|
Summary
A lack of standardised data, and what is judged to be significant under-reporting, make it difficult to make an accurate assessment of the numbers of individuals experiencing domestic violence. Only a tiny proportion of victims ever come into contact with statutory authorities, particularly criminal justice agencies, making measurement of the scale of abuse even more complex. However, available statistics suggest that one in four women and one in six men will experience domestic violence at some point in their lives, although the vast majority of serious and recurring violence is perpetuated by men towards women. Understanding of the scale of so-called "honour"-based violence and forced marriage is even patchier. The Government's Forced Marriage Unit handles 300 cases a year but the true number is likely to be far higher.
Our evidence showed that the Government has made significant steps to improve its response to domestic and so-called "honour"-based violence and forced marriage over the last few years. It has introduced new legislation on domestic violence and on forced marriage, established a National Domestic Violence Delivery Plan, an Inter-Ministerial Group on Domestic Violence and a dedicated Forced Marriage Unit. It has funded a number of initiatives in partnership with the voluntary sector, including a National Domestic Violence Helpline, and it has introduced new specialist domestic violence courts, multi-agency risk assessment conferences and independent domestic violence advocates. However, significant failings remain in a number of key areas.
Overall, we conclude that the Government's approach to all forms of domestic violence remains disproportionately focused on criminal justice responses at the expense of effective prevention and early intervention. We conclude that the vast costs of domestic violence to the UK economy—estimated at £25.3 billion in 2005-06 alone—demonstrate the scale of savings to be gained by effective prevention. We therefore recommend that the Government adopts a national strategy on domestic violence, or on violence against women more generally, to include an explicit emphasis on prevention. We conclude that such a strategy would provide a framework within which to implement many of the detailed recommendations we make in this report.
Our specific conclusions can be summarised as follows.
Prevention and early intervention are vital in tackling domestic and so-called "honour"-based violence and forced marriage. Yet education on these issues in schools seems to be at best variable, and at worst non-existent. There is no explicit statutory requirement for schools to educate pupils about any of these forms of abuse. In the case of forced marriage, some schools appear resistant to allow discussion of the issue, owing to fear of offending parents and communities. From a child protection perspective, evidence from case studies suggests that there are children in danger of being removed from school or further education and forced into marriage. However, data collected by schools about children who 'disappear' from school rolls tell us little about children at risk of forced marriage, and consequently there is scant recognition of the problem by education authorities. We recommend that the Department for Children, Schools and Families introduces an explicit statutory requirement for schools to educate children about domestic and "honour"-based violence and forced marriage.
Despite innovative work by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, marriage visas are still being granted in cases where the visa sponsor has been forced into marriage and compelled to sponsor the visa. Victims are being failed by the lack of a mechanism consistently to refuse entry to the UK in cases where an individual has been forced into marriage, and this failure is compounded by the absence of a mechanism by which the Government can accept information from third parties on reluctant sponsors. We recommend that visa sponsors are interviewed where there is suspicion of a forced marriage, including where suspicion is raised through information provided by third parties. We also recommend that the Government attach a power of refusal without the need for an evidential statement to visa applications in the case of reluctant sponsors.
It is essential that front-line professionals who come into contact with victims of domestic violence and forced marriage are equipped to identify abuse and refer the victim to appropriate support. Currently many of these professionals are ill-equipped to do this. We recommend that a thorough programme of accredited training for front-line professionals should be implemented across the board, including teachers, health professionals, visa entry clearance officers, police, judges and magistrates.
There is a desperate shortage of refuge space and emergency housing for those fleeing domestic or so-called "honour"-based violence or forced marriage. A concerted effort across Government is required to improve access to short-term emergency accommodation and longer-term housing for victims. We recommend that the Department for Communities and Local Government urgently quantify the scale of the shortfall and work with local authorities to ensure that refuge space is sufficient to meet demand across every local authority area.
The availability of Probation Service perpetrator programmes is so poor that some courts have been expressly prohibited from using the programmes as a sentencing option, whereas in other cases an offender's community order runs out before they even begin the programme. We recommend that, once research currently underway to identify the full extent of under-capacity has been completed, the Government urgently needs to find resources to fill the gap. We also recommend that the Government introduces "GO" orders, which have proved effective in other European countries in offering an inexpensive short term method of removing the perpetrator from the home. The introduction of a "GO" order scheme should be linked with Sanctuary Schemes, enabling the victim to remain safely in their home.
The provision of domestic violence services across the country is a "postcode lottery". Funding for specialist services, in particular those for black and minority ethnic women, is being cut because of changes to commissioning and funding processes at the local level. This is a cause for serious concern particularly at a time of greater awareness about so-called "honour"-based violence and forced marriage, when increasing numbers of victims are coming forward. We recommend that the Government and local authorities reassess funding and commissioning arrangements for domestic violence services, particularly those under 'Supporting People', and ensure that a presumption against 'Single Group Funding' does not impact disproportionately on domestic or "honour"-based violence services, or women-only services.
The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004 introduced a new criminal offence for breach of a non-molestation order. There is some evidence that police are issuing cautions for breaches of injunctions, including for breaches of non-molestation orders. We conclude that the use of cautions by the police as an alternative to charge by the Crown Prosecution Service is wholly inappropriate and dangerous in cases of domestic violence. We recommend that the Home Office and Association of Chief Police Officers must ensure all police officers are explicitly instructed not to issue cautions, and that the Crown Prosecution Service must charge for breaches of injunction.
We do not—yet—recommend that forced marriage be made a specific criminal offence, in the same way that domestic violence is not a specific criminal offence. However, there are strong arguments that it should be, not least those made by survivors themselves. If the implementation—in September 2008—of the Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act (2007) does not have the effect of reducing forced marriage, the Government must reconsider criminalisation. To this end we recommend that the Government produce an initial progress report one year after implementation of the Act, with fuller reports in subsequent years. |
