We could save billions of dollars by one very simple measure: introduce sanctions for false allegations of child abuse.

Problem solved. Suddenly this 'sea' of abuse would start to dry up.

After all, how better to show that we take child abuse seriously than to punish false or malicious allegations severely.

But, of course that would deprive groups like the National Council for Children Post Separation their piece of the millions and billions pie. OMG!

So here's a radical solution: defund the whole abuse industry. We would save billions, families wouldn't be torn apart by vexatious claims, society wouldn't have to deal with the social detritus that this industry creates, and best of all we wouldn't have the pernicious influence of groups like the National Council for the Destruction of Civil Society (or something like that) and their rent seekers like Mr. Pragnell.

The links I could find to the original report seemed to be broken however a link I'd posted to a summary of the report still works http://www.science.uwa.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/118532/Australian_Institue_of_Criminology-Trends_and_Issues_No195-Yound_Australians_And_Domestic_Violence.pdf

As far as I can tell the witnessing of violence is between a parent and partner, not violence involving strangers. The references seem to be around DV although broader in other spots.

"The rate of witnessing varied considerably depending on the nature of household living arrangements. For example, the witnessing of male to female parental violence ranged from 14 per cent for those young people living with both parents to 41 per cent for those living with “mum and her partner”. Young people of lower socioeconomic status were about one and a half times more likely to be aware of violence towards their mothers or fathers than those from upper socioeconomic households. Indigenous youth were significantly more likely to have experienced physical domestic violence amongst their parents or parents’ partners. In the case of male to female violence, the rate was 42 per cent compared to 23 per cent for all respondents, and for female to male violence the rate was 33 per cent compared to 22 per cent."

R0bert

R0bert, you might want to try the Attorney-General's Department Crime Prevention Archived Publications webpage under Y for the three parts of the Young People and Domestic Violence report:

http://www.crimeprevention.gov.au/Archivedpublications/Pages/default.aspx#YY

The third section contains the data:

http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/21248/20070722-0007/www.ag.gov.au/agd/www/rwpattach.nsf/viewasattachmentPersonal/%28E24C1D4325451B61DE7F4F2B1E155715%29_ypadv25-201.pdf/$file/ypadv25-201.pdf

Good link to the Pandora archive.

A couple of quotes:

"
From a written task conducted at the start of each group, it was clear that ‘bashings’
(street, pub and school fights) were the most significant (salient) forms of violence known to the
participants. Such violence was mostly perceived as involving only males, although some mention
was made (by older females) of girls fighting when drunk, over a boy. Verbal aggression (between
people known to each other, including friends) was cited as a form of violence, particularly by younger females. This involved name calling, bullying, ‘bitching’ and back-stabbing, and was
seen by both sexes to be very much the domain of females."

and

"Other types of violence cited,
but not to any great extent, included some mention by older girls of rape — by strangers. This
would tend to indicate fear of that type of violence rather than direct experience (which would
be more likely to involve someone known to them)."

and

"The reasons given for the
use of violence related predominantly to why
males
used violence."

Propaganda trumps experience.

Dane, good post!

The thing about introducing sanctions for false allegations, considering that it would be mainly females the sanctions would be imposed upon, they are likely to be only very light.

This week a story was reported in the UK, about a compulsive liar who cried rape 11 times. On the 11th occasion the police arrested the man and questioned him for 9 hours before being released without charge. "When the man heard Jones had been jailed for 16 months ‘he was disappointed and felt that the time wasn’t long enough after what she put him through’".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2284677/Compulsive-liar-Elizabeth-Jones-cried-rape-11-times-jailed.html

Charles Pragnell is exactly right. My daughter was forced to reside with her abusing and neglecting MOTHER for 3 years. It almost destroyed her young life. Of course Charles ONLY supports mothers not fathers, so no doubt he would be happy about that. Beats me how he can tout himself as an expert witness when he is so obviously biased against men/fathers. He seems to mostly hang around mothers and feminist groups, i have never seen him support a father anywhere, ever. What formal qualifications does he have anyway. BTW had an interesting chat with Julie Bishop late last year when she visited our town. She said that John Howards family law reforms were introduced to combat the bias towards mothers in the family court. Sadly they have been destroyed by the Gillard gov't. She said that the coalition WOULD be reviewing family law if they get into office. I can only hope she is right.