APPENDIX 8
Memorandum submitted by Families Need
Fathers
1. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
In our submission we would draw attention to
the evidence and research which has been produced on domestic
violence, which sheds vital light on the safety of children through
looking at the bigger picture. We emphasise the importance of
gender neutrality, in all aspects, including cultural attitudes,
provision of support services etc. bearing in mind the effects
which a lack of it can have on the welfare of children and their
parents.
Within this we address the terms of reference
provided by the Home Affairs Committee.
2. THE NATURE
OF FAMILIES
NEED FATHERS
(FNF) AND OUR
CAUSE
FNF is principally a service-providing charity,
helping children who are prevented from seeing enough of a parent,
by supporting that parent, unless there are reasons against this.
We also lobby in the way that charities are permitted to do.
Our aim is to end the assumption that following
parental separation the children will only have one significant
parent, and replace it by the best blend of both parents for the
children. We believe in equality of responsibility and respect
diversity. We are opposed to discrimination of any sort. The parenting
arrangements for the children should depend on their needs, wishes,
and the practicalities of each situation, and not the parents'
gender or any stereotype of any other group to which they may
belong.
3. OUR CONCERN
ABOUT DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE
We are fully supportive of the importance of
focus upon domestic violence that is driven by human welfare,
and especially child welfare, concerns. The use of violence between
adults or by an adult on a child is repugnant and the law and
other agencies should deal with it robustly.
However, we are opposed to the abuse of arguments
and "evidence" about domestic violence as a tool in
gender politics, especially where this may lead to children not
having a proper relationship with both their parents, as regularly
occurs.
A shortfall in concern about domestic violence
and abuse exposes people to risk. An overshoot may prevent children
having a proper relationship with loved and loving parents. Public
policy needs to be proportionate, and individual decisions must
be based on proper, full and fair examination of the evidence.
4. THE EVIDENCE
ON DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE
The definition of Domestic Violence can vary
widely, and could incorporate a broad range of behaviour, of differing
severity levels.[21]
The Women's Aid classification, for instance, includes significantly
milder negative behaviours which could be said to belittle the
experiences of genuine victims, not to mention diverting limited
resources from people in real need—female and male. Overall,
the evidence is clear. Behaviour that is common, if unpleasant,
is broadly gender neutral (the British Crime Survey 1996 found
that "men appear to be at equal risk to women of domestic
assault").[22]
As behaviour becomes more harmful it also becomes less common,
and proportionately more male on female.[23]
At no point, however, does it become wholly male on female.
This evidence is regularly misrepresented, and
a common form of argument is used. The definition of domestic
violence or abuse is said to "include" appalling behaviour.
The male on female predominance is asserted, and the contrary
minority is discounted. Then this pattern is applied to statistics
of behaviour that is more common. In this way a misleading impression
is given of the incidence and nature of domestic violence or abuse.
The abundance of false allegations worsens this
misrepresentation. In the florid emotions that accompany family
division, dishonest statements can start to fly, especially if
there are advantages to be gained—financial, emotional,
control of housing, and above all "possession" of the
children. Inevitably, some allegations, as well as some denials,
will be false. This is often ignored.
Focus upon public education and awareness-raising
is vital for an issue of such gravity as Domestic Violence; this
must be balanced and representative of the reality of gender neutrality.
Members of this charity who claim to have been
assaulted by their partner or ex partner, or who are the victims
of what they claim are false allegations, lack confidence that
they are treated in a non-discriminatory way. We support training
for all relevant professionals, such as the police and staff in
CAFCASS, in how to deal better with domestic violence. This must,
however, be accompanied by anti-discrimination messages and recognition,
in the training, of the fact that both men and women can be victims
of both violence and of malicious accusations. This is not currently
the case.
An example of good practice is the recent campaign
by Surrey Police exposing the "fiction" that only women
suffer domestic abuse. This type of practice should be promoted
more widely.
5. THE SAFETY
OF CHILDREN
FNF is fully supportive of attempts to prevent
children from being direct and indirect victims of domestic violence
and abuse. Both individual decisions and policy must be free of
gender or other stereotypes.
The leading evidence of the prevalence of child
abuse is the research published in 2000 by the NSPCC[24].
In a sample which contained a higher than expected proportion
of children whose parents had separated, the overwhelming majority
had experienced abuse-free childhoods and were close or very close
to both their parents. The pattern of "maltreatment"
that had been inflicted on a significant minority did not conform
to the stereotypes. Most types of abuse were broadly gender neutral
(with the exception of sexual abuse, which was, however, rare
and the perpetrator often not the father) and some were more often
inflicted by mothers than fathers.
The current concern about the safety of children
on contact is based on prejudice, not evidence. The assertion
made by Women's Aid that the family courts should be more stringent
in awarding contact to fathers because 29 children had been killed[25]
is highly selective. An examination by Lord Justice Wall reduced
the number to three deaths in two incidents over a 10 year period[26].
The issue still, however, reverberates and is used to drive an
argument that there needs to be more vigilance in making contact
arrangements. In fact, pro-rata time spent on contact is safer
than time spent in the charge of resident parents and their new
partners. Using NSPCC figures, over this same period, some 800-1,000
children may have been killed overwhelmingly by parents or carers,
and in "residential" rather than "contact"
situations.
Sometimes, parents who have lost control with
drastic and tragic consequences to their children's welfare, have
done so due to the stress of having to deal with greater demands
than they can cope with. This is recognised in institutional daycare
or social work support. A common resource, however, which is often
wasted, is the other parent. All proposals need to be checked
for safety, but the involvement of non-resident natural parents
to relieve the stress on the resident parents should be regarded
as a potential safeguarding measure for, globally, they prevent
more abuse than they inflict.
Absolute safety is impossible to attain. Over-protectiveness
is bad parenting. Decisions about the parenting of children in
divided families should always be considered for their safety,
but reasonable precautions need balancing against the proven benefits
to children of the involvement of both their parents.
6. THE NEED
FOR DECISIONS
TO BE
FAIR AND
EVIDENCE BASED
All allegations need to be taken seriously and
investigated with the speed, thoroughness and even-handedness
that their gravity requires. This requires proper evaluation of
evidence and a measured, thoughtful, and evidence-based response.
The protocols in private law for assessing whether children should
have relationships with both their parents should be aligned with
the best practice in public law.
The use of false allegations to prevent a child
from having a relationship with a loved and loving parent is child
abuse, perjury and an attempt to pervert the course of justice,
as well as domestic violence against the alleged perpetrator.
It should be treated and sanctioned as such. In the absence of
sanctions false allegations become a legitimate tactic in the
dispute and broaden the scope for conflict. The significant lengths
of time often involved whilst "fact-finding" hearings
or CAFCASS reports are undertaken must be borne in mind, as this
can be extremely harmful to the child who is denied contact with
a parent who may be the victim of false allegations.
The assumption that female allegations should
be presumed true and male denials presumed false needs to be replaced
by an examination of the evidence, free of gender stereotypes.
7. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
AND CHILD
CONTACT
Children should be allowed to spend time with
both their parents and their wider family unless this presents
a risk to the child. If there is thought to be a risk to someone
else, other means to protect him or her should be used. Decisions
about the benefits to children of relationships with their parents
should be based on an assessment of the future risks and benefits
and only on what has happened in the past if that is relevant
to the future.
Children should be required to see a parent
in a contact centre, or under supervision, only where there is
evidence that otherwise there would be a risk to the child. The
objective should be to assess that risk and this should be followed
by normal and free contact unless there are clear indications
otherwise.
Furthermore, it is almost impossible for grandparents
and extended family to be made party to a case. This is a Human
Rights issue given that part of the Human Rights Act, to which
the Family Courts must comply, Article 8: "the right to respect
for private and family life", is not being applied when only
contact with non-resident parents is dealt with and not the extended
family. We would argue that this is Domestic Abuse of the children
by the family courts, on the very children that they are charged
to protect.
8. SERVICES TO
VICTIMS OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
AND THEIR
CHILDREN
The "Gender Equality Duty" demands
that services by public bodies should be provided without gender
prejudice, discrimination or bias—it is discriminatory for
services and support, including financial and refuge services,
to be available only to some sections of the population, for example,
to women alone.
Government guidance on sentencing should include
provision of anger management and counselling services, and such
"perpetrator programmes" should be available to both
men and women. Public money and charitable status should not be
available to agencies which discriminate in their services by
sex, race, disability, sexuality or other unacceptable grounds,
or which promote negative stereotyping of a section of the population.
Any gender stereotyping organization should be excluded from involvement
in interagency services.
In this line, the existence of discrimination
in the provision of legal aid in cases of domestic violence allegations
is unjust. Whilst emergency applications for ex-parte injunctions
can be granted by legal aid solicitors automatically, defendants
in these proceedings cannot get legal aid (unless it includes
an Occupation Order) to cover representation.
Of great importance is communication with men
enabling male victims to acknowledge their experiences of legitimate
abuse, particularly considering that female on male domestic violence
tends to be more often emotional/psychological. Barriers to the
acknowledgement of female on male abuse must be broken down.
It is not discriminatory to provide separate
services to women and men or, where appropriate, other groups
for whom special services are needed to meet special needs, but
they must be proportionate to need.
9. CONCLUSION
The system as a whole is deeply flawed. Many
allegations result from the adversarial nature of the legal processes.
These encourage parents to seek "possession" of the
children, which can involve attacking the character, conduct,
and parenting of the other in order to gain that possession. If
shared parenting was considered to be the right of a child in
cultural and legal terms, rather than a "defeat" for
one parent seeking a dominant position in the life of a child,
allegations would diminish.
The issue of Domestic Violence should be treated
with the utmost vigilance, legally, professionally, and culturally.
Its consequences can be tragically destructive, and even fatal.
Its wrongful interpretation and skewed presentation however, can
also result in tragedy if inaccurate stereotypes are generated,
leading to loving parents and their children being unjustifiably
denied a loving relationship.
1 October 2007
21 "Any criminal offence arising out of physical,
sexual, psychological, emotional or financial abuse by one person
against a current or former partner in a close relationship, or
against a current or former family member," as defined by
the Crown Prosecution Service. Back
22
"Domestic Violence: Findings from a new British Crime Survey"
Home Office Research Study 191, p. 38 Back
23
Scottish Crime Survey 2000, via Women's Aid Back
24
"Child Maltreatment in the UK: A Study of the Prevalence
of Child Abuse and Neglect", Cawson et al, NSPCC, 2000 Back
25
"Twenty nine child homicides: Lessons still to be learnt
on domestic violence and child protection", Women's Aid,
2004 Back
26
A Report to the President of the Family Division on the publication
by the Women's Aid Federation of England entitled "Twenty-Nine
Child Homicides: Lessons still to be learnt on Domestic Violence
and Child Protection with particular reference to the five cases
in which there was Judicial Involvement", Lord Justice Wall,
Feb 2006 Back
| 
