Call for inquiry into domestic violence in New Zealand

Press, 13 May 1981, Page 14

Call for inquiry into domestic violence in New Zealand

a Royal Commission into violence in the home should be set up immediately by the Government. This is the final conclusion of a book published this week by the Battered Women’s Support Group—an emergency assistance service for battered women in Christchurch. The book, entitled “Listen to Me, Please!” ($4) was written by Dr John Church, senior lecturer in education at-the University of Canterbury, and Ms Doris Church, coordinator of the Support Group. “Listen to Me, Please!” is based on the experiences of the Support Group in assisting more than 500 battered women.

It examines not Only the family law but also such matters as: custody and access; counselling; acciden". compensation; the law or: rape: police performancecriminal penalties; and th* incidence of domestic violence in New Zealand.

The first part describes the experiences of 16 women who fled in terror from relationships with disturbed and violent men.

The second examines the Crimes Act, the Family Proceedings Act, the Matrimonial Property Act and a

number of other acts relevant to domestic violence. It asks how well these acts meet the needs of battered women and children and concludes that they suffer from many shortcomings. The third section is a list of 33 recommendations describing ways the authors believe the law could be reformed to provide improved protection for the victims of domestic violence.

The most urgently needed change, they say, is to the law regarding occupation of the family home. “Battered women always flee the family home before starting legal proceedings. It is just not safe for them to stay.

They and the children then remain homeless until the Court decides who can live in the home. This is taking four, six, or even eight months. When a spouse flees the home with the children in order to avoid further assaults. the Court must be given the power to decide, within a week or two, who will live in the family home,” say Dr Church. Another urgent need the authors maintain, is for some kind of restraining order which can be taken out against a violent spouse

without first bringing the marriage to an end. “This should have been included in the new Family Proceedings Act. At the present time the battered woman who wants to keep her marriage together receives almost no protection in law at all.

What is required is a civil protection, order which will compel the violent spouse to seek appropriate treatment and which will make further assaults on family members an offence punishable by law.”

The authors also suggest that de facto spouses be given the same legal protection, including the restrain-

ing and non-molestation order as legally married couples.

Perhaps the most radical recommendations are those realting to access. The authors claim that the Court frequently gives disturbed and violent parents access to their children against the wishes of the custodial parent. They argue that the court should have “no power to compel access except with the consent of both parents. The book’s suggested re r forms include:

® Removal of the defence of implied consent from the new non-molestation order before it comes into force on October 1.

® Abolition of the $lOOO fine introduced last year as a pentaly for withholding access to a disturbed and violent spouse. • The provision of a speedier divorce for domestic violence victims than that provided by two years living apart. ® Abolition of the husband’s right to sexually assault and rape his wife. ® Speedier Court decisions where the welfare of children is involved. ® Clearing of the present Court backlog of domestic proceedings cases. ® Better Police recording of the action taken following domestic dispute calls. • More suitable criminal penalties for those convicted of domestic assaults. The book concludes that only a Commission of Enquiry is likely to lead to the legal reforms which the victims of domestic violence so desperately need.

“The new family law introduced last. year was supported by almost all M.P.s. Yet the overall effect of the new law has been to strengthen the position of the violent spouse and to reduce the level of protection provided for the victims of domestic violence. If members of Parliament cannot be relied upon to ensure the safety of battered women and children, then this task must be given to an independent Commission of Enquiry.”