or referral as directed by the Victim. Research “in situ” suggests that this approach is successful. Confirmation has been further strengthened by the communities trust and familiarity with IWC Services

This has enabled IWC to: 

Engage the client/family by phone; and/or introductory letter; and in the case of hard to reach/unaware families a cold call/home visit will be carried out.



Establishing initial contact with the client/family carried out in accordance with IWC’s Home Visiting Policies and Procedures detailing appropriate risk management steps for staff to undertake during the initial visit.



Primary engagement delivered through either mobile or centre based modalities or at a mutually agreed upon setting.



Key strategies to establish relationships in the lead-up to the client consenting/not consenting to participate with IWC services encouraged by a mutual culturally responsive engagement.



Information sharing with other service providers and families by client consent with the option of limiting or not permitting certain information to be shared with other outside particular services.



Participation aimed at Perpetrators being mandated by the Courts.



Victims referred by agencies or the Courts are made cognisant that their participation is voluntary.



Victim/Offender participation in reconciliation or Justice Reform principles is Court referred via Mediation services in the first instance (please refer to Western Australia Victim/Offender Mediation Services).

The one clear lesson taught by women who are no longer entrapped in cycles of violence is what this woman had to say. “I’ve learnt that the best approach to DV is to focus on the people involved, not the DV. It’s a simple thing to say, but it is very difficult to act upon. I love going to Dadirri because as Aunty Miriam-Rose Ungunmerr-Baumann says, “Dadirri is also used as a prayer, a prayer in the sense of you just feel the presence of the Great Creator.” Archie Roach, Aboriginal singer and song writer said about Dadirri, “It does wonders for a person to just be still and listen to someone else talk about their life, and how they probably came through things. You never know what you’ll learn. “ IWC’s service framework is based upon a Community Development Framework (CDF) where principles of empowerment, resilience, restoration, and family and community reconnection are experientially demonstrated to participants. So that both the victim and the

perpetrator ‘know’ that access to IWC services is for their highest good, they are advised of what to expect before participating in the IWC’s Model of Care’; 

Domestic Violence Counselling,



Children’s Domestic Violence Counselling,



Court Based Services, Perpetrator Intervention through Violent Offender Counselling which is an integrated systems approach to Local Domestic and Family Violence.



Included in the CDF Framework are referrals to other services that already integrate with IWC Services and have the professional expertise in areas that are not covered by IWC Services.



This combination of services will ensure the local contextual needs of the Bundaberg community and current gaps in Domestic and Family Violence services are met.



It forms the basis for how the services will operate guided by a Best Practice Framework that can be modified as required.

DV clients have taught IWC that therapeutic interventions need to be tailored to support individuals, both in one-to one and where appropriate through conducting group based sessions. Key cultural nuances that have been uncovered as a result of this shift, thus far, comprise working with the client to: 

Build client ownership of the processes, services and outcomes of intervention and referrals.



Build a relationship based on personal authenticity and genuineness, trust, respect and rapport.



Effectively engage the client in resilience and empowerment development



Undertake an assessment of risk/needs to determine the appropriate options/interventions



Develop with the client a safety plan that is in accordance with the nature/complexity of their needs i.e. escape, protect children, seek refuge or completing relevant documentation (Domestic Violence Orders)



Provide practical support to the solutions the client sees as viable and valid



Identify/refer to other support agencies/services with integrity, to ensure the client can trust the referred agencies to provide for their highest good.



Provide a range of interventions, education, skills development and capacity and resilience building.



Integrate children’s Domestic Violence Counselling alongside the children’s parent/s

Further Intervention Processes to capture Cultural Nuances have been developed by IWC. This has been a step in which the victim and the perpetrator can identify that their voices are being heard. There are two parts to this aspect of IWC’s processes. They are: 2. Needs Assessment 

The Needs Assessment takes into account any existing case plan (if already completed) and works with the client/family to capture additional information, as required. IWC has developed a range of evidence based Needs Assessment Tools that support and enhance this process, including identification of child/family wellbeing needs with a focus on a collaborative strengths based model. In many cases, it was found that the Needs Assessment was required because children in one family had different biological fathers. Often it was the current partner who was engaging in DV behaviours



The Needs Assessment process informs the development/and or review of a single case plan to address issues/supports required/risks.



Where domestic and family violence is present and/or a significant issue is identified, the IWC engages and works in conjunction with specialist worker/services to ensure the continuum of care includes the safety of all family members.

3. Single Case Plan IWC’s approach to lead a single case plan is to gather information from the Needs Assessment and identify where a range of appropriate providers/services are required to conduct collaboratively case conferencing and/or coordinate the provision of services/resources; level of involvement; responsibility; and availability to meet the client/family needs in a timely manner. The plan of care is developed in consultation with the client/family comprising a series of goals/actions to meet needs as identified in the initial Assessment. The client/family is included in the overall process to ensure shared ownership, responsibility and empowerment. In the majority of cases, the IWC Workers lead the case management of clients/families and are responsible for working collaboratively with other agencies to respond to multiple, complex and/or interrelated needs. The RN/Psychologist and other staff provide professional support/direction and services to staff/client.



There may be occasions where the IWC is involved in the coordination of the case plan but not be the lead agency or service. In these circumstances it will be necessary to leverage appropriate goals off the case plan to meet the client/family needs.



The development/implementation of a single case plan prevents overlap and duplication of services, reducing confusion for the client/family and service providers.



Services are tailored to the needs of the client/family. Case management develops a trusting relationship with the family and ensures appropriate follow up/engagement with other services. This includes the regular review and monitoring of the case plan and recording of progress. Regular reviews ensure the changing needs of the family are addressed.



DV requires continual assessment and monitoring and brokerage funding may then be used to improve the imminent safety needs of the client/family.

Perpetrator and Victim Intervention – IWC’s Healing Circle Work HCW IWC is of the view that both the Perpetrator and the Victim require therapeutic assistance. This is to enable them to understand the cognitive and behavioural processes, triggers, honeymoon syndrome, aftermath consequences and spiritual disengagement. Both perpetrator and victim have engaged in this way, within their relationship. Both need to understand the how and the why which has led them to perpetuate DV in their lifestyle. Working through the issues together, assists them to realise and understand their own cycle of violence, and the cycle of violence of each other. Sometimes this makes for vulnerability as a perpetrator does not want to sit down and listen to the story of the victim. Nor does the victim want to hear the perpetrator’s story. Yet when the stories are shared, both realise that they can work toward other ways of living life in an environment that is less violent. Conclusion Healing Circle Work (HCW) is a proven Culturally Nuanced Approach to Domestic and Family Violence. It caters to Indigenous and non-Indigenous community members. HCW supports safer and stronger communities and families by addressing precipitating and underlying factors triggering domestic and Family violence. This is the story of a perpetrator/victim, who engaged in HCW in 2014.

A STORY OF TRANSFORMATION “Being kind to myself, helps me to be kind to my man. I KNOW it’s so hard for him to be kind to himself. His whole life has been everybody else's shit. He finds it so hard to accept that I love him for himself. After the Healing Circle he told me, “I love you Babe.” I cried. He has never said that to me before. We’re not together for the sex anymore Aunty. No! It’s true. Don’t laugh. We like being together. Can you beat that?” (2014)