Select Committee on Home Affairs Written Evidence

Annex 1

1.  INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

  In support of our submission to the Home Affairs Select Committee Inquiry on domestic violence, Women's Aid (WA) devised and circulated a questionnaire on 12 September to all our national network of services and individual members, covering the main subject areas identified by the Select Committee, and some additional ones of particular concern to our organisation. The survey was also posted on our website, www.womensaid.org.uk.

  The questionnaire was as far as possible designed to be answered quickly and easily, preferably on-line, as this facilitated both response and analysis. Most questions has pre-determined responses, but all topic areas had space for further comment, case studies, and examples of good and bad practice, if respondents chose to add more information.

  In just over a week, we had received a total of 302 responses: 265 via the on-line questionnaire,[170] 23 by email and 14 by post. In view of the extremely tight timescale, we regard this as an extremely encouraging response, which indicates how strongly our member organisations and other supporters feel about these issues.

  Responses received break down as follows:

Table 1

Women's Aid local domestic violence organisations	49.6%
Individual Women's Aid member/supporter	8.6%
Other services/individuals	32.7%
Not known	9.6%

  A proportion of responses from individuals/other services are from survivors—but unless this is made clear from the additional qualitative information (as it was in some cases), we do not know who falls into this category.

  Many respondents chose to answer only a proportion of the questions—depending on their particular knowledge and experience. Many of the questions were aimed at service providers, and could therefore not be properly answered by survivors and others whose interest was of a personal and individual nature. Because of that, in most cases we have calculated percentages for each question based on the number answering, rather than on the number of respondents in total.

SUMMARY OF KEY RESPONSES

2.  PUBLIC EDUCATION AND AWARENESS-RAISING

2.1  Public awareness campaigns

  This question was answered by 240 respondents, 197 (82%) had seen at least one local or national domestic violence awareness raising campaign. 167 of these had seen a national campaign, and 150 had seen a local campaign.

—  116 (69% of those who had seen any national campaign) had noticed the national WA campaign.

—  36 (22%) of these had seen Home Office campaign.

—  35 (21%) of these had seen the Metropolitan Police campaign.

  Many of them also mentioned local awareness campaigns. Around 80% thought the campaigns they had seen had been effective—though most of them were unable to cite a definite increase in referrals to their organisation as a direct result of any campaign.

2.2  Schools

  We asked respondents whether they had during the past year undertaken work within schools on domestic or sexual violence issues, either with pupils or staff. The responses are recorded below, Table 2. (198 respondents)

Table 2

Talks or discussions with school pupils	75	38%
Training teachers/other staff	57	29%
Develop resources for use in schools	48	24%
Other work in schools	5	3%
Not this year but have done in the past	34	17%
No, never	61	31%

  We also asked whether (to their knowledge) schools in their area addressed domestic violence in any of the following ways. (142 respondents.)

Table 3

Include within PSHE/Citizenship curriculum	65	46%
Have a domestic violence policy/procedure	16	13%
Identified member of staff for DV issues	27	19%
Work on violence and gender equality issues	44	31%
Address in any other way	57	40%

  Three-quarters of respondents thought schools responses to domestic and sexual violence had improved either a little (47%) or a lot (28%). Despite this, most of the comments we received were qualified in some way, eg:

Finally we have occasionally been able to provide domestic violence workers to assist with healthy relationships sessions rolled out alongside healthy choices programme organised by the local district council's community safety programme—though this ceased a year ago—presumably due to funding and resourcing.

There needs to be more awareness of the issues and schools need to be aware of support services that are available in the local area so they don't feel isolated and unable to manage. I think some schools are scared of "scratching the surface" regarding DV and is we show that they have the support available to them to deal with the issues they maybe more confident to manage the problems. This is an ongoing problem re: PSHE agenda and schools commitment to this kind of work, there needs to be more done in relation to healthy schools and supporting children & young people's well being in a school environment as well.

2.3  Health

  Of the 201 who answered this question, 60% said NHS trusts are training health professionals on domestic violence. However, it was apparent that only selected health professionals were receiving such training—predominantly health visitors (trained in 96% of cases[171]) and midwives (87%), and rather lower numbers of A and E staff (55%) and practice nurses.

Good response and liaison with Health Visitor Teams and midwives—zero response from GP's despite many efforts to engage . . .

A & E staff have been trained by us for several years and health visitors are a new partner and referring agency. Survivors have told us they appreciate being screened and often disclose historical abuse and wish they'd been asked the question earlier on in the abuse or when it was actually happening to them . . .

  46% said that—based on what survivors had told them—there had been an improvement in the last year in healthcare professionals' responses to women and children experiencing domestic violence.

3.  POLICE POWERS AND LEGAL PROTECTIONS FOR VICTIMS

  There was fairly widespread agreement that police response had improved over last two to three years: 75% of respondents (n=198) agreed and only 14% disagreed. However, when asked about specific actions, the vast majority said that the police "sometimes" respond in the preferred manner (see Table 4).

Table 4

When police respond to incidents of domestic violence do they—

	Always	Sometimes	Never
Respond quickly?	21%	76%	2%
Respond sensitively and sympathetically?	11%	86%	4%
Arrest the perpetrator	9%	84%	6%
Provide effective protection for the survivor and any children?	16%	76%	6%
Give the survivor contact details for a domestic violence service . . .?	35%	62%	1%

  This inconsistency of police response was highlighted by many, who gave numerous examples of both good and bad practice by individual police officers. This was the topic on which we received most comments, for example:

Often it depends on individual senior officer's commitment in terms of the response or service the victim receives . . .

Service is patchy, response rates are variable, call centre staff are occasionally clueless, targets sometimes encourage meaningless or damaging arrests of both parties (where for example the victim has pushed their attacker in self defence), or meaningless prosecutions for victims who have lashed out in what is often a fairly minor way after years of relentless abuse.

I still hear far too often of poor police responses, and lack of any action being taken. Too many women refuse to contact the police because of poor prior experience.

Everyone should receive the same service. Some officers remain insensitive to the issues despite training. Due to lack of resources response to an incident and investigation afterwards can be slow. Increase in personnel would help and ongoing training (refreshers) should make a further positive impact.

Police have in general increased their awareness, and take DV crime more seriously . . .

Good practice has been when specific offers have responded appropriately and sympathetically to victims.

4.  CRIMINAL AND CIVIL JUSTICE PROCESSES, INCLUDING THE SPECIALIST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAMME

4.1  The criminal law and its implementation

  We asked respondents about their experience of survivors using the criminal justice process during the past year, and any concerns they might have about this. The responses are shown in Table 8.

Table 5

Do you have any particular areas of concern in regard to the criminal law and/or how it has been implemented during the past year?

	Number	% of respts n=144
Initial police response	53	37%
Charging/prosecution process	102	71%
Going to court	63	44%
Survivors accessing special measures in court	60	42%
Survivors being subpoenaed to court	38	26%
Sentencing	90	63%
Reduction of charge/sentence following a guilty plea	86	60%
Ongoing protection	97	67%
Other	9	6%

  Most of the comments we received concerned inadequate sentences, often following long delays and traumatic court proceedings. These are a selection of them:

Attending court can also be threatening and intimidating for victims, especially those from the BME groups or those who don't speak English. The reduction of the charges can also make victim feel not credible and valued, and as result they are less likely to press the charges against the perpetrator. Victims who attend court are vulnerable, feel intimidated, unaware of their rights, without confidence, thus creating a huge gap between the low level of responsiveness of the victim due to a history of DV and what is expected of her in the court.

. . . Far too many offenders still getting off with light or community sentences that have little or no impact on the safety of the survivors . . .

The law does not seem to take serious steps in punishing the perpetrator and frequently is overly lenient. Meanwhile the victims have long term physical, emotional and psychological scars.

The sentencing for people found guilty is a farce, it very rarely reflects the seriousness of the crime especially if the perpetrator is a highly paid white collar worker. It does not encourage or support women to make a stand and leads to many women feeling let down by the system when they will have sacrificed a lot to attend trials.

Most survivors feel very let down by the law—if it even gets as far as court. Sentences are too lenient and devalue the experiences of these women and children.

And from a survivor:

Criminal law was not well explained to me; a bit confusing. My first solicitor told me to go to the police which was good because my husband was arrested, but on the other hand the criminal procedures were long and difficult to understand . . . The judge did not want to case to go to trial so my husband, after months of discussions, signed an undertaking stopping him to talk to me, come to my property . . . There were 16 months of negotiations, discussions . . . It was a nightmare.

4.2  Specialist Domestic Violence Courts (SDVCs)

  SDVCs are aimed at reducing some of the above problems. They should enable domestic violence cases to be fast-tracked, to be heard by specially trained magistrates, with support for victims from specialist staff, including IDVAs. 44% of our respondents[172] said there was an SDVC in their area, with a further 24% saying one was in the planning stages.

  We asked respondents whether they felt SDVCs had improved the process of going to court for domestic violence survivors. Sixty (of the 78 who had had experience of SDVCs) cited one or more positive factors— and none said the process had got worse.

Table 6

If there is an SDVC in your area, do you find that this improves the process of going to court for women who have experienced domestic violence?

	Number	% of respts n=60
Yes, because it is dealt with more quickly	37	62%
Yes, because the woman has more support and information	46	77%
Yes, because those involved are more aware of domestic violence issues	45	75%
Yes, because the court is less intimidating/more welcoming	27	45%
No difference from previous court process	8	13%
Yes, for other reasons	2	3%
No—it has got worse	0	—

  We only had a few comments on SDVCs, due probably to our members' relative lack of experience this new initiative. Comments we did receive mentioned a few concerns, such as the need (not always met) for adequate on-going training for all court staff, and the inability of (some) SDVCs to deal with all the relevant cases, including trials.

Due to the sheer volume of cases it is not possible to hear all within the SDVC. Another court/time period should be allocated rather than the current practice to slot cases into any court as time allows. Support services, trained staff etc are not always available at these other times.

It seems that there are many different models—the ones that seem most effective are the ones that also run trials, unlike [that in another area] which just deals with listings/directions and therefore is no real use to victims.

[I know someone who] sits as a magistrate in one of these courts. She appals me with her lack of knowledge and her ability to leap to conclusions based on her assumptions of what causes and what "cures" DV.

It still appears to take time although this has improved greatly since the introduction of the SDVC however charging and sentencing can be a long process.

4.3  Independent Domestic Violence Advisors (IDVAs)

  Just over half of our respondents (56% of 182) said there were IDVAs in their area—70% of which were managed and/or employed by a voluntary sector organisation (including local Women's Aid organisations).

  There was general agreement that IDVAs increased survivor safety—at least to some extent: see Table 7. (Note that the numbers having no experience of IDVAs is quite high—and only 156 respondents answered this question.)

Table 7

Do you think IDVAs are effective in supporting survivors and improving their safety?

	Number	% of respts n=156
Yes, a great deal	63	40%
Yes, to some extent	30	19%
Sometimes yes, sometimes no	14	9%
No, not much	3	2%
No, not at all	0	—
Don't know/No experience of IDVAs	44	28%

4.4  Protection under the civil law

  We asked respondents whether they had any particular concerns in regard to access to and use of protection available under the civil legislation. The responses are shown in Table 10. Concerns about obtaining Community Legal Services funding, and the inadequate enforcement of injunctions predominated.[173]

Table 8

Do you have any particular areas of concern in regard to access to and use of the civil law to protect survivors of domestic violence, and/or how it has been implemented during the past year?

	Number	% of respts n=130
Eligibility for legal aid (CLS funding)	93	72%
Obtaining legal aid/CLS funding (if eligible)	68	52%
Process of applying/going to court	34	26%
Obtaining order applied for	32	25%
Enforcement (if breached)	91	70%
Other	7	5%

  The following were among the comments we received:

. . . No protection for survivors at all in civil courts despite all the protection measures in place for vulnerable witnesses in criminal cases . . . Legal aid almost impossible to access.

There is always a difficulty with enforcement if we cannot serve the perpetrator with the necessary documentation. This may be alleviated with the change in the law on 1.7.07 but this is yet to be seen.

Not many perpetrators abide by the rules of injunctions and survivors still get harassed and do not feel safe.

From a survivor

. . . I am in full time employment and therefore not entitled to legal aid. I was unable to fully explore some of the legal opportunities I could have to gain protection and recognition from what I was experiencing. I also found the solicitors I did contact did not fully appreciate my situation.

4.5  Family law: Child contact and residence

  Despite recent changes in procedures, there is still great concern about the issue of safety—of both mother and child(ren)—when contact or residence is being decided by the courts. A majority of respondents (66%[174]) say family courts (and CAFCASS[175]) still do not take adequate account of safety when making child contact or residence orders. Just over one-third think there has been a slight improvement in the past year—but the rest say there has been no change. Two thirds are concerned about the continued use of mediation in cases involving domestic violence. The following are some of the comments we received on these issues:

The Family Courts can only benefit by becoming transparent to public scrutiny . . . I hear from many women who tell me that their husbands are abusing the system, connivance with CAFCASS workers, psychiatrists and even in one instance a judge.

CAFCASS locally have tendency to be drawn in by perpetrators charm and tactics and not recognise the seriousness of the Domestic abuse and the effect on the children.

The family courts & CAFCASS claim to listen to the children, but they don't and continue to make decisions that facilitate ongoing abuse and control.

If women have initially granted contact but then stopped it because of concerns, they are often portrayed as implacably hostile and the domestic abuse they have suffered is not looked in to as a possible risk factor for the children.

It is difficult to understand how mediation can work within a relationship where power and control lies so firmly in one camp.

I've lost count of the number of women I've spoken to who tell me that the mediator has started the mediation process by expressing the opinion that the woman is clearly influencing the child against the father, or that the mother has some kind of mental health issue. There is a distinct perception among women going to the Family Court that the service is biased against them . . .

4.6  The Domestic Violence Crime and Victims Act 2004 (DVCVA)

  Only 17 respondents were aware of cases where the new provision under section 4 of the DVCVA had been used[176], during the two months it has been in effect. Of these, 11 (73%) thought it had made enforcement more effective, whereas the rest had been unable to detect any change. Relatively few answered any of the other questions about the DVCVA. Of those that did, the main area of concern was section 5 whereby both/all adults are held jointly responsible for death of a child. 61% of respondents also thought that the facility to apply for third party orders (under section 60 of the Family Law Act 1996) should be implemented.

5.  SUPPORT FOR VICTIMS, INCLUDING FINANCE AND REFUGE SERVICES

5.1  Supporting People

  Supporting People (SP) is a major source of financial support for domestic violence services, and may cover both refuge accommodation and floating support services to those living in the community (including temporary and emergency accommodation.) Looking just at Women's Aid member organisations[177], 78% were funded by SP to some extent. 90% of these received funding for refuge provision, and 54% for floating support services.

  We are concerned that the new commissioning framework, including the requirement to tender for continuing SP funding, means that specialist domestic violence services are under threat. It seems that our concerns are shared by many of our member organisations, three-quarters of whom were concerned about tendency to fund generic rather than specialist domestic violence services. A significant proportion were also concerned about the potential loss of specific women-only and BME services. See Table 11.

Table 9

Recent consultations have highlighted concerns about the SP tendering process. Do you have any concerns about any of the following?

	Number	% of respts n=79
Tendency to fund generic rather than specialist services	55	70%
Reduction or loss of women-only services	48	61%
Reduction or loss of BME specialist services	24	30%
Other	12	15%

  The following are some of the comments we received about the SP competitive tendering process:

I feel that if a service is effective and can show continuous improvement I see no benefit to the tendering process. It has a negative impact on the service user continuity of care and service delivery and creates uncertainty in the teams delivering that service. I do not feel that SP understand the nature of the work and the limited skilled professions around to deliver high standard services and care.

Smaller voluntary organisations have been largely ignored mostly because the standards are too difficult to implement.

We have applied to become a provider and receive funding, but there is fierce competition for scarce resources. Goalposts seem to shift: we were told there was funding available this year, now it will not be available until next year. The processes are long and there is no feedback about what is going on . . .

. . . SP have created a depressing competitive edge to what should be an arena for working together for the benefit of women and children.

Women's Aid is the specialist provider of women only services and have years of expertise we should be exempt from the tendering process and be allowed to support our service users. This process is breaking down relationships as a result of the process.

5.2  Services for children and young people

  Supporting People do not fund services for children- which is a major gap, and means that specialist services for children and young people who have been traumatised by their experiences of living with domestic violence are often not available, or—if available at all—have very insecure funding.

  Despite this, 73% of domestic violence services provide services for children and young people who have lived with domestic violence, and three-quarters of them receive at least some funding for this work. The majority of that funding is for services within refuge accommodation.

5.3  Permanent housing

  Access to permanent housing for women and children who have left their homes because of domestic violence is very important. Refuges—while offering crucial support in the immediate aftermath of abuse—are not intended as long-term accommodation; and most domestic violence survivors are not in a position to own their own homes. Many will be hoping for an offer of accommodation from their local council or housing association.

  Two thirds of respondents said women were waiting longer to be re-housed than two years ago. Also, the proportion who have been re-housed in private rental accommodation has apparently risen in the past year[178]—and more than three-quarters of respondents were concerned about this. See Table 12 for a breakdown of where women were being re-housed.

Table 10

PROPORTIONS WOMEN MOVING ON TO DIFFERENT KINDS OF HOUSING PROVISION

Council owned accommodation	35%[179]
Housing association provision	27%
Private rental accommodation	25%
Owner occupied housing	1%
Other	11%

  These are a selection of comments from respondents about the difficulties women and children face in finding permanent housing.

In general women are still waiting too long to be rehoused. This has an impact on their children, who need to be settled back into schools in the area.

There is no social housing provision for any women seeking accommodation on leaving the refuge. We are advised that there is a waiting list in excess of seven years to be re-housed in social housing locally.

Housing is particularly difficult in this area as it is a seaside resort and has very little social housing. Private landlords tend to let properties throughout the holiday times and do not need tenants in there houses on a permanent basis.

The waiting times for families moving on from first and second stage into temporary housing is too long. It takes between 18 month and 2 years to reach permanent housing for families during which time they may have settled into properties and feel reluctant to have to move their family once again. Hostel accommodation is still being used for families despite this being bad practice.

Often women are offered inappropriate housing, if they turn that down they are penalised. Women with additional needs suffer the detriment even further as sometime mental health or language barrier, disability etc restrict them from fully engaging and receiving equal access to services.

  We also asked about the response women received when approaching their local housing department when they were homeless due to domestic violence. See Table 13 for a breakdown of the responses.

Table 11

In your experience, when women seek help from your local housing authority or homelessness unit because they are homeless due to domestic violence, how satisfactory is the response they receive?

	Number	% of respts n= 140
Very satisfactory	9	6%
Quite satisfactory	48	34%
Neither satisfactory nor unsatisfactory/it varies	48	34%
Fairly unsatisfactory	21	15%
Very unsatisfactory	14	10%

  Some of the comments are included below: most are critical of the service provided by homelessness departments, but the final one is a positive example of what can be done.

The housing department are becoming very uncooperative and not very sympathetic and are always trying to find reasons for not accepting our clients as homeless. For example, one client got told they could not re-house her because the perpetrator was not a threat to their child, only her!

Housing/homeless services do not take DV victims seriously. They believe [in] the myth that it is temporary relationship breakdown and treat the case as temporary. Bad examples include case of mothers and children escaping from DV, becoming homeless and being asked to go back to their council property.

The women are discouraged by staff at the local housing department from making a homeless application and they are often asked if there is any way they can return home.

Women are asked very intrusive questions and are having to prove the abuse they have suffered.

All Homeless applications on the grounds of domestic violence are referred to us for assessment prior to a decision being made. Housing officers do act on our advice and we share information for this purpose. Few decisions are negative.

5.4  Sanctuary Schemes

  Sanctuary Schemes are one option for some domestic violence survivors who choose to stay in their homes after special security measures have been installed. They are by no means appropriate or safe for everyone, however. 64% of those responding to this question (n=151) said that there was a Sanctuary scheme in their area; but only 40% of these had a designated and funded advocacy scheme linked to it—as Women's Aid would recommend. Comments from our respondents on Sanctuary schemes were mixed: some felt their local scheme worked well, but others had some concerns.

We are finding it ineffective in our area and only relevant for a small number of clients once risk assessment is completed.

Feed back from one woman was that they found the sanctuary very scary and depressing for their children.

. . . On the whole it has given women increased confidence for their safety and works best if police panic alarms also installed.

Our police fund things like shutters and bars for doors etc, but not CCTV or panic rooms. There is no perpetrators' support programme and there is no housing available which could be used for single male perpetrators in a supported tenancy scheme linked to Sanctuary. I think making a house more secure, without the other provision to keep the perpetrator supported and away from the victim, just leaves the woman a prisoner in her own home.

Provided it is seen as a choice for women and there is support for women it is a good idea . . .

6.  PERPETRATOR PROGAMMES

  Not applicable due to prioritisation. Please also note that there is more detailed information available from Respect.

7.  MULTI-AGENCY APPROACHES, AND WHAT BARRIERS EXIST TO THEIR EFFECTIVE OPERATION

7.1  Multi-agency partnerships

  74% of domestic violence agencies said there were formal partnership arrangements/protocols how agencies should work together, and nearly everyone who answered this question said they attended their local Domestic Violence Forum. Numbers attending the other specified forums were less—but still substantial.

  A majority of organisations were involved in training other agencies in domestic violence awareness—often in partnership with other relevant agencies.

  We were concerned that implementation of the National Domestic Violence Delivery Plan did not appear to be monitored—or if it was, our respondents did not know about it; and we were also concerned that the Government's Voluntary Sector Compact—aimed at improving the relationship between local government and the voluntary sector—was either not being adhered to, or if it was, our respondents did not know about it. See Table 14.

Table 12

	Is there a mechanism for monitoring the NDV Delivery Plan in your area?	Is the government's Voluntary Sector Compact being adhered to in your area?
Yes	63 (41%)	33 (23%)
No	19 (12%)	32 (23%)
Don't know	71 (46%)	77 (54%)
Total responding	153	142

7.2  Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARACs)

  58% of our respondents attend MARACs, though the vast majority (over 90% of those attending) do not receive any dedicated funding for this work. There was muted agreement with view that MARACs increase survivor safety: see Table 5. Respondents did, however, have some concerns about the MARAC process: see Table 6.

Table 13

Do you think MARACs increase survivors' safety?

	Number	% of respts n=174
Yes, a great deal	27	16%
Yes, to some extent	62	34%
Sometimes yes, sometimes no	31	18%
No, not much	5	3%
No, not at all	1	0.5%
Don't know/No experience of MARACs	48	28%

Table 14

Do you have any of the following concerns in regard to MARAC procedures?

	Number	% of respts n=107
Survivor confidentiality	49	46%
Empowerment of survivors	45	42%
Safety of survivors	27	25%
Individual agency responses	67	63%
Effective management of time and resources	39	36%
Impact on workload of specialist DV services	70	65%
Other	7	7%

  These are some of the comments we received, illustrating some of these concerns:

With regard to safety of survivors above, the most difficult to reach, entrenched cases (those which are socially excluded or at risk of being socially excluded) are the ones which currently often get closed at MARAC with no changes have been effected, and yet these are the cases which present the highest risk for the victims. This is because the perpetrator and survivor do not engage with services and so services often close their cases . . . Clearly this goes against the principles of MARACs.

It's early days for us at the moment but already MARACs have improved communication. On the other hand, they do not sit easily with our ethical approach of supporting women to take control of their own lives and there appear to be real risks relating to confidentiality, empowerment and other issues.

MARACs work well in identifying victims who are at "most" risk and creates action plans to help both victims and perpetrator where possible. However I'm not always confident in its ability to protect victims and empower them to became survivors.

Worried that even if a woman doesn't give consent, her case goes to a MARAC. This is taking women's choice away . . .

World + brother invited, worried about confidentiality sometimes.

Very useful although still evolving. Need to encourage other agencies not specialising in DV to refer.

Survivors have little power over what happens, and this may put the survivor at a greater risk. It is a good idea to have all the relevant agencies getting together on a case.

Just beginning in our area. Good but NOT the be all and end all and I fear that sometimes holding a Marac is felt to be the answer in itself.

---

170   Not everyone answered all the questions, and only 122 completed the questionnaire. We have, however, included responses from incomplete questionnaires as well. Back

171   All % are based on the 119 who were aware that domestic violence training of healthcare staff was undertaken in their NHS trusts. Back

172   174 answered this question. Back

173   It is possible that the latter will be addressed by the criminalisation of breach of non-molestation orders under section 4 of the Domestic Violence Crime and Victims Act 2004-but this has been implemented too recently to have made an impact, as yet. Back

174   answered this question. Back

175   The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service-the body responsible for making reports to the family courts in cases where contact and/or residence is contested. Back

176   ie criminalisation of breach of non-molestation injunctions. Back

177   ie full members, associated organisations and associated refuges: 149 respondents. Back

178   Two thirds of respondents said this was the case. Back

179   This figure is a rough average of all the responses to this question. Back

---

Prepared 13 June 2008