Increase in DV during Christmas period.

[Akiram]

Does anyone have know how much DV increases over the Christmas period? By that I mean how much more is DV reported to the police (I know that that doesn't give a true indication of the rise).
The shocking number (I think-forgive me if I have this wrong) of 2 women a week killed by their partner, how does that figure stand up against the Christmas period?
Also, can anyone give me (in laymans terms please) a reason that whilst over Christmas there is always a huge drink/driving campaign there is nothing similar with regards to DV - yet the rate of victims must surely be similar if not more in the case of DV.
Sorry if these are stupid questions and I have missed the answers somewhere.
Wasn't sure if here or Relationships or was the right place to ask the question.

[APanbyanyothername]

I think if you google this you will find an answer. Public DV campaigns are often left to local police DV units ( mistakenly). Not dis-similar to DV at times of football World Cups.
A concerning development is the reduced resourcing that units are experiencing as cuts in police funding is effected.

[Akiram]

Thankyou Apanby. Looked on Google and yes some areas do have a campaign but nothing on the same level as drink/driving {sorry to repeat that but only comparison I can come up with) - just curious why. I would be interested to see the stats for increased drink-driving, thefts,burglary and DV at Christmas so I could compare them - just strggling to find that info.
Thankyou again.

[Rudolfsgottarednose]

As far as i know all of the Childrens centers etc have special "Christmas DV" posers on the walls (as opposed to general posters).

One of the soaps always have a DV story in them with helplines at the end. There has been stuff in all the media.

The NSPCC and other children's charities have campaigns to urge people to phone the police if they hear any signs of DV as sometimes it is on;y on the threat of SS involvement will the women seek help.

Some of the reports my department receives about what neighbours witness but don't phone the police beggers belief.

[Akiram]

Thankyou Rudolf thats interesting. I've not watched soaps for years but when I did I must admit I struggled with their take on DV - at the risk of phrasing this wrongly I sometimes wished they would take it down a notch or two so that women realised they weren't being abused every day didn't make them any less of a victim.
I think its good that the NSPCC etc have campaigns I just wonder why its not more widespread - eg (and I admit I might well have missed it) there are adverts on TV, in newspapers, leaflets through your day warning against drink driving and leaving valuables on display at Christmas but less so with DV - maybe its down to a lack of money I don't know.
I'd still like to know the stats on drink driving at christmas and how much they spend on awareness/warning of it compared to the increase of DV and how much is spent on awareness/warning of it.

[Rudolfsgottarednose]

It is easy to condem a drink driver but in the case of DV you would have to condem a mother who stays almost as much as the perpritator. If a women has doubts about leaving her partner then Christmas is another excuse as to why she cannot go. People also become sentimental at Christmas, there is so many factors at play, rather than a simple "phone a taxi" message.

Then there is the victim herself asking you 'to keep the peace' so zero tolerance isn't as easily applied, but tbh personally i think it should be.

However the complexity of human relationships means that you would have to be oppresive in your actions, if you tried to force women to "just leave" (and men also but we are focusing on women victims).

The main thing that you can do is to educate people on the damge done to children in abusive households and hope that will spur a woman on to act.

Feminism, of course, has its part to play in raising self esteem and as seeing women as having equal worth.

The soaps have gotten better at showing the build up from emotional abuse to physical assualts.

[APanbyanyothername]

MrsM - can I ask if you are an IDVA? 'None of your business' is of course an option.

[APanbyanyothername]

Ah, thanks. It's just that IDVAs see a lot of 'both sides', ime. ta.

[ElfenorRathbone]

"in the case of DV you would have to condem a mother who stays almost as much as the perprit"

Only if you're heavily into victim-blaming.

I prefer to condemn a perpetrator of DV outright and 100%, for perpetrating violence. But then, I've got this silly idea that people are responsible for their own actions and that victims can't be responsible for the crimes that are perpetrated against them.

[Rudolfsgottarednose]

Elf- you hav taken that out of context, i made that statement as to why DV cannot be viewed in the same way as drink driving.

Were as most people will speak out against a drink driver and the mothers who would load their children into the car, DV cannot be compared as the reasons are complicated as to why mothers (as we are discussing DV from a feminist POV) stay silent and ask others to, even though their children are being damaged living in a house in which DV takes place.

[OhdearNigel]

I work for the police in a court liaison unit supporting victims & witnesses; we're on our first day back from Christmas today and are awaiting the influx of DV cases this morning. My husband is a DS and on duty over Christmas, there was the usual mass of Boxing Day cases as per usual. It's very definitely true that the number of DV cases increases over Christmas - 2 days cooped up together with copious amounts of alcohol magnifies peoples' domestic issues and seems to bring them to a head

[sunshineandbooks]

There have been huge advances made in the police in recent years. Prejudices based on class and race are well-documented, and a big effort is being made to move past them. It's really encouraging. Also encouraging is the drive to deal more sensitively with domestic abuse. There is a recognition that just as institutional racism exists despite the absence of racism in individual officers, institutional prejudice exists against victims of domestic abuse because the role of the police is not to examine the complex dynamics of human relationships but to establish whether a criminal act has taken place and who is responsible for it. This can lead to the victim feeling under question and in cases where a woman has physically defended herself can result in her also being arrested for assault.

Unfortunately, despite the police making all the right moves to deal with this, this has yet to trickle down effectively to all grass roots level officers, just as was the case when race was first taken to task (a process which is still ongoing of course, but has seen hugely significant improvements). It really is a case of luck as to whether the officer called to a DV scene will truly understand the dynamics at play in a DV situation or whether he/she holds the prevailing view in society that the woman is somehow complicit in her abuse and must have provoked it or is as bad as he is because she 'keeps going back' or 'gives as good as she gets'. This is improving all the time and I think there are more good officers than bad, but it has a long way to go. For women whose relationships are characterised by their ability to pick up on every subtle little nuance of body language, facial expression and throw-away comments, any police officer who has even a smidgeon of irritation/disbelief towards the victim will be glaringly obvious to them.

Generally, however, I'd say the police have made huge improvements. The main problem lies with the courts IMO. DV is still seen as a lesser crime in the way punishments are handed out. There is still a problem with sorting out injunctions etc unless the victim has either money or easily available legal aid (not likely, despite govt protestations to the contrary), and unless the victim can prove urgency, which isn't easy, they take time that the victim often doesn't have, meanwhile she is living under intolerable levels of stress and fear. Is it any wonder so many women go for an easier life and go back to their partners where all this stress will disappear (even though it's only until the next incident).

One of the biggest problem as far as I'm concerned, is the still persistent notion that DV offenders somehow have a problem that requires treatment rather than punishment, or that alcohol/substance abuse is the main problem and the offender wouldn't offend if they just stopped drinking/taking drugs. It plays into the myths perpetuated by abusers everywhere that abuse is something they can't help. Most of the current studies clearly demonstrate the opposite - that most abusers make a deliberate choice to use an abusive pattern of behaviour to control their victims. This is the reason why most of them manage to maintain normal relationships with others and at work. While there are, of course, thugs whose every relationship is characterised by violence, they are the minority.

Less than 5% of abusers successfully change, even with treatment. The most successful programmes are those that hold the perpetrators responsible and stop taking an anger-management approach. It is a constant source of frustation to me that this has not yet been taken on board, though the recent rash of high-profile deaths and subsequent criticism of how the police/courts deal with it may see this change.

[Rudolfsgottarednose]

Sunshine- tbh in my LA the problem is information sharing by the police, the officers seem to think that they will be adding to the womans problems by treating the incident as a child protection issue and making a 'contact' via SS. Sometimes it is only when the family (or rather children) is put on a CP plan through DV incidents that they seek help.

I think that although the charities, Banardo's, NSPCC and other local charities, do excellent work, the funding isn't static enough to handle something as complex and ongoing as DV work.

But then i have seen years of work done with the women and they for some reason as soon as they are de-planned, let the men back into the home, even when it puts the children at great risk. These are women whose children haven't had contact (that we know about) with the father and they don't rely financially on the men.

[ElfenorRathbone]

" officers seem to think that they will be adding to the womans problems by treating the incident as a child protection issue and making a 'contact' via SS"

Well often, with good reason. There have been many cases of women being told that their children will be taken away from them if they don't leave the man.

So next time he beats them up, they don't call the police, because they're scared of having their children being taken away.

The best support a woman can get, is for the state to have the man taken away and kept away from her and the family. Unfortunately, because the courts don't take DV seriously, women are pretty much left with the message that they're on their own, if they don't solve the problem, then they just have to put up with it.

[ElfenorRathbone]

Yes but the difficulty isn't that women choose to stay... the difficulty is that the men aren't forcibly removed. They've committed a crime, it's a serious crime and the state should kick in to ensure that he's removed and stays removed, whatever anyone else says. I totally get what you're saying MrsM about the programmes being shit, but that is where as you say, long term education comes in and also the programmes need to be changed. Let's support women to keep men away from them and their children, punish and educate the men properly, make freedom programmes easily accessible and then we can start talking about how we have to remove the children - once we've actually given women and children proper support to extricate themselves from violent abusers. We just don't do that atm. We've gone straight into punishing women for putting up with abuse, without actually punishing the abusers and / or giving women proper support to escape the abuse first.

[Rudolfsgottarednose]

"Well often, with good reason. There have been many cases of women being told that their children will be taken away from them if they don't leave the man."

We cannot, as a society allow children to stay in "at risk" situations. I see women frequently sneak the men back into their lives, even getting pregnant to them, when they are released from prison.

The system works differently in each LA. Some LA's have easy accessable programmes and solutions, but the women still don't take them up, or take the men back without the condition that he follows the plan put in place, so the CP process has to click in and the women have to make the choice between their partners or their children.

It isn't as simple as the support isn't gven in every case.

[SardineQueen]

Haven't read all thread.

If a person beats another person then they should be prosecuted.

it's not a case of " if a woman chooses to stay with an abusive partner, is it really right to undermine her decision by forcing her or the perpetrator to leave" surely it's a case of if someone, anyone, is repeatedly committing violent crime then they should be in prison. At what stage does it stop being the woman's "choice" to have the crap beaten out of her, and the state should intervene? Before she's dead, I would say. Long before.

Why the lack of inclination to treat violence within the home in the same way it would be treated outside the home ie as a serious criminal offence?

[SardineQueen]

If a person repeatedly attacks people in the general public then they are tackled with confinement / mental health treatment surely?