It’s happening again.
Another run of alleged domestic violence homicides has horrified the nation, and the media is again searching for answers.
The specific cases remain subject to ongoing investigation. Speaking generally, when the questions turn to prevention, the answers from politicians and prevention agencies are almost uniform:
“We need to have better conversations with our boys about respect.”
“We need men to step up.”
“We need to change harmful gender norms and attitudes so that we can stop this violence before it starts.”
“Everyone has a role to play in ending gendered violence.”
Hearing these messages I’m struck by a nauseating sense of cognitive dissonance. In one breath we are facing a national crisis, and in the next our solution is to call out “disrespect” and challenge harmful gender norms.
But these aren’t just stock answers or platitudes. They articulate our national prevention strategy, which focuses on changing the underlying social drivers of gendered violence by addressing harmful attitudes.
The problem with this strategy is that it outsources its results to future generations. Even the major prevention agencies driving this work say we can’t expect to see results anytime soon. Indeed, in the most recent national community attitudes survey, there had been no improvement in attitudes towards domestic violence since 2017.
We’re not getting this right. When it comes to prevention, we owe more to victims and their families – past, present and future.
For the past five years, I’ve toured across Australia speaking on coercive control at hundreds of events for communities, frontline workers, health workers, magistrates, police and lawyers. I’ve listened to the fears and frustrations of thousands of victim-survivors and frontline workers in places such as Darwin, Wagga, Shepparton and Hobart. The frontline workers consistently say that sexual violence and coercive control cases are becoming more complex and severe. They are clear about the connections between harmful, unregulated industries like mainstream porn and gambling, and they are desperate for more resources to work with children.
Victim-survivors are at their wits’ end. They’re trying to restart their lives, find housing and help their kids heal from the trauma inflicted by the perpetrator, even as he continues to torment, stalk and dominate them though systems such as child support and the family law courts. They wonder how on earth they can prevent their kids becoming victims or perpetrators themselves. But what can they do? Support for child survivors is inadequate, especially in regional areas.
They need us to do better at prevention. They need us to throw everything we’ve got at it.
Over the past year, I have worked with Prof Michael Salter on a white paper called Rethinking Primary Prevention. In it we argue that prevention (or “primary prevention”, as it’s officially known) cannot and should not be limited to whole-of-population strategies. We simply cannot rely on a prevention strategy that is not expected to show results for decades.
Instead, we recommend that state and federal government prioritise innovative, results-based prevention strategies that will be accountable for reducing violence over the short, medium and long term.
In our white paper, we identify four missing pieces of the prevention puzzle.
1. Accountability and consequences – for perpetrators and systems that enable them – is prevention
We need to stop violent and controlling people from continuing to use violence and coercive control against their current partner, their next partner and their next partner. There is a lot to do to make police and the courts protective for victim-survivors. But accountability and consequences are not solely the domain of the justice system; in many cases, other consequences will be more meaningful and effective. For example, when the major banks detect persistent financially abusive behaviour, they are now suspending, cancelling or denying the offender access to their account. There are so many opportunities to introduce accountability and consequences across the systems weaponised by perpetrators, from child support to Centrelink and the family courts. Abusers should be identified by these systems and face consequences, instead of being allowed to carry on with impunity.
2. Recovery is prevention
Child abuse and neglect – including growing up with coercive control, being physically or sexually abused and being shamed or neglected by parents – are accelerants to adult victimisation and perpetration. The work done on preventing child abuse, preventing violence against women, and healing from trauma and abuse all needs to be linked. We need to properly resource the frontline to work with child survivors so they can properly heal.
3. Regulating damaging industries (including porn, gambling, alcohol and social media) is prevention
We all have a role to play in ending gendered violence, but those roles and responsibilities are not equal. For example, 14-year-old boys do not have the same responsibility for ending gendered violence as, say, the owners of TikTok or PornHub. We know young people feel that pornography is normalising sexual practices that girls and women describe as painful or unpleasant, and mainstreaming dangerous practices such as non-fatal strangulation.
The sexual violence sector is seeing this in their caseloads: services often say victims are getting younger and showing up with more severe injuries. We should not be afraid of regulating these industries, and the federal government should advance the eSafety commissioner’s strong recommendation to set age verification limits for online porn.
In our current prevention approach, the private sector is predominantly engaged in terms of education and training to create safe and respectful workplaces. That’s important, but there is no mention of business models that are actually causing or exacerbating gendered violence. We need to get serious about the impact of certain industries – particularly gambling and alcohol – on the severity and impact of perpetration. Even if we don’t consider problem gambling or alcohol to be the cause of family violence or coercive control and simply see them as exacerbating factors, isn’t it incumbent on us to tackle exacerbating factors, especially those that lead to more severe physical injuries? Our leaders say they want men to step up. Let’s see them take on these vested interests and show the country what “stepping up” really looks like.
4. Structural improvements to gender equality, such as the single parenting payment, is prevention
About 60% of single mothers have escaped domestic abuse. Even after they leave a controlling partner, our systems make it almost impossible for them to be safe. We need to reform our systems – from family law to child support and child protection – to vouchsafe their freedom, safety and independence.
Education and efforts to change social attitudes is also prevention. We should properly fund the excellent school programs teaching students about consent and respectful relationships. But we should also acknowledge that this work has long-term change in its sights.
Perhaps the Albanese government’s commitment to ending violence against women and children in a single generation is unrealistic and unattainable.
But I say let’s take this government at its word. Let’s see them match their stated ambition with world-leading actions to stop perpetrators in their tracks.
• In Australia, the national family violence counselling service is on 1800 737 732. In the UK, call the national domestic abuse helpline on 0808 2000 247, or visit Women’s Aid. In the US, the domestic violence hotline is 1-800-799-SAFE (7233). Other international helplines may be found via www.befrienders.org.
• Jess Hill is an Australian journalist and educator on coercive control. She is the author of See What You Made Me Do: Power, Control and Domestic Abuse
