i have just had a revelation about this subject.

Regarding AVO's, the women who take them out against their 'intimate' partners who end up getting bashed by them anyway, should get a commendation from the police for telling the truth about their partner.

Those who take out AVO's who don't end up bashed or dead, would need to pay a penalty for having lied.
Isn't that a great idea?

Wolly, Killarney's animus towards MRM groups is because she fears they might be successful in lobbying for changes to be made to the laws which would result in women losing their privileged treatment in the courts. She's afraid courts might be told to publish meaningful insightful statistics that have more substance to them than those peddled in feminist propaganda.

@Suseonline,

If a person lies or grossly misrepresents the facts in order to take out an AVO against their partner, he/she should incur a penalty - not a commendation, irrespective of whether he/she is subsequently bashed (FULL STOP).

Because the law does not work that way ie follow natural justice principles, some men become so enraged that they take the law into their own hands.

I would suggest Roscop, that if a man/woman has the ability to become so 'enraged' as to take the law into his/her own hands, then the woman/man who took out the AVO had very good reason to do so.

The problem with the current AVO system is that the poor victim has to actually wait until they are physically harmed by the violent offender before anyone will believe them.
Of course, only a few victims and perpetrators of domestic violence are also embroiled in family court issues.
Financial issues and loss of control over partners after marriage breakdowns also cause violence.

I don't know what the answer is.

Suse, I think you may be on the right track in some ways.

The answer is to get totally away from the genderised view to allow resources to be pooled and directed at the study of violence per se in Australia.

There should be an independent national study conducted on the causes of violence and following that report, consideration of the treatments.

It is very poor indeed that an ex-federal senator, who incidentally has her income guaranteed to life by the exasperated taxpayer, has the front to declare on national television (again paid for by the taxpayer) that domestic violence is a gender crime. All, she is doing is riding the same wagon that won her a Senate seat as a career politician.

It should be obvious to all that the contributors to the violence are not anywhere near as simple as that intellectually-narrow, conceited, self-promoting and pretentious woman imagines.

A national study of the general theme of violence please, by a prestigious university, and side-step the blocks and log-jams like that foolish woman.