The views of Australian judicial officers on domestic and family violence perpetrator interventions

(Note that this post remains a working draft – to be continued)

Whilst browsing in Twitter today I came across a mention of a new study that sounded rather interesting. Here is a link to the tweet I saw, plus a link to the relevant page in the web site of an organisation as ANROWS (Australia’s National Research Organisation for Women’s Safety Limited). It appears that ANROWS commissioned the study.

ANROWS receives substantial government funding support (in 2019/20 this amounted to $10,410,025). The feminist leanings of that organisation, are made quite clear in this paper, for example.

Additional information about the project can apparently also be found on the Monash Gender and Family Violence Prevention Centre website. As it turned out, the study was more interesting (and disappointing) in relation to what it didn’t say, rather than what it actually said.

Here is a link to the ‘Research Summary’ which I will now address in this post. If I have sufficient time & energy then I might also review the ‘Research Report’.

Let’s start with a document word search. ‘Men’ appeared 51 times, generally with words like ‘department’ or ‘women’. An exception were references to men as perpetrators of domestic violence (p3). ‘Women’ appeared 14 times, mostly within titles of reports or organisations. One exception was “the judicial officer as a powerful voice in a good position to capture the attention of the perpetrator and to denounce violence against women and their children” (p6). The term ‘victim’ did not appear once.

Next, what topics would I hope to see, and perhaps even expect to see, addressed in a project like this?

– the accuracy or otherwise of judicial officers understanding of the nature, extent and trends with regards to domestic violence – and particularly with regards to gender differences

– the virtual absence of perpetrator intervention programs for female offenders

– the shortage of refuges or treatment facilities for male victims (some with children)

– the apparent gender inequity with regards to being taken to a police station, arrest, sentencing, etc.

– gender differences in the cause and/or underlying factors common to perpetrators of abuse and/or violence

No to Violence: Working together to end men’s family violence

The No to Violence agency (‘NTV’), also known as the Male Family Violence Prevention Association, appears to be populated by ardent pro-feminists. Despite that, surprisingly one third of the board members are male. Of those staff listed in the web site, seven are female and three are male.

In January 2019 I was blocked from the twitter stream of the CEO of NTV, Jacqui Watt, without explanation. I became aware of Jacqui’s stream via browsing the Twitter stream @OurWatch CEO, Patty Kinnersly. (Credit to Patty for not blocking me, although I am blocked from the OurWatch general account)

NTV do not appear to be listed in the ACNC register, but relevant details including a copy of their 2018 annual report are available in their web site.

NTV is heavily supported by the Victorian government and their annual report acknowledges receipt of almost $3.9 million in grant funding for the year ending 30 June 2018.

In this 2014 submission NTV sought to undermine the integrity of the ‘One in Three‘ organisation.

In this 2014 submission NTV sought to undermine the integrity of the ‘One in Three‘ organisation.

Anyone wishing to complain about NTV or the conduct of specific staff members should familiarise themselves with the Complaints Procedure.