Police ‘must act’ in marital rows

Press, 22 June 1978, Page 4

Police ‘must act’ in marital rows

Police reluctance to take a 1 instructive role in domestic Imputes worries Mr lan Me- 1 bonald, director of the Mar- 1 tjage Guidance Council in Christchurch. He believes that the police ; ihould give domestic disputes i • high priority. “At present ’ lhev are very low on the list i >f priorities.” he «aid vester!av. He said that constructive, ntervention in domestic dis-' 1 Mtes should be of great con-i tern to the police because i' nolent homes were the incu-i ’Mors of future social prob- | eI P.?. criminal behaviour, h were often badlv: lhected by violence in mar-' lage: it was a factor in many, •ises dealt with by the coun- j I I and appeared in all social; I rata. ,’? e had discussions:, lith the acting head of the 1 :

Christchurch police, Detective Chief Superintendent E. G. Perry, and the District Commissioner (Deputy Assistant Commissioner G. E. Twentyman) but little progress had been made. The police regarded domesI tic disputes as social work and not part of their role. Mr Perrv confirmed tnai this was the view of the i police. He said that other I Government departments were better equipped to handle the social issues ' n Mr' McDonald said that calls to domestic disputes were not adequately mont•tored. nor was sufficient information collected by the police. “Three different cars can go out to incidents at a home on three successive Thursdav 'nights but no special

response seems to be given to repeated calls to the same residence.” It was not necessary to have a social worker at a dispute. He or she could do little then. But the police should be able and be encouraged to refer a case to a social worker after perhaps a third successive call to one household. Mr McDonald was impressed bv the family crisesintervention scheme established by the New York City Police Department. Its report was a very creative document.

The New York police were encouraged to recognise that the resources of social agencies were limited and that they had to have a role in domestic disputes. They were told that there were ways of intervening in violent dis-

putes to establish calm. “With the very careful training given they are able to choose the alternatives of making a referral to a social agency, of mediating, or arresting,” said Mr McDonald. He could see no reason why special squads trained to deal with domestic disputes could not be set up in New Zealand.

“But first the police need to monitor domestic intervention and initiate a follow-up system. They do have a social responsibility to do this.”

Mr Perry said that police action in domestic disputes was bound by secrecy provisions ensuring confidentiality. Individuals would object to their private business being divulged to social agencies.

The aggrieved party in a dispute did not want to go to a social worker: they wanted the police to take positive action on their complaint. The day after a dispute the situation had often settled down.

Mr Perry regarded domesI tic violence as a very serious • problem but said that the I parties involved were adults ■ who could seek the help : available to them if they : wished. Mr McDonald said that consideration should be given to giving the police the power to refer couples in violent marriages to conciliation. Although he had doubts about compulsion provisions, these were brought to bear in divorce proceedings. By the very nature of counselling, a couple could not be forced to take part.