Examination of Witnesses (Questions 180
- 199)
TUESDAY 19 FEBRUARY 2008
MS NICOLA
HARWIN, MS
SANDRA HORLEY
AND MS
JASVINDER SANGHERA
Q180 Chairman: You mean the enquiries
are more intense?
Ms Sanghera: Yes, for a white
child.
Q181 David Davies: Jasvinder, since
you are bravely raising quite sensitive issues here, can I ask
you; as far as the councillors in Derby are concerned, can you
see that one particular group is more adverse to what you are
doing than others? Is it Asian councillors who a resistant, white
councillors or a mixture of both?
Ms Sanghera: The councillors who
made the comments were Asian councillors. The councillor who stood
as the representative in response to Derby being almost put under
the spotlight stated that some schools did say they were not willing
to put the poster up but it was the school governors, and their
reasoning was that it would prejudice children and it is sensitive.
I do not understand what is meant by "prejudice" or
"sensitivity" because that is part of the problem here.
Q182 David Davies: Is it happening
elsewhere as well as Derby?
Ms Sanghera: Yes. Can I just say
it is not just a question for Asian councillors. What I would
expect from people in accountable roles, even the non-Asian councillors,
is for them take a stand and to show some leadership on these
issues.
Q183 Chairman: Of course Mr Salter
has raised this, as he said, with the Education Secretary and
the Prime Minister but I have not seen a copy of this poster.
I wonder whether it would be possible for you to send some copies
of these posters to the Committee so we can see what is so controversial
about them.
Ms Sanghera: By all means.
Martin Salter: Just on that point, the
other thing that I think would be useful for the Committee, you
do not need to send it to us but if we could have the Forced Marriage
Unit's teachers' toolkit that would be very useful for us to see.
Q184 Chairman: Did you have something
else to say, Ms Sanghera?
Ms Sanghera: I just wanted to
mention the issue around home schooling as well. I feel home schooling
needs to be checked to ensure that it is meeting the national
standards.
Q185 Margaret Moran: Just going back
slightly, you raised the issue about the reduction in services
for black and minority ethnic women. Maybe you want to clarify
that slightly, but we have also heard that there can be issues
around drug and alcohol abuse, both in relation to perpetrators
of domestic violence, and survivors. Sandra, perhaps you could
tell us what the level of provision is around some of that, and
also perhaps to Nicola as well: we have also heard that there
are gaps in terms of the age limits, that lots of services are
for 18-plus and there is nothing for 16 to 18-year-olds.
Ms Horley: Briefly, there is not
enough refuge provision for these groups of women: black, Asian,
minority ethnic and refugee women; not enough services for drug
and alcohol users; and there is a problem around the 16 to 18-year-olds.
We believe that the Government definition of domestic violence
should be changed to include under 18s, encompassing 16 to 18-year-olds
who experience intimate partner violence and girls subjected to
forced marriages. More primary prevention work needs to be done
in schools on these issues and PSHE must become a mandatory part
of the school curriculum. I do not know if there is anything you
want to say.
Ms Harwin: I totally support all
that. There need to be far more support and information services
for 16 to 18-year-olds. Just as a point of information, last year
there were 870 young women staying in refuge accommodation who
were fleeing forced marriages, so there is quite a high proportion
that are actually using refuge services.
Ms Horley: Main Asian women will
not access mainstream or generic services and when they do their
experience of racism, I am afraid, is not uncommon. We have heard
today about groups having their funding cut, including Southall
Black Sisters and other black and minority ethnic groups. There
is a chronic lack of funding for services, and whilst the forced
marriage issue is going up the agenda ironically, as I said earlier,
the services for BME women are being reduced as we speak.
Ms Harwin: I think the other thing
that is important to note is that in the distribution and range
of services there has been a wide range of services on domestic
violence—and, as Sandra said earlier, a third of local authorities
make no provision—across the country from outreach, resettlement,
floating support, refuge provision to independent domestic violence
advocates, et cetera, but what we are seeing is that there is
often a reduction in outreach services which can particularly
help women in the community who may not want to go into refuge
accommodation. Some of that is being changed into independent
domestic violence advocates, which is great in terms of the fact
that we do need to have these specialist advocates in relation
to the criminal justice system, but we are seeing a loss of more
generalist outreach domestic violence services which will have
consequences for women who are low risk and medium risk and who
need that kind of support.
Margaret Moran: I think it might be helpful
for the Committee if you could provide us with a note on the outreach
services because we have focused quite a bit on the refuge provision
itself but perhaps we are missing the fact that there is a wider
support out there and what is actually happening to that, so a
note what is happening to specialist services and outreach would
be very helpful if you can encompass that.
Q186 Chairman: Would you provide
us with that information?
Ms Horley: May I make a point
about 16 to 18-year-olds or do you want to go on to another question.
Q187 Margaret Moran: In fact, could
you collaborate on that note to tell us because I was asking about
outreach and the gaps that there are. Could I go on to the domestic
violence courts, primarily to Nicola: perhaps you could tell us
about the progress in domestic violence courts/specialist courts
and their frequency around the country. I attended what they call
the domestic violence court in Luton recently—it is not
actually a specialist court—and I was struck by the fact
that almost every sentence was a community sentence. There were
no prison sentences but instead community sentences with IDAPS
(and we will come on to IDAPS later). Can you tell us what you
think is the most common sentencing and what is the profile of
sentencing for domestic violence and also maybe comment on the
training for magistrates and judges?
Ms Harwin: The most common sentences
for perpetrators are bind overs and fines. In fact, while realistic
sentencing is important, less than 30% of reported incidents of
domestic violence even get to the criminal court and reported
incidents are less than a quarter of all domestic violence. Within
the specialist courts and within the multi-agency risk assessment
and the independent domestic violence advocates and this whole
framework for improving the response to the criminal justice system
that is put in place, we are still talking about a relatively
small percentage of survivors and they are high-risk survivors.
One of the problems with the way that cases are coming to court
and being sentenced and the outcomes at the present time is that
three-quarters of the responses to the National Network of Domestic
Violence Services survey said that they were unhappy with the
attrition that was going on both in charging and in conviction,
and they mentioned the fact that they felt women were often putting
themselves under enormous pressure to go through a trial, it was
often taking a long time and then at the end of it they would
get bind overs or fines which would not really reflect to them
the seriousness. One of the problems is that charges are often
downgraded. One of our organisations told us they had a woman
whose husband had attempted to strangle her and in their view
it should have been a charge of attempted murder. The Crown Prosecution
Service initially charged with actual bodily harm. This was then
downgraded to common assault because of evidential problems. At
the end of that of course what he got was what she saw as a fairly
negligible sentence which did not reflect at all the seriousness.
Of course, that is just one incident, that does not reflect a
whole range of behaviours and fear and harm that she had been
exposed to over the course of a number of years, so I think that
is one of the problems.
Chairman: Can I bring in Mr Davies here.
Q188 David Davies: You are obviously
aware that since the CPS have become responsible for charging
rather than the police what you are saying is not specific to
domestic violence, it is absolutely across the board. I could
show you any number of victims who will tell you exactly the same
thing and desperately want the police to be back in charge of
charging rather than the CPS.
Ms Harwin: I have to say I think
there are some differences. For example, I was presented before
I came into this hearing today with a cutting from the Lincolnshire
Echo from yesterday which showed that there were two cases
of severe assault and harm where there had been community sentences
and the same court has sentenced a man with mental health problems
to a 14-day custodial sentence for cruelty to a rat. I want to
point out that you cannot just say—
David Davies: But he will not actually
do any time in jail because he will have 18 days off and serve
half.
Q189 Chairman: Can we get back to
the subject.
Ms Harwin: I think there is an
issue about the seriousness of domestic violence in relation to
other violent crimes and other crimes. I think that you are quite
right, this is a serious problem. What we are finding is that
because the sentences are so low, then it means that women are
seeing the men who assault them again and again and again perhaps
go to court, they may get bail, they may get a negligible sentence,
but they are not protected, and it is going on. That man had no
access to and is not feeding into programmes which might be the
only route to changing his attitude or ideas or behaviour.
Chairman: Could you hang on one second,
Ms Harwin. Margaret Moran will get us back on track.
Q190 Margaret Moran: Again, it might
be helpful if a note on sentencing could come forward because
I think there are many more questions in there that we would have
pursued had we more time. A couple of quick questions to Jasvinder
and Sandra particularly. How widespread is suicide amongst domestic
violence and forced marriage victims? We heard from the CPS that
they try to pursue a case. Do you think there is more that could
be done in that direction?
Ms Horley: Briefly, ten women
a week commit suicide as a consequence of domestic violence. Domestic
violence is the single most important cause of female suicidality,
and Asian women are two to three times more likely to commit suicide.
Q191 Margaret Moran: That is pretty
comprehensive.
Ms Sanghera: I can tell you that
the majority of the young people that we see in the age group
between 16 to 24, who have issues pertaining to honour-based crimes
or forced marriages, have tendencies towards self-harming, very
high rates of depression. What we have to remember—and it
is the same with re-settlement if I just can bring that point
in here—about these women is if they make a stand they do
not have families to turn to, they are completely isolated and
totally aliened. That in itself can drive them to suicide. I myself
lost my sister to suicide. When she was suffering domestic violence
she went to the people who are meant to love you the most who
told her to go back and make the marriage work for the sake of
honour. I still feel in my heart of hearts that she was driven
to commit suicide but we cannot hold people accountable for her
death. What we have to consider—and you are absolutely right
to raise the R v D case—is that what it does not
allow us in law is for us to consider psychological harm, psychiatric
harm yes, but not the psychological, so there is a need to consider
psychological bodily harm.
Q192 Chairman: 500 women a year commit
suicide as a result?
Ms Horley: Yes, two women a week
die as a result of domestic violence.
Q193 Chairman: Do we have an ethnic
profile of how many of those 500 are Asian women?
Ms Sanghera: Part of the problem
is that coroners are not reporting it. I went to Leicester and
I was speaking to people and the Head Coroner said to me, "We
see suicides which are quite questionable." We need coroners
to report them and to look for signs and to look for symptoms.
Ms Horley: I was going to add
to the point you were making. Much more needs to be done to investigate
the suicide of domestic violence victims and develop more appropriate
responses, including easy access to psychological services. In
addition, there needs to be a clear criminal route to prosecute
perpetrators who drive their victims to commit suicide and Refuge
is involved in a campaign with Iain Duncan Smith for a change
in legislation—liability for suicide.
Ms Harwin: Can I add two final
points on suicide.
Q194 Margaret Moran: I am going to
ask about intimidated witnesses so perhaps you can incorporate
what you were about to say in that. We have heard variously that
particularly domestic violence victims and those survivors of
forced marriage should have automatic status as intimidated witnesses.
Could you just say something about how the system is failing domestic
violence victims as witnesses.
Ms Horley: The use of special
measures for victims of domestic violence when giving evidence
is not working consistently. Special measures provide support
to victims and encourage them to engage with the court process.
Refuge recommends that all domestic violence victims should have
automatic status as intimidated witnesses and that special measures
available under this ruling should be made without application.
The use of special measures—screens, TV links, closed court—is
still it not working consistently. Independent domestic violence
advocacy services across the country, including Refuge's own,
are reporting that applications are not being made in the majority
of cases. The reason why this is the case is because in many courts
there is no clear process through which to apply for the special
measures, ie how and by whom, and this results in the CPS, the
independent domestic violence advocates and other support services,
not getting the applications in on time. The Home Office review
of the specialist domestic violence support programme has also
demonstrated that access to special measures to support victims
and encourage them to engage with the court process is one of
the lowest performing areas. Given that special measures have
clear benefits to victims and can help result in fewer victim
retractions or non-attendance, Refuge is recommending that they
should have automatic status.
Q195 Chairman: That is very helpful.
What would also be very helpful, I know you have a lot of information
and I am sorry if I appear to be rude in pushing this forward—
Ms Horley: We are very passionate
as well.
Chairman: We do have other witness coming.
What you have said is very helpful and Mrs Moran's suggestion
that you put what you have to say in a note would be extremely
helpful. If we need to interview you again of course we will.
Gwyn Prosser?
Q196 Gwyn Prosser: Ms Harwin, I want
to ask you about the multi-agency risk assessment conferences.
We have heard mixed reviews about their effectiveness. Tell us
about the pros and the cons; how they could do it better; should
they be made statutory?
Ms Harwin: Women's Aid does support
the multi-agency risk assessment conferences and they are an important
tool and an important partner in developing a co-ordinated community
risk approach to domestic violence in terms of helping share information
and managing risk of harm, but we feel very strongly that they
must not be the only domestic initiative that is operating in
a local authority area. Again, this is an area where we canvassed
our members to get their personal experience of what was happening
locally, and while many of them felt that they were helpful in
some ways, they were concerned in a number of areas. They were
concerned that multi-agency risk assessment conferences in most
areas are not survivor-led. The victim is informed that a referral
is happening. In a sense, they are in direct conflict with the
principle of empowerment which has always been part of the way
that we have tried to support abused women to get out of abusive
situations and develop their own choices. In a way, one could
say that they are already statutory in the sense that information
can be shared without consent already using legislation on child
protection, legislation on the protection of vulnerable adults
and the crime prevention legislation. To some degree we are concerned
that if survivors think they are statutory and if they are acting
in a completely statutory way, this will definitely discourage
them from reporting domestic violence to the police. I know we
are short of time but I could give you a case example where a
very inappropriate referral to MARAC has happened in a way which
is completely disempowering and completely inappropriate. I could
send that.
Q197 Chairman: If you could send
us that information.
Ms Harwin: The other issue is
survivor confidentiality. At the moment the guidance recommends
that up to 15 agencies attend a MARAC and all of these agencies
have access to the full case file, so there is a huge issue about
safety. One of the things that has to be taken into account is
that at the moment MARACs are looking at women assessed as very
high risk, and one of the things that very often leads to success
is because intervention did take place at the stage of low or
medium risk. What we do not want to see is the focus being all
on developing responses to women who are higher risk when other
women are not getting the help and support which might prevent
them getting to the point of high risk. The Newham Asian Women's
Project for example has highlighted that middle and low risk cases
do not qualify for a MARAC and that actually the early intervention,
prevention and support work that they have been carrying out by
specialist agencies has been very, very successful.
Q198 Gwyn Prosser: I think you concur
with most of what was said there. How can we deal with those victims
who refuse, for whatever reason, to engage with the MARACs? Can
they be helped to be drawn into the system?
Ms Horley: Most women prefer to
use the services of the voluntary sector and I would be urging
the Committee to fund domestic violence services through the voluntary
sector rather than statutory services. Women are afraid their
children are going to be taken into care and they are afraid to
go to the police for help. They need to know that where they are
going people understand the problem they are going through, that
they will have confidential support and about the MARACs, I want
to echo Nicola's point that we need to not just be addressing
the needs of high-risk victims because risk is so fluid, it can
escalate very quickly. What might seem low risk today, tomorrow
is very high risk. I had a case of a man brandishing a knife in
his wife's face which was considered low risk. In my view, that
is attempted murder.
Ms Sanghera: I think MARACs are
an ideal opportunity to risk-assess victims of forced marriages
and honour-based crimes; I really do. However, I do think there
is some work to do around making MARACs accessible in terms of
the understanding around risk to victims of forced marriages and
honour-based crimes. I think that could be a training issue with
some joint working in order for us to achieve that, and there
may be an argument for some specialist IDVAs across regions to
deal with victims of forced marriages and honour-based crimes,
but I wholeheartedly do support the MARAC as a co-ordinated risk
response to my victims, because at the present moment—I
cannot reiterate this enough—when victims of forced marriages
and honour-based crimes leave, which we know can lead to murders
and multiple rape, et cetera, the risk doubles. At the present
moment when we refer to the police we are asking for a high level
of protection. The only high level of protection we get referred
to is witness protection, but they fall at the first criteria
because these are not witnesses giving evidence in court. However,
they still need a high level of protection.
Ms Harwin: Can I echo one thing
that Sandra said about safety?
Q199 Chairman: Could you send us
a note about that?
Ms Harwin: It is safety that is
the priority, and that is often provided by the IDVA, by the independent
domestic violence service that is supporting the survivor.
Chairman: I am sorry to be unpopular,
but we are going to have to end the session unless we stick to
the questions because we have another two sets of witnesses. Mr
Streeter. You must be brief. I am sorry, not you, Mr Streeter.
| 
