Blog Archives - Women’s Aid

What it costs to flee abuse and stay safe

Chloe Browning — Thu, 26 Sep 2024 08:03:18 +0000

What it costs to flee abuse and stay safe

By Harriette Drew, Senior Policy Officer

A common myth about domestic abuse is: ‘If it was really that bad, she’d leave’. This completely misses the obstacles survivors face. Even once a woman has made up her mind to leave – which can itself be very difficult – there are often multiple barriers to putting this into practice.  

We know from our work with survivors that finances are a key barrier. Put simply, leaving and rebuilding a safe, independent life can be very expensive. Survivors often do not have access to the money they need to flee, due to economic abuse, and the financial challenge has only been exacerbated by the cost of living crisis. 

How much does it cost to leave?

At Women’s Aid, we have been working to quantify this financial barrier. Drawing on research, data and expert insight, we have produced an estimate of how much it could cost a survivor to leave her perpetrator and how much financial support is available.  

Not surprisingly, there is a substantial gap. While essential costs related to fleeing (like housing, legal fees, travel and others) can total almost £50,000, the support through social security, legal aid and grants only comes to around £40,000. 

For a survivor, the £10,000 deficit can mean the difference between safety and being forced to return to the perpetrator in order to be able to feed her children. 

The economics of leaving

Beyond the overall deficit, three key themes stuck out to me in the research:   

1. Leaving is a process

When calculating the costs, we took into account the first year after leaving. This is because we heard strongly from domestic abuse services and survivors that leaving isn’t a single event – it’s a process. Many survivors leave multiple times before they do so permanently, and at any point, an unaffordable cost could force the survivor to return to the perpetrator.  

To ‘stay fled’, survivors need financial support which meets their costs in a timely manner. But our research found that survivors often face delays to accessing benefits. They have to set up new bank accounts and wait for new ID to arrive before making benefit applications and, even then, the benefits are often paid in arrears.

As such, a survivor who flees may be forced in debt almost immediately – which makes the rest of the process much more difficult.

2. Leaving can feel like a full-time job

Survivors told us that rebuilding their lives involves hours and hours of appointments and administration. This would be a heavy burden for anyone, let alone for survivors suffering the effects of years of trauma on their mental health. It is even harder for those who do not speak English as a first language.

The tasks survivors face include:

Family court hearings	Health appointments	Contacting the Child Maintenance Service
Debt advice support	Flat viewings	Jobcentre appointments
Meetings with social workers	Appointments at the bank	Counselling
Criminal court hearings	Peer support groups	Benefits applications
Dealing with creditors	Preparing court bundles	Contacting local authority housing officers
Setting up new bank accounts	Applying for new ID	Applying for a new school place

Although survivors may be officially entitled to a range of support, it is often not accessible. They may need to chase services repeatedly to get them to take action; the Child Maintenance Service came up often as an example of this. Or they may need to remind the council of their housing rights or challenge DWP on incorrect benefit decisions.

All these efforts can take a toll, costing survivors time, wellbeing and in some cases their ability to stay in paid employment.

3. Leaving is especially unaffordable for some

We based our estimates of costs and support on a ‘typical’ survivor journey. But there are many reasons why a survivor’s costs may be higher, such as:

having more children,
living in an area with high housing costs,
needing a car or taxis to get around due to a disability.

Many survivors are also prevented from accessing support, for example due to their immigration status. Survivors subject to a ‘no recourse to public funds’ condition would not be eligible for benefits and often face an impossible deficit, with insufficient support from the state.  

What needs to change?

For survivors to be able to access safety, rebuild their lives and contribute to the economy, they need a safety net which works. A safety net which is domestic abuse informed, accessible and sufficient.  

The current deficit is not inevitable; targeted policy changes could go a long way to reducing it. We are calling on the Government to take action to ensure survivors can flee and stay fled.  

See our summary and report for our full recommendations and further information.  

The post What it costs to flee abuse and stay safe appeared first on Women’s Aid.

Why are so many referrals into refuge unsuccessful?

Chloe Browning — Mon, 29 Jul 2024 09:03:02 +0000

Why are so many referrals into refuge unsuccessful?

On Track is Women’s Aid’s bespoke case management and outcomes monitoring system and is currently used by over 100 local domestic services. Where organisations and service users’ consent, the data collected by keyworkers contributes to a national dataset held by the research team at Women’s Aid. Thanks to our member services and other domestic abuse services using the system, the On Track national dataset is the largest dataset in England on the experiences of survivors accessing domestic abuse services. We also want to thank On Track user organisations, their key workers, and their clients for their immense contribution to our national dataset, enabling us to put the lived experiences of survivors at the heart of our work.

Since 2016 we have used On Track data to report on the national demand for refuge services in our Annual Audit reports which have consistently shown that over 60.0% of referrals into refuge services are unsuccessful in each financial year. To investigate why this figure is so high, we conducted analysis using On Track referrals data from 62 refuges across England in the financial year 2022-23.

We found three most common reasons why referrals were unsuccessful:

The refuge did not have the capacity to support the client / survivor: 40.6% of unsuccessful referrals. This includes when the refuge did not have an available bedspace or when a service did not have the resources to meet the needs of the survivor.
The client / survivor did not accept the refuge space: 35.4% unsuccessful referrals. When someone is still experiencing domestic abuse, entering a refuge is complicated and dangerous leading to situations where survivors are prevented from accessing support services, or changing their mind about accessing support. There are also situations where survivors will decline support when it because the location of the refuge is too close to the perpetrator’s residence, the location of the refuge would cause disruption to their caring responsibilities, or because they are unable to afford the refuge space.
An inappropriate referral was made on behalf of a client / survivor: 18.0% unsuccessful referrals. These include referrals which were made on behalf of someone not experiencing domestic abuse, referrals with insufficient information recorded, or instances where the client could be supported more appropriately by a partner agency.

We also saw that capacity is not just about bedspaces. Included in the 40.6% of unsuccessful referrals which were rejected due to the service lacking in capacity, 17.5% of unsuccessful referrals were rejected because the refuge was unable to meet the specific support need(s) of the survivor. Despite a significant number of survivors who access refuge requiring specialist service provision, we saw that refuge services often don’t have the capacity or resources to accommodation additional support needs. This is a significant reason why referrals into refuges are unsuccessful, showing that women with additional support needs still face significant barriers to accessing safety.

In order to reduce the number of unsuccessful referrals and ensure refuge services are resourced to support all women accessing their services and provide the specialist service provision necessary, we are calling on the government to increase long-term and sustainable funding for specialist refuge services by investing £427 million per year, as a minimum, to fund specialist women-led and ‘by and for’ domestic abuse services in England.

The briefing also shows that current levels of service provision are not currently meeting need. Local authorities need to regularly conduct needs assessments, listen to the insights provide by the needs assessment and from specialist domestic abuse services to ensure they are commissioning the correct provision to support the survivors in their local area.

The post Why are so many referrals into refuge unsuccessful? appeared first on Women’s Aid.

An insight into the unique value that specialist domestic abuse services provide to survivors and society

Chloe Browning — Thu, 28 Mar 2024 09:27:58 +0000

An insight into the unique value that specialist domestic abuse services provide to survivors and society

By Phoebe Nicholson-Pallett, Research and Evaluation Officer

As part of our Annual Audit 2024, Women’s Aid heard from 104 domestic abuse organisations [1], with the aim of better understanding the unique value that specialist services offer to survivors of abuse, including children, as well as to local communities and society. This includes specialist ‘By & For’ services that are run by and for particular groups of marginalised women. We found that specialist domestic abuse services work to continually improve understandings of and responses to domestic abuse across society, keeping communities safe and saving money. They advocate for survivors to receive the holistic and longer-term support they need to recover and live free from control and abuse. Specialist services understand their local communities and seek to improve the safety of their communities through prevention, awareness, and education. All the while these services must continually adapt to meet new challenges and complex societal and often political issues.

Our research showed that specialist services are doing this in five main ways:

By recognising the diversity of survivors and their experiences

“We have been able to provide services by-and-for the Latin American and BME community in their preferred language which has proven to make a big impact in the service users, 98% of our users in 22/23 state that it made a difference to receive the service in a Latin American and BME women’s organisation.” – Annual Survey, 2023

“We’re there from beginning to whenever it needs to end, or not end – it’s open. It’s what women and girls told us that they needed – they come in and they tell their story once and we’re with them until they decide, “right. That’s it. I’m off now”. […] We don’t see repeat victimisation like we used to in some of the more rigid services where you come in at one end and you get that bit of support and then off you go.” – Interview, 2023.

By engaging survivors in the community

“Our service has helped so many women and families feel safe, cared for, listened to and supported […] I think not only have we empowered our survivors to move on and up we also helped the wider community by way of some survivors volunteering and some taking up meaningful employment opportunities.” – Annual Survey, 2023.

By identifying gaps and filling them

“We’ve just got for this year a Safer Ageing Domestic Abuse Advisor because one of the things that was identified in [our] assessment was that older people were suffering from domestic abuse but not reaching out.” – Interview, 2023.

Ensuring survivors receive the support they are entitled to from statutory services

“We identified an increase in referrals where mental wellbeing was the primary support need and those referrals were experiencing long waiting times for mental health support so were looking for something else to bridge the gap.” – Annual Survey, 2023.

“Not having a criminal justice system that works for women subject to Domestic Abuse. This increases risk for women and adds pressure to Domestic Abuse services.” – Annual Survey, 2023.

By sharing knowledge and expertise

“We offer training to professionals, and group work to survivors and their children. We are visible as a reputable and passionate charity in our local community and participate in community events. We offer a counselling service to those recovering, and work in partnership with local agencies to offer excellent service provision that best meets the needs of the community.” – Annual Survey, 2023.

“We have been influencing the narratives around DA that blame victims and fail to hold perpetrators responsible for abuse. We are now seeing the impact of this […] with many lead agencies talking about the importance of language used and embedding responses that challenge victim blaming.” – Annual Survey, 2023.

We know that specialist domestic abuse services are doing far more than responding to the immediate or short-term needs of survivors and their children. They are saving lives, restoring hope, working to ensure that survivors receive the representation and responses from statutory services and support they are entitled to.

It is crucial, therefore that we continue to see, recognise, and amplify the value of these vital services, and enable them to adopt strategies to ensure their long-term survival and sustainability.

Read the full report here: The Domestic Abuse Report 2024: The Annual Audit

References:

[1] Running 188 service entries on Routes to Support. Of these 104 organisations, 80 ran refuge services (21 indicated that they did not, and three did not respond to the question) and 76 provided community-based services (15 indicated that they did not, and 13 did not respond to this question).

The post An insight into the unique value that specialist domestic abuse services provide to survivors and society appeared first on Women’s Aid.

Why the definition of refuge matters

Chloe Browning — Wed, 10 Jan 2024 10:47:46 +0000

To read the report by the ONS in full click here.

To read Women’s Aid’s analysis of the findings click here.

Why the definition of refuge matters

Sarika Seshadri, Head of Research and Evaluation

“For those three weeks, I didn’t eat anything. I was breastfeeding. And it was COVID, and the hotel didn’t give too much, just gave a cereal, a juice, and a cake. That was all my food for three weeks, while I was breastfeeding. And I didn’t have money to buy anything”.

(Multiple types of TSA, Other ethnic group)

The report “Women survivors of domestic abuse and their lived experiences of temporary safe accommodation in England: January to June 2023” from the ONS explores the experiences of women accessing different forms of temporary accommodation. Centering women’s voices, it sheds important light on what it is actually like to flee domestic abuse. From worrying about not being able to safely return to pay back some borrowed money for a train fare, to not being able to feed yourself or your children, the stories that the women shared bring home the real and daily challenges women face in escaping domestic abuse. Whilst each woman’s experience is different, the stories here reflect the critical difference that specialist support can make, whilst also being a testament to the strength and resilience of the women themselves.

What the stories also show is the difference between a refuge service, including specialist ‘by and for’ refuge services, and other types of temporary accommodation, which may not even be safe. Women’s Aid defines a refuge service as a type of safe accommodation dedicated for survivors of domestic abuse that includes a specific programme of support. This differs from other forms of accommodation, which we know from our work on our No Woman Turned Away project, are often unsuitable and dangerous for women fleeing domestic abuse.

This report highlights this difference, showing that in other forms of temporary accommodation, women and their children were often unable to access even basic rights such as food, water, clothing, bedding or space to sleep. Women were frightened for their safety, and the safety of their children. They struggled to navigate complex systems to access services, felt isolated and depressed and struggled to secure the resources they needed to move on. Despite the fact that children are now recognised in law, under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, as victims in their own right, women were unable to secure support for their traumatised children.

“We’re just living in one small room, with … one double bed. So, we have to share a bed. He sometimes didn’t like me to sleep with him… I told the council, ‘This is the situation. It’s very narrow, and I don’t know what to do’… They were like, ‘You have to make him sleep on the floor, and you sleep on the bed.’…How can I do that? He’s a disabled child. He’s autistic. How can I make him sleep on the floor, while I’m on the bed?”

(Multiple types of TSA, Other ethnic group)

Even those women who had accessed refuge, reported that they were concerned about staff who were overworked and overstretched, and some refuges didn’t offer the quality or specialism of service that women fleeing domestic abuse desperately need.

“As much as women have help, particularly speaking for myself, you have the support, you have your key worker that comes to see you every week, but one side that I thought was not looked … into is people’s mental health … accessing even mental help was very difficult … Because I felt suicidal a lot. But my key worker was very good, she was really brilliant. She made loads and loads of referrals.”.

(Refuge, Black African)

This quote supports the findings from a recent report from Imkaan and the Centre for Women’s Justice on the suicides and homicides of Black and minoritised women, that specialist support, and in particular support provided by ‘by and for’ services, can potentially be the difference between life and death. Women fleeing domestic abuse need a well-funded, sustainable and high-quality network of specialist refuge services, including ‘by and for’ refuge services, that can support them and their children to recover, move on and live free from abuse.

Back to Safe Blog

The post Why the definition of refuge matters appeared first on Women’s Aid.

Joint letter in response to racist attack on Selma Taha, CEO of Southall Black Sisters

Alicia Brooks — Fri, 20 Oct 2023 09:38:40 +0000

Joint letter in response to racist attack on Selma Taha, CEO of Southall Black Sisters

Dear Commissioner

We are writing in solidarity with and support of Selma Taha, CEO of Southall Black Sisters, following the sickening racist abuse she experienced on the 29th September 2023.

We are horrified at this vile racist attack and disgusted that one of our colleagues was subject to this hatred. It is deplorable that a Metropolitan Police Officer stood by and failed to de-escalate the situation, intervene and do their duty.

We are writing to you in our full support of Southall Black Sister’s call for accountability, and to demand appropriate action is taken with regards to the attacker and the police officer. We continue to see a chasm between the Met’s commitments to culture change and the institutional racism and misogyny which continue to undermine safety and justice for Black and minoritised women.

We look forward to hearing from you as to how you will address this chasm.

Yours sincerely,

Farah Nazeer, CEO, Women’s Aid Federation of England

Andrea Simon, Director, End Violence Against Women Coalition

Harriet Wistrich, Solicitor and Director, Centre for Women’s Justice

Sue Coleman, CEO, West Mercia Women’s Aid

Paula Nolan, CEO, Liverpool Domestic Abuse Service

Elaine Langshaw, CEO, Newcastle Women’s Aid

Shaminder Ubhi, Director, Ashiana Network

Sara Britnell, CEO, Wycombe Women’s Aid

Vicky Bunnage, CEO, Crossroads Derbyshire

Ursula Lindenberg, CEO, VOICES

Hayley Brewer, Manager, Independent Choices Greater Manchester

Shigufta Khan, CEO, The Wish Centre

Jo Gough, CEO, RISE

Yasmin Khan, Director, The Halo Project

Rebecca Radcliffe, Director, South Liverpool Domestic Abuse Services

Surwat Sohail, CEO, Roshni

Sawsan Salim, Director, Kurdish and Middle Eastern Women’s Organisation (KMEWO)

Jan Tasker, Co-CEO, Collaborative Women UK

Aneta Mackell, CEO, Opoka,

Hannah Ashford, CEO, North Devon Against Domestic Abuse (NDADA)

Valerie Lolomari, CEO, Women of Grace UK

Saskia Lightburn-Ritchie, CEO, MyCWA

Sarah Dagley, CEO, NIDAS

Nik Peasgood, CEO, Leeds Women’s Aid

Sarah Hill, CEO, IDAS

Yasmin Khan, CEO, Staying Put

Suzanne Jacob, CEO, SafeLives

Elaine Yates, CEO, Coventry Haven

Nicky Harkin and Jodie Woodward, Co-Chairs, Rape Crisis England & Wales

Colette Byrne, CEO, Broxtowe Women’s Project

Kathryn Hinchliff, CEO, Pennine Domestic Abuse Partnership

Constanze Sen, CEO, Bromley & Croydon Women’s Aid

Claire Johnson, CEO, Bexley Women’s Aid

Mary Wakeham, CEO, Refuge4Pets

Heidi Riedel, CEO, Woman’s Trust

Caroline Phansi, CEO, Contento Social Homes

Shonagh Dillon, CEO, Aurora New Dawn

Charlotte Kneer, CEO, I Choose Freedom

Anna Walsh, CEO, CHADD

Carey Philpott, CEO, SATEDA

Richinda Taylor, CEO. EVA Women’s Aid

Beverley Jones, Chief Executive, Next Chapter

Souad Talsi, Interim CEO, Al-Hasaniya Morroccan Women’s Project,

Hollie Venn, Chief Executive, Sheffield Women’s Aid

Denise March-Palmer, Interim CEO, Stepping Stones Luton

Tori O’Callaghan-Lake, CEO, Springfield Domestic Abuse Support Service

Donna Cullimore, CEO, Finding freedom from abuse

Angie Herrera, Director, Latin American Women’s Aid

Niki Scordi, Chief Executive, Advance

Samantha Fisher, CEO, Trafford Domestic Abuse Services

Sharon Howard, CEO, Safe in Sussex

Salma Ali, Manager, Preston Domestic Violence Services

Priya Chopra, Chief Executive, Saheli

Mandy Green, Head of Services, Nottinghamshire Women’s Aid

Gaby Price, CEO, Women’s Aid in Luton

Angie Stewart, CEO, Cambridge Women’s Aid

Charlotte Almond, Chief Executive, Staffordshire Women’s Aid

Gail Heath, CEO, Pankhurst Trust and Manchester Women’s Aid

Debbie Hughes, Chief Executive, Living Without Abuse

Claire Lambon, CEO, Stop Domestic Abuse

Sophie McGoff, CEO, Women’s Aid Leicestershire

Hannah Ashford, CEO, North Devon Against Domestic Abuse

Maureen Connolly, CEO, Birmingham and Solihull Women’s Aid

Fran Ellis, CEO, Rising Sun Kent

Sue Burke, CEO, MK-Act Domestic Abuse Intervention Services

Sahdaish Pall, CEO, Sikh Women’s Aid Nicola Miller, Chief Executive, The Dash Charity,

Jodie Woodward, Chief Executive, NIA

Gisela Valle, Executive Director, Latin American Women’s Rights Service

Estelle du Boulay, Director, Rights of Women

Jasmine Mohammad, Director, Safety4Sisters

Gurpreet Virdee, CEO, Women and Girls Network

Diana Nammi, Executive Director, IKWRO

Leni Morris, CEO, Galop

Medina Johnson, Chief Executive, IRISi

Dhriti Suresh Eapen, Senior Project Manager, AVA

Jo Todd, CEO, Respect

Suky Bhaker, CEO, Suzy Lamplugh Trust

Janet Dalrymple, CEO, Safer Places

Nahar Choudhury, CEO, Solace

Tania Woodgate, CEO, Changing Pathways

Elizabeth Matthews, CEO, West Cornwall Women’s Aid

Jatinder Chana, CEO, Asha Projects

Ellen Miller, CEO, Refuge

Stephanie Grimshaw, Head of Policy and Public Affairs, Welsh Women’s Aid

Leyla Buran, Campaigns & Policy Manager, White Ribbon UK

Natasha Rattu, Executive Director, Karma Nirvana

Kyla Kirkpatrick, Director, The Drive Partnership

Nicola Sharp-Jeffs, CEO, Surviving Economic Abuse

Karen Hague, CEO, Vida Sheffield

Ruth Davany, CEO, Behind Closed Doors

Caroline Grant, CEO, The First Step

Cath Jago, CEO, South West Surrey Domestic Abuse Service

Monica Tuohy, Interim CEO, Jewish Women’s Aid

Alix Simpson, CEO, Berkshire Women’s Aid

The post Joint letter in response to racist attack on Selma Taha, CEO of Southall Black Sisters appeared first on Women’s Aid.

The National Certificate in ‘Tackling & Preventing Domestic Abuse’

Chloe Browning — Tue, 20 Jun 2023 11:23:21 +0000

The National Certificate in ‘Tackling & Preventing Domestic Abuse’

Looking for a qualification that is suitable for working in the domestic abuse sector? Then look no further. The National Certificate in ‘Tackling & Preventing Domestic Abuse’ is aimed at those working in the sector supporting women and children who are/have experienced domestic abuse. The qualification will add to your knowledge and skill set, enabling you to practice in a variety of roles, such as the IDVA role.

The qualification is delivered over ten days, face to face and remotely and uses a variety of robust assessment methods to suit different learning styles, ensuring that you get the best experience out of your learning.

To find out more, please email: training@womensaid.org.uk

The post The National Certificate in ‘Tackling & Preventing Domestic Abuse’ appeared first on Women’s Aid.

New: Bystander training

Jess Milton — Fri, 05 May 2023 12:44:31 +0000

New: Bystander training

Have you ever wondered why people witness abuse, aggression, violence etc… in public places and don’t respond to help. Do you want your business or community to know how to do this safely?

The purpose of bystander training

Bystander intervention is built on the concept that we can all play a role in creating safe spaces for each other when we witness our friends/colleagues/strangers facing bias, discrimination, sexual and other types of harassment/violence.

There are ways in which you can interrupt, collaborate with others, or report and record such behaviour safely. You don’t have to act alone.

This training will increase your awareness of the types of abuse people may face, what an active bystander is and how to use the different Hollaback methods (Direct, Distract, Delay, Delegate, Document) to be an active bystander.

By becoming an active bystander, you can prevent assault in its many forms among people of all ages. Our Bystander programme is offered in either a remote or face-to-face setting and will give attendees confidence to become an active bystander by learning what that means, and what approach suits them.

Want to know more, either contact us to arrange a brief meeting to discuss, or fill in our training request form.

The post New: Bystander training appeared first on Women’s Aid.

The Victims’ Bill: Women’s Aid comments

Chloe Browning — Tue, 24 Jan 2023 09:30:20 +0000

The Victims’ Bill: Women’s Aid comments

The Government published its Draft Victims’ Bill in May 2022 as part of the Conservative Party’s commitment to improving support for victims in the criminal justice system.

On 19^th January 2023, the Government issued its response to the Justice Select Committee’s pre-legislative scrutiny of the draft Victims’ Bill, which Women’s Aid responded to in a statement published here. In its response, the Government rejected many of the recommendations made by Women’s Aid and endorsed by the Justice Select Committee that would have made a real difference in the experiences of survivors of domestic abuse, which are set out below. This raises serious concerns about the effectiveness of the Bill in ensuring survivors of domestic abuse have a better experience of the criminal justice system and can access timely support from specialist domestic abuse services.

Background to the Victims’ Bill

The Conservative Party has committed to introducing a Victims’ Law at the last three General Elections. In late 2021, the Ministry of Justice published its proposals for this alongside a consultation, to which Women’s Aid submitted a response.

As part of our research, Women’s Aid spoke with survivors of domestic abuse to better understand their thoughts on the Government’s proposals for Women’s Aid to feedback to the Ministry of Justice. Our findings were stark: not a single survivor was aware of the existence of the Victims’ Code, which sets out their fundamental rights as victims and the standard of support they should receive.

The Government published their response to the consultation in May 2022, alongside a Draft Victims’ Bill. The Justice Select Committee, which is responsible for examining the work of the Ministry of Justice, responded to this by launching an inquiry to scrutinise the Bill (called ‘pre-legislative scrutiny’). Women’s Aid also fed into this process by submitting written evidence to the Committee, which published its pre-legislative scrutiny report in September 2022. This blog explores the recommendations made by the Justice Select Committee in their report on how the draft Bill can be improved to ensure it fulfils its aim of putting victims at the centre of the criminal justice system and ensuring all victims are able to access better support services, and how the Government has responded to these.

The Justice Select Committee’s pre-legislative scrutiny report

The Justice Select Committee stated in its report that the Bill “won’t achieve the Government’s aims”. The report also echoes many of Women’s Aid’s recommendations, which we welcomed.

Call to increase funding

The Bill currently places a duty on key agencies, such as local authorities and health bodies, to work together when commissioning community-based services, but does not attach any funding to these services. The Committee therefore recommended strengthening this duty through multi-year funding, reflecting the calls Women’s Aid has repeatedly made alongside others in the violence against women and girls (VAWG) sector.

Community-based services – services delivered to survivors in the community as opposed to in refuges, including advocacy, counselling, and therapeutic support – are essential in supporting survivors of domestic abuse. In 2021-22, these services supported an estimated 131,094 women and 170,422 children in England. However, 43.2% of local domestic abuse services which responded to Women’s Aid’s Annual Survey in 2022 confirmed they were running community-based services without dedicated funding. It’s important the Victims’ Bill addresses this issue and ensures services which provide life-saving support to survivors, like Women’s Aid’s member services across the country, do not have to do so on a shoestring budget.

The Committee also noted the need to increase victims’ awareness of their rights through the Victims’ Code and to shift the burden of responsibility for claiming rights away from survivors and onto criminal justice agencies. This would require additional funding from the Ministry of Justice to expand the capacity of victim support services who already face unmanageable referral levels and caseloads. As part of this funding, the Committee also echoed calls made by Women’s Aid for the Government to put in place national multi-year ringfenced funding for specialist support services. This funding should include a separate pot for ‘by and for’ services, which are designed and delivered by and for people who are minoritised (including race, disability, sexual orientation, transgender identity, religion or age) and are rooted in the communities they serve.

Further recommendations

In the report, the Committee issued several further recommendations to the Government which mirror those made by Women’s Aid. The Government has rejected most of these measures, including:

Introducing a complete firewall for migrant victims and witnesses to better protect those with insecure immigration status. A firewall would mean that victims’ and witnesses’ data cannot be shared by the police with Immigration Enforcement, allowing those with insecure immigration status to report crimes safely.
Not restricting entitlements provided under the Victims’ Code due to immigration status, so everyone can access justice.
Strengthening the role of the Victims’ Commissioner and formalising relationships between the Commissioner, Police and Crime Commissioners, and the Inspectorates to allow for the escalation of concerns raised at a local level and to enforce their compliance with the Victims’ Code.
Ensuring that the provision of victim support services is available to all victims, even those who don’t engage with the criminal justice system.
Guaranteeing that measures to support victims set out in the Victims’ Bill and Code are not diminished by reforms to the Human Rights Act.

Women’s Aid and the Committee also highlighted the need to ensure victims are aware of their rights under the Victims’ Code, and for the collection of granular demographic data by criminal justice bodies on victims supported by the Code. The Government has largely accepted these recommendations, which Women’s Aid welcomes. However, there is a long way to go before this Bill can truly make a difference to the lives of survivors of domestic abuse.

Women’s Aid’s recommendations

In addition to the recommendations accepted by the Justice Select Committee, Women’s Aid is calling for further changes to strengthen the Victims’ Bill, including on the Victims’ Code, the way in which services are commissioned and on defining the role of advocates.

Victims’ Code

Women’s Aid is calling for all victims to be provided with the same point of contact throughout their journey in the criminal justice system to improve the service received. Building on the need to ensure victims are aware of their rights under the Victims’ Code, the accessibility of the Code must also be improved by considering the needs of Deaf and disabled survivors and by addressing language barriers. The improvement of data collection on victims supported by the Code is also imperative to monitor how well this is serving victims and to improve the accountability of criminal justice agencies in delivering the Code.

Commissioning of services

Further to the calls for multi-year funding for community-based services, Women’s Aid is recommending the creation of an oversight mechanism to monitor the commissioning of services led ‘by and for’ minoritised women, which face some of the greatest challenges to accessing vital funding. The duty to collaborate when commissioning community-based support services should also be expanded to encourage cross-boundary collaboration, particularly to support Black and minoritised women in accessing appropriate ‘by and for’ services as needed outside their local area.

Role of advocates

Women’s Aid welcomes the Committee’s recognition of our concerns about creating a statutory definition of Independent Domestic Violence Advocates (IDVAs), who work with victims of domestic abuse to understand their experiences and their risk of ongoing harm. Defining IDVAs risks creating a one-size-fits-all approach and could lead to the decommissioning of specialist advocacy and wraparound support that specialist services provide outside of the IDVA model. We are therefore cautioning against establishing a formal definition of an IDVA, and recommending that the Government hold discussions with specialist ‘by and for’ domestic abuse services as part of these deliberations.

Next steps

Whilst Women’s Aid welcomes improvements to the Victims’ Code as a step towards criminal justice agencies taking a victim-centred approach – which includes a duty on the Crown Prosecution Service to meet victims in certain cases before a hearing takes place – we remain concerned that the draft Bill fails to make enough of a real difference for survivors of domestic abuse.

We are especially concerned by the proposal to create a statutory definition of an IDVA, as well as the lack of a statutory commitment to provide sustainable, multi-year funding for community-based services.

We will therefore continue to advocate for revisions to the Bill to address these issues and ensure that survivors of domestic abuse receive the best support possible in their journey out of abusive relationships as well as through the criminal justice system.

The Government has now responded to the Committee’s report, and the Victims’ Bill is currently expected to be introduced in the House of Commons by the Government in Spring 2023.

The post The Victims’ Bill: Women’s Aid comments appeared first on Women’s Aid.

KvK – a retreat from progress in the family courts?

Chloe Browning — Fri, 20 Jan 2023 12:59:10 +0000

KvK – a retreat from progress in the family courts?

In June 2020 the Ministry of Justice published the Harm Panel Report, following an inquiry into risks of harm and the family courts in England and Wales. The report identified deep-seated, systemic problems with how domestic abuse is responded to in family court proceedings. Courts and professionals were found to be prioritising contact over children’s and non-abusive parents’ safety. Despite attempts by senior judiciary and policy makers, over the past 20 years, to improve family court responses to domestic abuse, these issues have continued.

Practice Direction 12J (PD12J) was implemented in 2008, which set out what a court should do when allegations of domestic abuse are raised in a child arrangements (contact) case. Research found serious shortcomings in its implementation and deep-rooted systemic barriers to achieving meaningful cultural change, leading to a continuous ‘cycle of failure’. These include a strong pro-contact culture and narrow understandings of domestic abuse by courts and professionals which leads to domestic abuse being marginalised, downgraded and ignored in child contact cases at the expense of safeguarding and welfare. There is a perception in many courts, and by many professionals, that domestic abuse is only ‘relevant’ to decisions relating to the welfare of the child when it involves recent incidents of very severe physical violence. This has led to fact-finding hearings (where the court decides whether allegations are true) being held in only a small proportion of domestic abuse cases, with allegations not considered sufficiently recent or serious ‘swept under the carpet’. If fact-finding hearings are held, victims can experience systematic barriers to proving the abuse, including women’s experiences not being believed and stereotypical beliefs on ‘typical’ victims and victim behaviour. Even where abuse is proved at fact-finding hearings, it is not often factored into decisions about child contact. Respondents to the Harm Panel felt there was little difference in the orders made between cases that did and did not feature domestic abuse, with courts simply treating the case as if domestic abuse was of no continuing relevance.

Challenging outdated attitudes towards abuse

In March 2021 the Court of Appeal published a judgment in the case of Re H-N and others [2021] EWCA Civ 448 on four joined family court cases, all of which involved allegations of domestic abuse. The mothers had experienced dismissive attitudes and minimisation of the domestic abuse and sexual violence by the trial judges. Three of the four appeals were upheld, with the Court of Appeal agreeing that the cases had been dealt with poorly.

The Court of Appeal noted that the approach requiring victims to provide evidence of physical injury was “wholly outdated” [23], as are approaches which respond to domestic abuse as purely a matter between the adults and as though it is irrelevant to the child’s welfare [24]. The Court of Appeal emphasised that incidents of abuse “, may be part of a wider pattern of abuse or controlling or coercive behaviour” [27], which is relevant to the risk of future harm, is never just ‘in the past’, and that a “pattern of abusive behaviour is as relevant to the child as to the adult victim.” [31] Accordingly, the Court of Appeal stated that understanding saw coercive and controlling behaviour should be the “the primary question” in child contact cases involving domestic abuse. [51] However, the Court of Appeal also expressed the view that “not every case requires a fact-finding hearing even where domestic abuse is alleged” [8], highlighting the resource implications of increasing the number and length of fact-finding hearings.

There is tension in the Re H-N case between restricting the need for fact-finding hearings, and ensuring robust assessments of the risk of coercive control. The concern is that without a full understanding of domestic abuse and a real shift away from the pro-contact culture, resource constraints will come before factually-based risk assessment and the ‘cycle of failure’ will persist. This concern was confirmed in the case of K v K two years later.

Challenges to meaningful change

In K v K [2022] a district judge made findings against the father, including rape and controlling behaviour of the mother and physical abuse of the children. Cafcass had recommended there should be no further direct contact between the children and their father. On the father’s appeal to the High Court, the findings were upheld. However, the Court of Appeal then found that the finding of rape was unsafe and the case should be remitted to a more senior family court judge for consideration of whether a fact-finding hearing was necessary. This raises concerns about how allegations of rape are dealt with in family court proceedings. There is no definition of rape and consent in documentation applicable to family court proceedings. The Court of Appeal in H-N made clear that the criminal concepts of rape and consent should not apply in family court proceedings. It is therefore unclear what test a complainant must meet in order to prove their allegations which is, arguably, in breach of their rights under Articles 6, 8 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. A further concern is the use of rape tropes and stereotypes, such as how a woman would or should behave in an abusive relationship. Additionally, unlike the criminal law, there are no safeguards in family law proceedings to prevent a complainant’s sexual history being used to discredit her.

The Court of Appeal also said that the parties should first have participated in a Mediation, Information and Assessment Meeting (MIAM) before going to court, despite mediation being inappropriate in cases involving allegations of domestic abuse. The judgment also indicated a worrying understanding of how coercion and control impact children. The trial judge had found that the father’s behaviour “would have been very frightening for the children” who, he said, had suffered harm from witnessing the abuse of their mother. The Court of Appeal said an analysis of why the children would have found this behaviour “very frightening” was needed.

The ‘key principles’ set out by the Court of Appeal were designed to limit the number of fact-finding hearings by ensuring that MIAMs are not bypassed without a ‘genuine reason’, and careful consideration of whether a fact-finding hearing is ‘necessary and proportionate’. A similar view is contained in judicial Guidance published in May 2022 which states: “there is a time and a place to determine allegations of domestic abuse, but it may not be in your court. Unless it will be relevant to, and necessary for, your decision regarding the welfare of the child, do not allow the court to be used to litigate such allegations.”

The family courts are facing huge resource constraints, and the difficulties of ensuring that the fact-finding exercise can be undertaken in this context cannot be underestimated. However, it is extremely concerning that lack of resources and poor understanding of domestic abuse appear to be leading a retreat from the positive progress seen in H-N and recommended by the Harm Panel report. Although the Court of Appeal in H-N confirmed that training for judges in rape, domestic abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour is mandatory, it remains unclear what training is provided. Judicial training needs to go further than outlining the basic principles of domestic abuse and should include a focus on the dynamics of memory and trauma to increase understanding of how witnesses and parties present when they have sustained abuse. Two years after the Harm Panel, a report by Women’s Aid found that while some family court professionals’ understanding of coercive control is beginning to improve, the impact of coercive control on victims, and the ways it is used by perpetrators post-separation are still not fully understood, with the pro-contact culture still a “key driving factor” in child contact cases.

Finally, a significant concern is the use of ‘parental alienation’ as a tactic to undermine allegations of domestic abuse, an argument that was raised by the father in the Court of Appeal in K v K.

Parental alienation is not recognised as a medical disorder by the WHO, NICE or under the DSM. There is growing evidence that parental alienation is often counter-alleged by fathers when mothers allege domestic abuse. We are aware of cases in which primary carer mothers have been found to have ‘alienated’ their children from the father, and the children have then been removed from mothers and either placed in foster care or in the care of the father. In such cases, she may be allowed no contact with the children for 90 days or ever again. In contrast, in most cases of proven domestic abuse, contact between the child and perpetrator continues. A further concern is the use of ‘parental alienation experts’, an industry that continues to grow and profit. The President of the Family Division is currently reviewing the use of unregulated experts in family court cases.

We continue to push for progress. In August 2022 Dr Proudman succeeded in an appeal in which the Judge failed to undertake a fact-finding hearing on the mother’s allegations of abuse (CM v IP [2022]). We are also currently awaiting the outcome of the Pathfinder Projects being piloted in North Wales and Dorset, which aim to develop alternatives to the adversarial process to reduce the trauma to victims of domestic abuse and ensure that the voice of the child is heard. Until then, however, it is imperative that the current system does not resolve resource constraints by compromising or bypassing fact findings and consequently, effective risk assessment and the safety and welfare of children and adult victims.

Back to Safe Blog

The post KvK – a retreat from progress in the family courts? appeared first on Women’s Aid.

The cost of living crisis is pushing domestic abuse services to breaking point

Chloe Browning — Wed, 04 Jan 2023 09:07:57 +0000

The cost of living crisis is pushing domestic abuse services to breaking point

Women’s Aid and ITV have highlighted this week that the cost of living crisis is having a significant effect on specialist support services working with survivors of domestic abuse. New research from Women’s Aid has revealed the impact of the crisis on services and some of our members have shared their experiences with ITV.

You can watch the ITV piece here.

Nearly every member (96%) said they were experiencing at least one of the following financial issues: increased rent for premises, other increased costs (e.g. food or supplies), funding not rising in line with costs or another financial issue.
More than half of Women’s Aid members (59%) told us they were using their charitable reserves to cope with the crisis.
Almost three-quarters (73%) said they had staff who were experiencing financial hardship, with one in five (20%) saying they had staff who were using foodbanks.
Only five members (10%) had been able to access help with their refuge energy bills.
The majority of members are experiencing staffing issues, with 80% struggling to recruit for vacant roles at the salaries they can pay.
Shockingly, many members (67%) said if this crisis continues without intervention, it would stop them from supporting survivors – either turning them away from existing support, reducing the support available or closing all together in 5 cases. This rose to 85% of services run by and for Black and minoritised women.

Specialist domestic abuse services such as Women’s Aid members are a vital lifeline for survivors, providing safety and support for women to recover and rebuild their lives after their experiences of abuse. In summer 2022, our survey of domestic abuse survivors found that the cost of living crisis was making it even harder for women to escape domestic abuse. At a time when their life saving specialist services were especially needed, our members told us they were also feeling a severe impact from the rising cost of living.

We know, and Women’s Aid research has found, that the domestic abuse support sector is facing an ongoing funding crisis. The recent Covid-19 pandemic presented huge challenges to domestic abuse services and as the cost of living crisis has intensified this winter, it has added to the pressures on these already stretched services. To understand members’ experiences of this further crisis and to find out what impact it is having on their capacity to support survivors, the Women’s Aid research team issued a survey in November 2022. The full results of our survey can be seen in this document.

Local support services are facing financial challenges due to the crisis

Nearly all of the specialist frontline services who responded to the survey (96%) told us they were facing a financial issue related to the crisis. With the majority (78%) reporting that their funding was not rising in line with the increased costs they are seeing, member services were looking for ways to cut costs and having to scale back on the extra ‘added value’ support they deliver alongside their core services, such as care packages for survivors or peer group work programmes. Over half (59%) were having to use their charitable reserves to cope, which is not sustainable in the long-term.

“Our reserves can only be spent once, when they’re gone that will be the end of any support we can give to staff and survivors…”

Staff are struggling with the crisis, creating additional challenges for services in delivering support to survivors

Local authority funding contracts for domestic abuse support does not always cover the full cost of delivering the service. Often services rely on unsustainable and short-term funding pots to support their work, leaving domestic abuse services under-resourced and restricted in what they can pay their staff. With low salaries in the sector and the cost of living soaring, almost three-quarters of the specialist support services responding (73%) said they had staff who are experiencing financial hardship. One in five (20%) had staff who were using foodbanks.

Low salaries mean passionate and experienced staff are making the difficult choice to leave for higher paid roles elsewhere in order to support themselves and their families. The majority of the specialist domestic abuse support services responding (80%) were struggling to recruit for vacant roles at the salaries they can pay. Member services told us they were concerned these issues were affecting the quality of the services they could deliver to survivors, with short-staffed services and heavy workloads leading to burnout and affecting the wellbeing of existing staff.

“We cannot keep up with increasing demand and staff are working non-stop and beyond working hours to support women. This is leading to burnout. Staff vacancies means that staff are doing more for longer”

Domestic abuse support services are feeling the impact of pressures on public services

The impacts of the cost of living crisis are far-reaching and services in other public services are also feeling the effects. The vast majority of Women’s Aid member services responding (92%) said they were seeing an increase in delays or difficulties accessing services in at least one other sector. This is leading to longer stays in refuge as survivors struggle to secure move-on housing or require support over longer periods of time, adding to demands on services and reducing the number of refuge places they can make available.

“It’s prolonging progress, positive outcomes and recovery, lives are on hold.”

Support services have not been widely able to access support around the crisis

The majority of specialist support services responding have not been able to access government support schemes to help with their refuge energy bills. These schemes are not straightforward to access for communal buildings, which is how utilities in refuge services are often managed. Just five (10%) of the services responding to our survey, said they had successfully been able to access energy support for their refuge and some were unaware that support was even available to them.

“Our bills are set to soar and the additional cost of funding these bills takes away money from other areas such as staff.”

Specialist services for Black and minoritised women are particularly feeling the impact of the crisis

The survey showed these challenges were having a disproportionate effect on specialist services run ‘by and for’ Black and minoritised women. For example, specialist services for Black and minoritised women were more likely to report issues recruiting staff and more than half (54%) said they had not been able to provide any cost of living pay increases to staff, compared with just under one-third (28%) of all services. More of these specialist services reported concerns about how the crisis may affect their ability to support survivors in the future.

Fears for the year ahead

Despite all of the challenges they are facing, specialist domestic abuse services continue to provide their lifesaving work and support for survivors remains available. However many specialist services (67%) said that if the cost of crisis continues without intervention, they were concerned they would have to turn survivors away and/or reduce their services. Shockingly, five member services had fears they might have to close their services completely.

“Our service is at serious threat of closure”

Women’s Aid is calling for:

An Emergency Support Fund administered by a network of specialist domestic abuse services and accessible to survivors regardless of immigration status, to support survivors of domestic abuse through this crisis period.
Urgent, practical support for specialist domestic abuse services
- The Government to establish an independently chaired taskforce to review recruitment and retention in the domestic abuse and wider violence against women and girls (VAWG) sector. The taskforce must be chaired by a VAWG expert, and involve specialist VAWG organisations and specialist ‘by and for’ services, as well as local commissioners and funders.
- A Government guarantee to provide services with support with energy bills until the crisis is over, and that no specialist domestic abuse services will close. The government must also provide immediate clarity on how energy bill support can be accessed where there are difficulties.
- Ensure local authorities and police and crime commissioners set contracts with services to pay workers at the Real National Living Wage.

Reduce the impact of legal costs for survivors to enable them to seek justice
- Abolish the means test for legal aid for survivors of domestic abuse.
- Fund specialist advocacy services for all survivors.
- Provide additional support to women with No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) to ensure they can access immigration advice/and support with their visa fees.
Exempt survivors of domestic abuse from the benefit cap and end the two-child tax credit limit these are huge barriers for women with children when fleeing abusers.
Abolish the No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) condition for survivors of domestic abuse and extend eligibility for the existing Domestic Violence (DV) Rule, to ensure all women with insecure immigration status are supported to escape abuse.
- Local authorities must prioritise supporting women with NRPF experiencing domestic abuse directly during the cost-of-living crisis – and set aside emergency funds to do so.
- The government must urgently provide clarity about what funding will be provided for accommodating survivors with NRPF, specifically the Support for Migrant Victims run by Southall Black Sisters concludes in March 2023).

Back to Safe Blog

The post The cost of living crisis is pushing domestic abuse services to breaking point appeared first on Women’s Aid.