Marac referral threshold

[bringingupthebaby]

I've just posted this question in another thread, but thought it may be easier to start a new thread - any thoughts would be gratefully received.

My question is about the Marac referral threshold - I know that 14 ticks constitute an automatic referral - but has anyone heard of or would like to comment on a Marac referral that has been triggered following a single arrest for a minor incident (sorry to use the word minor - but it wasn't a punch, kick, slap, hit), resulting a caution. There have been no previous calls to the police and no children exposed to violence - yet this has triggered a Marac referral resulting in a Non-Molestation Order, an Occupation Order and restricted Contact Order.

Just to clarify I am not a man posting this - I am a friend of the accused. I feel that this outcome is extremely disproportionate to the incident and would welcome thoughts on this. How reliable is the 14-tick automatic referral if, perhaps the victim is knowledgeable about the DASH-assessment system (used to determine level of risk/need for Marac referal)?

Hi PolterGoose. Thanks for your reply - I totally understand why you would think that but please be assured that I have questioned myself and read the police file and the numerous statements and orders that are part of this case to satisfy myself - and I'm satisfied he's not an intrinsically violent man. He has complied and will continue to do so but it just really doesn't add up.

I'd be interested in hearing examples of cases that led to a Marac referral - I know it's not always just a single incident that triggers a referral, but what sort of cases have triggered a referral?

Don't get me wrong, I think that that role of the Maracs cannot be praised more highly in terms of protecting victims of domestic violence and helping people to get on with their lives and protect their children - I speak, not from personal experience, but with some knowledge of what this looks like as a member of my family was involved in a very abusive relationship, with an outwardly very charming man. His behaviour worsened over time, it was kept a secret and it wasn't until he almost killed her that she sought help and action was taken.

Back to this case - any other thoughts, would be most gratefully received.

Many thanks

It can be less ticks if the professional feels the risk is justified. Some areas are doing this more often ( my area is one).
The harassment questions/emotional abuse questions mean that there doesn't need to have been an injury

I know that in most cases that reports are DV are accurate, but in those cases where false allegations are made, or a minor incident over-inflated to make the issue look greater than it is, what measures are in place to check the validity of the answers with the accused?

I'm very familiar with the DASH checklist now and think I could provide a very convincing argument if I wanted to accuse my partner of DV and then post the DASH-assessment, from what I can see, everything then goes on behind the scenes, ex-parte hearings etc - before the accused can even come up for air.

As I said, the Marac system is there for a reason. All this has been done to provide greater protection for victims of DV, which was absolutely needed, but it does beg the question about whether the system is strong enough to weed out false allegations/someone playing the system to trigger a Marac referral.

I'm not trying to be argumentative in anyway here and would really welcome thoughts on this - as I said, this case really just doesn't add up and I don't want to see my friend labelled as a perpetrator with restricted access to his child.

it is hard to know, however well you know this person,. exactly what goes on when you not there....but also yes of course the accuser might exagerate... however, it may be that the minor incident was in fact the final straw in a series... after all what motivation would the other person have otherwise?

onus is on him now to prove to the authorities that he is not as is said...lay low, dont get angry or breach the orders, show he is preapred to do what it takes to maintain relationship with his children ...

restricted access does not need to be forever if he proves himself that this was a minor one off incident and he is a model dad...

what's worst case scenario?

that he has to attend a contact centre? he should ask for supervised and reported contact so that if that goes well and he gets glowing reports then chances are that within six months he will get unsupervised access no problem.

tell him to comply with the orders and be a model person; putting the children first; that will prove his case