by Harriet Wistrich, CWJ Director
Over fifty years ago most forms of violence against women and girls were rarely spoken of or reported, unless publicity inducing sensational stranger attacks. There were no support systems or provision for victims and virtually no criminal justice response. It was the collective action of survivors and feminist activists who came together mainly as part of the early women’s liberation movement that transformed this picture. It was through writing, speaking out, the creation of refuge space for women and children escaping violent men and of ad hoc rape crisis phone lines and counselling that provided the foundation for the current system. At that time most of that support was provided was on a completely voluntary basis and done from a perspective of feminist political activism, to support women to leave violent partners and to provide a space for women to disclose experiences of sexual violence and child abuse in confidence and without fear of judgement or victim blaming. Women sharing their stories and supporting each other from lived experience helped develop an understanding of the nature of male violence and what was needed to combat it both on a personal and societal level.
As a result of this activism and more generally of women sharing experiences in women’s groups, a picture began to emerge of the scale of male violence against women and girls. It became apparent that the fear of male violence was an almost universal experience for women regardless of their class, ethnic heritage or other intersecting categories. Support services created by women and for women became not only an effective model for support but also a feminist political enterprise. Gradually over time as this movement developed it became clear that the despite the universal threat of male violence experienced by all women, intersecting oppressions of race, class, disability, sexuality and age inevitably resulted in different types of threat, availability of support and access to justice.
Confronting the reality and scale of male violence and its intersecting impact meant inevitably asking why the state did little or nothing to tackle a problem that caused death, physical and psychological injury on a frightening scale. It was quite apparent that there was a woeful state response to such serious violence. The classic police response to a call out to a domestic violence incident was to describe it as ‘just a domestic’ or “its six of one, half dozen of the other”. Rape and sexual assault reports were routinely disbelieved, and the victims blamed for provoking attacks. Needless to say, very few women reported intimate partner violence. Women’s groups were not simply support and mopping up services, they were and are voices for change, campaigning, writing, protesting, lobbying and in many other ways demanding change.
As a result primarily of the activism of women’s organisations combined with other movements for social change, the landscape has changed. We have a range of legislation, statutory duties and published policies and guidance designed to improve the criminal justice response to male violence. However, despite these changes , as I have set out in previous instalments of this manifesto, the criminal justice response today is still blighted by the attitudes described above. Despite this, there has been some improvement and many more women do report violence now even if only a very small proportion of those allegations reported are prosecuted. There is a social services framework for intervention to protect children at risk, albeit flawed and punishing of mothers who may themselves be victims but perceived as failing to protect. There is some awareness and training within the education and health sector designed to help those who may come into contact with women and children at risk and some encouragement to intervene where appropriate.
There is now, therefore, some expectation in contrast with the past, that women who have been subject to male violence should receive support. At a minimum this should include assistance with escaping violent partners, advice and support through the criminal justice process, assistance in relation to family proceedings, counselling and other emotional support. They should also be provided with help in related matters including immigration, interpretation and housing advice where needed. Support services should provide access to appropriately qualified lawyers. In addition, as a result of activism within the women’s movement, we have seen the emergence of specialist “by and for” services and support groups to advocate on behalf of and meet the different needs and experiences of women. There are a range of brilliant groups that support women from black, Asian and other minoritised communities, refugee and migrant women, as well as specialist support for LGBT women (and men), disabled women (although far too few on the ground given the rates of violence experienced) and others.
Providing an effective system of support for those that have been victims of violence and abuse is not cheap. If women and children are fleeing their homes they will need safe accommodation and should be entitled to a decent standard and safety. If they are seeking support and counselling, that provided should be trauma informed. If they choose to report the violence to the police they will need help navigating the system and surviving the pressure of assisting an investigation and prosecution of a perpetrator. Inevitably there has been a degree of professionalisation of the roles to ensure minimum standards. There needs to be significant financial support and resourcing to ensure services can meet a range of needs.
However, as the service provision is made more available and local authorities, government, police and crime commissioners and others come under certain statutory duties to provide minimum support, the emergence of state provision, commissioning and competitive tendering to provide ‘value for money’ has emerged. Where service providers are required to compete, we have seen the growing dominance of larger, generic, non-specialist services. These services may have little connection with the principle of support from lived experience or any feminist analysis including an understanding of how male violence is rooted in deep structural power differences between men and women. They may also lack insight of community-based organisations that provide support taking into account different socio economic and cultural codes.
Services providing support for victims of sexual or domestic violence that are run directly by police or local authorities are usually gender neutral and may therefore not be accessible to those who distrust the police or social services, often with good reason. Those working within these state services may be inhibited or prevented from campaigning against any dubious policies of the authority that employs them, even when they directly harm service users. There will be little opportunity to creatively develop and respond to new issues identified, in a way that specialist women’s groups have done.
Since the introduction of competitive tendering for women’s services, there have been fears and some evidence that the provision of specialist women only services will suffer. Imkaan, an umbrella organisation advocating on behalf of specialist black and minoritised women’s services say there has been between 35% to 40% reduction of funding for this sector over the last ten to fifteen years.
It is imperative that there is a sustainable funding model that is underpinned with a thorough equalities analysis, in order that we do not reproduce ‘one size fits all’ generic forms of support, but rather recognise the wide-ranging and intersecting needs of different survivors and the importance of community engagement and outreach work.
If you would like to have your say in how the criminal justice system could be improved for victim’s, please respond to the government’s victims’ bill consultation which closes at 11.59pm on Thursday 3rd Feb 2022. More on the consultation can be read here.