- This topic has 14 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
-
-
But barrister (detail removed by moderator) says judges have “minimised” the threat of domestic violence. Some 123 MPs have signed an open letter calling on the justice secretary to hold an inquiry into family courts. The Ministry of Justice says child safety is “paramount”.
i wonder if womens aid have spurred this on asking women to write to their MPS thank god theyre going to do more than just offer separate waiting rooms! x*x
-
Wow. This sounds major. I was worried about a new system in the States where abusive parent actually gets more time with their child to try to create that ‘bond’. So mother’s that brought up the fact their partners were abusive were allowing the court to use this new system. I will try and find the name of it. It floored me when I read it x
-
Hi I read into this article a little and not to be negative but they seem to be concentrating on the toxic trio as below which is violence substance use and mental health problems in WOMEN please please tell me theyre not going to victim blame survivors of domestic abuse again. it is the perp that causes all of these things xx oh god xx
What is the ‘toxic trio’?
The past few years have seen an increased awareness of the frequency with which domestic and sexual violence, substance use and mental health problems co-exist, particularly in the context of safeguarding children and young people. Various terms have been coined to describe the concurrent experience of these three issues: the ‘toxic trio’, ‘the trilogy of risk’, and people with multiple and complex needs. There is concern that terms such as the ‘toxic trio’ are problematic because they can lead to the parents – most often the mother who is frequently the victim of abuse herself – being deemed toxic or seen as the main source of risk, and therefore they don’t hold the perpetrator of domestic abuse to account for their behaviour.
The use of the term ‘multiple and complex needs’ is not necessarily any less stigmatising – it is yet another label applied to a person or family and one that is used to exclude some from services. Furthermore, any combination of needs may be complex, not just substance use and mental health problems. As such, supporting families affected by these three issues involves exactly that – talking explicitly about domestic abuse, substance use and mental ill-health and helping them to address the impact that these issues are having on them and their family.
Living with mental health problems, using alcohol or drugs, or experiencing domestic abuse does not automatically mean a parent/carer is unable to safeguard their child(ren) from serious harm. Furthermore, adequate support can reduce (although not necessarily eradicate) the risk of children experiencing long-term negative effects of growing up with such problems. This means children can outgrow their troubled childhood. This is particularly true where only one issue affects the family.
Major concerns arise when more than one of these problems is present, as is often the case. It is the ‘multiplicative’ impact of combinations of factors that have been found to increase the risk of harm to children, with family disharmony and domestic violence posing the greatest risk to children’s immediate safety and long-term wellbeing (Brandon et al, 2010).
So, identifying all three issues and how they impact on the adults and children present in any family is vital. Furthermore, professionals need an in-depth understanding of how the issues interlink – particularly in terms of what domestic abuse is and how victims may end up using substances as a way of coping with their experiences – to ensure the interventions that are put in place are as effective as possible in promoting the safety and wellbeing of all members of a household.
Gathering and analysing information
A key message that has emerged from serious case reviews is that practitioners need to gather and analyse more information; they “must be encouraged to be curious, and to think critically and systematically” to understand how the difficulties affecting families interact (Brandon et al, 2008, p98). Unless professionals are sufficiently curious, questions will go unasked and important information will not be gathered.
Each family member should be spoken to individually about what is happening in the household. This is particularly important given the tendency to focus on mothers in families where a child or children are at risk of harm. It has been noted that fathers can be more difficult to engage with, either because they refuse to talk to social workers, are absent from the home when professionals visit, or do not live in the home with the child (Farmer, 2006 cited in Cleaver et al, 2011). However, every effort must be made to engage with fathers, even more so in cases of domestic abuse where usually the father/male carer is the perpetrator and poses a high level of risk to the family.
Children should be spoken to away from their parents wherever possible as they may not feel able to talk about what is happening in the family in front of them. This is particularly true if they fear negative consequences for their parents/carers or themselves, eg if they disclose that one parent/carer is abusive towards the other or towards the children. Very often, children and young people don’t want to get their parents into trouble, and also fear the family being separated as a result of disclosing.
In a similar vein, in cases that involve domestic abuse, both parents/carers should be spoken to, and spoken to separately. It is unlikely that a victim of domestic abuse will feel able to speak freely in front of the perpetrator, and perpetrators will often use such ‘forums’ to further manipulate and control the victim.
-
-
-
Morning..😊.lots of pro active campaigning happening.
There’s a petition on change.org #thecourtsaid. calling for …A public enquiry into the treatment of DV survivors in family court.Also a list of MPs on Twitter who are backing a campaign to better protect victims of rape & DA being badly let down by the family courts.
via Louise Haig MP if you wanted to add to this now is the time to write to your MPs and share.Also on FB lots of pro active activities…re a protest and writing your own messages to display in parliament square.
Looks like big steps are being made ladies!!! We can get involved & we will make a difference for us all 👏🏻👌🏽
-
FYI…#thecourtsaid Petition link http://chng.it/Dp7dZV2Ff9
& the FB page is called , Don’t look back with links to campaigning and information.
@ LouHaigh is the MP for Sheffield who is supporting survivors please have a look and re tweet, so we can all make a difference
Let’s rally together..get our voices heard for our children & our futures. 👏🏻
Together, we are stronger! Come on let’s do this!! 🙂
-
This is awesome to hear.
Thank you for posting it.
Just all vulnerable women do need to be very cautious posting on FB as its so unsafe for vulnerable women, and tracks locations etc even when you have device locations disabled.
How encouraging, I really hope that real actual change will be effected as a result.
Real support and real protection for women AND the children.
-
Hi all,
You can check the Women’s Aid website for any up to date news. As previously mentioned its important you all stay safe online.
Best Wishes,
Lisa -
we have 4067 members on this site which would carry one hell of alot of clout – ive sent the above to my local MP but i am also going to send it to the schoolmy daughter attends – im not sure if im brave enough to send this to the solicitor that opposed my case im tempted because above all the court staff need to be fully aware of this x*x hope we can all submit something for the cause including our own storeys and experience xx i have to say my MP has been great xx love diymum
-
It’s looking like the government are going to make a full enquiry in to the family courts around DV. They’re not reviewing independently though which is unfortunate. From the Victoria derbyshire show they’ve said they have 3 months to give this investigation it’s full attention. They are admitting there isn’t enough funding, that CAFCASS investigators have up to 90 cases each to deal with. The courts are so stretched and no one is willing to put the funding into this. Even after interviewing a mother who’s children were killed by her ex at court ordered contact. Why is this not being made a priority?? Love diymum
-
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
