Social Services punish mothers for DV

I think that one thing that would help is that if you are arrested following a domestic incident you are held for 48 hours and not allowed to return to the home for 72 hours.

that way it gives women the chance to get a restriaining/non mol/occupancy order.

or for thenm to arrange alternative accomodation without the fear of him returning midway through the plans to flee.

it gives them that little bit of thinking time. space to breath and evaluate the situation without the fear and manipulation.

but an abuser can be charged for the offence of common assault/abh/gbh/rape etc.

he may get a fine, even a few weeks in prison. if the mother then takes him back again what more can be done?

There is no law to say you cannot live with whoever you like. abuser or not.

if the threat of losing your children is not enough to make you realise you need to make him leave (if you can) then what will?

The routes for escape need to be clearer and there needs to be far better facilities for those who do leave.

but if someone simply doesn't want to..what can be done?

but DV is by its ver nature a private issue that is wrapped in secrecy.

in casesof extreme violance there is physical evidence and can be acted upon. but there are the cases of emotional/sexual abuse that is less obvious. these are just as damaging to the children of the household but far less easy for passers by to report.

without the mothers co operation there is nothing to be done.

I think better facilities for abused women is the start. and much more training for social workers!

sorry SGB-i dont agree with you.
the system isnt working ok.
if the system was working ok-how come women go back to theyre abusers time and time again?
how come women sometimes go on to have more abusive realashionships?
how come Queen has written a post and said what she did?
we dont have to bring in new badly formalated laws-we already have them.

Sakura: I don't think that any woman who lives with a man is weak. I do think that the social pressure on women to live in couple-relationships with men is something that can contribute to women staying in abusive situations, and would like to see less pressure on people in general to seek and pursue heteromonogamous relationships whether they want to or not.
I think basically you are suggesting that the authorities target victims of domestic violence for some eeeevil patriarchist reasons of their own, when this does not really appear to be the case: DV is (usually) taken much more seriously by the police than it used to be and women are offered help with rehousing, injunctions, etc.

the problem at the moment is that if the woman doesn't press chanrges there is nothing anyone can do about the DV.

the police have new powers to press charges themselves but in reality there is little that can be done without her statement.
he gets bailed and returns to the home.

if a woman is refusing to co operate then unfortunately it is in the childs best interests to be removed. as horrible as that seems. And as i say, i have been there so i do understand just how confusing all is.

Unless there is a new law bought out that says the state can intervene and decide who can and cannot live in the family home i am not sure what else can be done.

Sakura: I don't think the idea you seem to be peddling of women as all helpless pawns under the patriarchy is at all helpful. We might as well just drown ourselves now if Teh Menz are going to get us whatever we do.
Sometimes women do bad things. Some women are selfish, stupid or cruel. In general, a system where women are helped and supported in getting rid of abusive partners, but children may be removed from a home where there is violence if their mother refuses to address the vioolence and protect them, is one that is working OK. Individual cases may be badly handled, but that is true of every aspect of the law and not a reason to bring in new, badly-formulated laws.

im a social worker.

i am also a well documented "survivor" of domestic violance.

I am a bit on the fence tbh.

I understand totally why SS have to take the line they take. for a child to remain inside a home that is experiencing abuse is to abuse that child. an abused mother can do all she can to protect her child and to sheild them from what goes on, but essentially they will be aware and be damaged by it.

BUT when SS came to my home and threatened that my children would be placed on the ARR it put me in danger. they told me that any further complaints would lead to a full investigation and my children placed on the register.
this meant that i no longer cried out for help during the beatings/rapes.

it meant that rather than trying to lock hinm out and calling the police, i activly opened the door when he was drunk. depsite knownig that it would end in violance.

So whilst i agree that SS need to ensure that children are being cared for and are not subjected to the violance. there needs to be a better way of doing it. they need to do more to help the women escape rather than just telling them they need to.

well-i think theres a bigger picture.
firstly-yes children need to be protected.
having said this though-i feel that women are punished.
not only have they suffered at the hands of the abuser-but then they either have theyre children tooken off them[more punishment]
or they get the man to leave and become a single parent[society doesnt really like single parents either]
the children suffer twice-one when they are in a home where there is abuse-then secondly when they get tooken off theyre mums.
when all this is going on-the woman then has to proove herself!
she has to proove herself and its not her doing the abusing[usually]
instead of punishing the women and children-
we need to find ways to actually help-
like changing the way society sees abused people.
helping abused people change the way they see themselves.
i dont think that abused women are sometimes devious people who need people going round talking to theyre neighbours ect
i feel that a lot of time they are frightened
and have low self esteem.
some of them are frightened of the unknown because abuse is all they have ever known.
lets stop punishing the women and children and properly punish the abuser instead.
a lot of times a restraining order isnt worth a carrot either.
iits the abuser that should be put away-not the children.
as i said-they suffer twice-why is this allowed when the abuser gets off scott free[mostly]

As a society we have an awful lot of personal freedom and as part of that we have the freedom to live with an abuser should we "wish." I've put wish in quotes because I understand many people feel unable to leave an abuser due to threats or what have you.

Children don't have the same personal freedoms which is why they are removed and not the abuser.

I agree that the standard of evidence for removing a child from a non-abusive parent should be the same as convicting a violent man but as I (and others) said before it takes solid evidence and witness statements and for there to be a victim who will give evidence to convict someone of anything. This is as it should be IMO. I would rather children we're removed earlier from parents and then returned to them if there isn't evidence of abuse than having to wait to satisfy the very important legal codes.

Dittany: if I am wrong then I apologise unreservedly but I rather think that you have posted in the past that your father was abusive and you are/were angry with your mother for prioritizing her relationship with him over your wellbeing. If it wasn;t you who posted this then I apologise, as I said - however, more than one poster (on various threads) has expressed anger towards a mother who did not protect DC against an abusive man, because she chose not to, because she considered herself 'in love' with the man, because both she and the abusive man were addicts or alcoholics...
There have been threads on MN from women complaining about a partner's absolutly horrible behaviour both to them and to their DC, but all offers of support and advice on how to get rid of the man have been stonewalled on the grounds that the poster doesn't want to be single/'loves' the man/is worried about what neighbours will say if she throws him out.
There is a great deal of support these days for women who want to be free of an abuser, but there are still some women who will not take it up, who insist that the abuser can be persuaded to change, or that he is not that bad really. In these situations then surely it's right that SS step in to protect the DC.