I've discovered some contradictory figures to the ones I referenced earlier on the AIC website and posted some details on the Family Law thread.

R0bert

Oh my goodness. If all the above claims are true, then isn't it wonderful that you found that info that all those men were killed by women ... just so you could prove your point to all us violent women?
You guys are sick...

Antiseptic, when have I ever said I have witnessed actual domestic violence in front of my eyes?
I haven't, thank goodness, but I have arrived on the scene to clean up afterwards many times, that's for sure.

I don't know about all the homes and hospitals you have been in, but the ones I was working in had people of all ages as patients.
And I looked after plenty of people of both genders who have been bashed by others in their homes.
What nurse hasn't? It is rife in our communities.

One thing is for certain, I am far more qualified to discuss the medical problems suffered by domestic violence victims than you are... and I know the horrible truth, unfortunately.

I don't care whether you believe me or not really.
I might leave you guys to beat chests together on your own now.
See you all on another thread.

Suze.

Suzie, I think my point stands.

You haven't at any stage tried to address the subject of Jennifer's piece, which is looking for better ways to prevent "the medical problems suffered by domestic violence victims ", preferring to focus, as always, on the most extreme cases where it ends badly for the woman and a bit of gender vilification: "you guys are sick", for mentioning that women also commit extreme violence?

While that might give you a warm glow, it doesn't actually contribute to the debate, so as usual there's no loss to the discussion if you leave. Thanks anyway and enjoy your latte.

R0bert, as I understand it, many of the older police statistics are unreliable because they were collated from a dataset that simply didn't record some aspects, including gender and in some cases familial relationship. I believe this is changing and the more recent data is better.

Either way, it's not especially relevant to a discussion on reduction in violence, since murder is usually at the end of a fairly long path of dysfunctionality in the relationship. Who eventually does it, is less important than how it got to that point, I think.

Antiseptic,
The following might be of interest.

"With the first group there were significant reductions in the potential for child abuse to occur and this ultimately resulted in fewer notifications to child protection services compared with the families on the waiting list," Dr Thomas said.

Previous research has shown coercive parenting, a lack of positive parent-child interactions and low levels of parental warmth to be key risk factors for child abuse."

http://www3.griffith.edu.au/03/ertiki/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=31202

Something similar could be used for domestic violence programs, but due to the bigotry of feminism, domestic violence is never carried out by women.

Suzie "just so you could prove your point to all us violent women?
You guys are sick..."

Once again Suzie does not appear to have any problem with ChazP trying to prove a point that's targeted at men, even when it's based on clear and deliberate misrepresentation of the data. It's only when men show the other side that it's a problem.

Now just what is sick here?

R0bert

vanna, that link is very interesting. It's encouraging that such programs are being trialled, but it's disappointing that they're not more widely known and that they've taken so long to come about.

There has been a widespread willingness to characterise men as inadequate parents, but little real effort to address dysfunctional mothering in recent years.

An early intervention program designed to teach people to negotiate with each other might be a good start. It might be something useful that the glut of social workers can deliver if they could be properly retrained. They'd need proper supervision, of course.