If this recommendation doesn't reinforce the lawyers dog breakfast that family breakdown is, then I couldn't imagine a better way to achieve it.

There is a simpler and more fair way to go about this issue.
If a spouse is assaulted, and that assault is dealt with through the common law process of assault, that clearly produces the evidence for further use of AVO's.

At the moment, verbal abuse is cause enough for issueing an AVO. that is a major point of its weakness.
Another point of weakness is using the normal process of child discipline as reason for an AVO. Proof of child abuse should be mandatory. If a child has been assaulted by a parent, a normal course of events is sufficient; an assault charge.

AVO's are actually an excuse for lazy policing, with little to no consequence to them, and as parts of this article make clear, the accused spouse can be left to face an unfair consequence.

So the real question is: who actually gains the most from parliamentary inquiries?
Since lawyers and doctors constitute an overly large swathe of politicians, make your own guess on this question!

Dan

Assertion based on pure speculation and, par for the course, biased assumption!

And without anything remotely resembling credible evidence?

But then what would you expect from a (control freak) personality, who seriously believes that people choose their sexuality and that he and others of his intellectually challenged ilk, believe, therefore, that they have a right to persecute and discriminate against folk for the sexuality they are born with?

That said, if we were to deploy, and nothing prevents it, covertly deployed, new, space-age, unbeatable, lie detectors. We could allow the mighty irrefutable truth, decide all contested outcomes!
Alan B.

Words can be weapons and abuse! Anybody who allegedly loves someone or something, then they need to know without question, you always get more from any relationship, with TLC!

If we agree to a union, it does not and never ever confers ownership!

And children are not property to be fought over!

If we truly love and care, then in any separation there has to, must be, an amicable way to resolve or end something, if only for the innocent victims of family breakdowns, the kids.

Kids don't ask to be born nor have R soles merely masquerading as normal human beings, for a parent or parents!

And verbal abuse is still abuse, that can and does come with negative lifetime consequences for the victims of this, intellectually challenged behaviour!

Besides, for those that GENUINELY CARE, something they avoid, even if it means taking a walk around the block or using a punching bag as a punching bag instead of the wife or kids or the family pet!

Me? I'd use unbeatable new space age lie detection to establish the truth! And given there is family violence and a perpetrator? I'd take them outside and have them shot.

If only to prevent their genes to further contaminate the gene pool any more than it already is! And far more reliable than any AVO that is continually breached.

Four women die every week due to family violence and needs to be stopped!
Alan B.

Alan B you're exaggerating. Around about 50 women murdered a year in total including all those who are not victims of domestic violence. Still too many of course. I don't believe the author of the article was minimising the issue of genuine domestic violence. What he is concerned about is the misuse of our judicial system to persecute innocent people. This is a perfectly reasonable thing for a lawyer to be concerned about and indeed for anyone who is at risk of becoming a victim of a false accusation to be concerned about. I have a friend who was kicked out of his house based on the word of his Russian prostitute wife. He was rendered homeless. She then had her boyfriend/pimp move in with her and proceeded to sell all his tools (he is a tradesman). It took him weeks before he was able to get a hearing and by that time all his possessions were gone. This was a very difficult time for him and the courts had no sympathy what-so-ever for his plight. Yet they were willing to believe his wife with no evidence necessary at all.

@ Alan B, At least 6 men are murdered by women EVERY day & it needs to stop.

To Imacentristmoderate.

Would you be so kind to give the details of that Statistic? That at least six men are killed by a woman each day. Muurder is murder, and it doesn't matter who does it to be an issue. But there is also a seperate issue of exaggerating data to suit a person's position. I see that enough times that clarification of stats needs to be asked as well.

what a total mess as we have allowed social engineers to denigrate the covenant of marriage over the last 50 years. We have toxic masculinity and toxic feminism which is as nasty and often violence. Look at the creatures the abc promoted last week and you will get the drift.

Six men murdered ever day may be true, but very few of them by their female partners.

And I stand by the statistic that four women are indeed murdered every day by their partners. Animals/knuckle-dragging Neaderandals

The Bureau of statistics and their records pertaining to all homicide crimes will back me up!
Alan B.

Alan B.

You previously said it was 4 women a week. Now it's 4 women a day. Same question I asked Imacentristmoderare. Can you give a source for a stat, so that we know which it is and don't have an exaggeration to make a point.

Correction and apologies, Four women a day should be read as four women a week and widely reported on most news service desks!

And the Australian Bureau of stats.

One would have to be both blind and deaf not to already have read or seen material that confirms these widely reported stats.

Of course, perpetrators of domestic violence, who all too often, are too represented in indigenous communities! Are going to follow their usual practice and challenge the widely reported facts!

As evidenced in the foregoing attack the messenger attacks!
Alan B.

To Alan B.

Attack the messenger attacks? I'm not trying to attack you Alan. If you want an example of attacking the messanger look at your first response to in this discussion. It is full of attack. Though whether that's aimed at the author or Dicer Dan ?I don't know.

When it comes to facts and figures there are exaggerated figures and there are over used misinformation. Having a figure clarified ensures that it's accurate instead of it being either emotionally exaggerated or politically motivated in it's exaggeration. It's worth at least attempting when in reply to your figure of 4 women a week are killed, Imacenteristmoderate replied with a higher figure for men who are killed.

As for women, regardless the figure it's still too high. What I've been able to find for # per week, is several years old. But it states with a reference study that one woman a week is the stat of domestic murder against women. http://www.domesticviolence.com.au/pages/domestic-violence-statistics.php
A number that is too high to not ignore or not be concerned.

Regarding the article though. If restraining orders are used as a tactic in parent's battles that's a troubling concern. The issue of women in domestic violence is a seperate issue then parents angry with eachother manipulating the courts to not let their ex see his/her children is a concern worth getting attention. It's seperate from the stats of domestic abuse against women.