I went to pick my son and daugther up for my usual visitation, unbeknownest to me, my son witnessed an altercation between my ex and one of her 'boyfriends'.

My son did not want to leave his mother because he was afraid that she would die. Apparently she and her partner at the time had made threats to kill each other.

He had previously reported to me that he had rung the cops when she and her partner at the time were figthing.

I contacted DHS, no luck, went to legal aid and they were not prepared to help me.

My son attended school for about the first 2 months of high school, since then he has not been back. This year he will be 16 this year and has yet to complete any formal education.

My daughter had started down the same track of not attending school, but fortunately at present it seems she is attending school.

...“Hammering away” at those in society with a propensity to violence, is a sure recipe to “riches” for Lawyers undoubtedly: But realistically, (and as convincing as this article is), domestic violence will never be solved as the problem it is “en-total”, (win-win for Lawers).

...Domestic violence, to ever be controlled, needs another and more lateral approach to continuing the endless list of its compositions under law; (of course the author is on a winner here, since few would disagree with the connection of animal cruelty to human cruelty, as constituting a crime; another “win-win” for Lawyers).

...No…the approach for solving this problem will be social change, wrought through education from an early age using psychological manipulation of all children.

...Not, I might add, by Lawyers “using” children themselves to "manipulate" a winning case for clients.

You don't need a degree to recognise violence. Where I come from the majority of families are known to Police DCS and anyone unfortunate enough to live within 100 metres of their homes. The dogs from those homes are generally very skinny. The real problem is that the courts are not serious in doing anything about it and when someone does like Mr Brough did all the leftist luvvies cry racism.

Excellent article. Certainly, the suggestion of animal shelters within refuges is long overdue, as I personally know of a few marital breakdown situations in which this scenario has played out.

However, when these places can only afford to allow one or two night's refuge for humans at best, I can't see this hopelessly inadequate arrangement being extended to animals.

Unfortunately, the death by a thousand cuts to domestic violence shelters over the last 15 years, especially under the Howard government, has rendered these shelters almost non-functional. Under the current 'there's no money' mantra of the conservative state governments, along with the Coalition's history of regressive attitudes to women, funding to anything that holds even the faintest whiff of favouring women over men will only continue to be starved - especially if the conservatives win the next federal election.

I'll make that my only comment for this thread, as I know this commentary will quickly fill up with all the usual odious protests that it's really women who are the vicious and violent gender, but that powerful feminists are preventing us from knowing or doing anything about it.

Before I comment on the article, first a comment on Killarneys misrepresentation ofnthe point that is made by a number of posters including myself on these types of threads.

The message is that we are all in it together, that both genders are capable of great good and great harm. That an lack of balance of power in either direction creates harm. There have been a couple of male posters with a deep seated anti-female bias but they have been few, most that Killarney misrepresents are objecting to the repeated assertion that its men specifically that are the problem with no intent to suggest the reverse.

Thats been said before, most will get it but unfortunately some won't.

There are a range of things that might cause someone to stay in an abusive relationship, issues around pets being one and cruelty to pets is something that should be addressed. Social attitudes to seperation and divorce ar still significant issues for many. The nightmare that awaits those with a malicous or greedy spouse when you get to issues of child residency, child support, property settlements etc ar other reasons why some find it easier to stay in an abusive relationship than move on.

I was pleased to see that Dr Scutt varied the pattern slightly from the norm, whilst there were plenty of reminders that its women and children who suffer at least there was one example where the abuser was female. Gender should not matter however against a backdrop of portrayal of men as some sort of overwhelming risk to their families it is important to highlight that some from both genders harm children, that some from both genders harm partners (in all sorts of ways).

"unreasonably denying the family member the financial autonomy that he or she would otherwise have had;"
and yet a I have a government department doing just that to me at the moment with a child support formula which mandates payments well beyond the real costs of providing for our son and is well beyond what I can afford.

R0bert

R0bert says -
""unreasonably denying the family member the financial autonomy that he or she would otherwise have had;"
and yet a I have a government department doing just that to me at the moment with a child support formula which mandates payments well beyond the real costs of providing for our son and is well beyond what I can afford."

this is completely out of context of the article and has nothing whatsoever to do with domestic violence. If you are so intent on continuing this type of rhetoric in such a manner then you would do well to remember that the Child Support Agency and the formula that it operates was born out of legislation passed by politicians which even today is made up of a majority of MEN.

Tired