Unfortunately we have a predominately ‘christian’ govt - hence the preservation of marriage & the dominance of man is considered more valuable than women’s safety. Making victims part of the solution is cruel &enables perpetrators to shift the responsibility for their actions.
Counselling does not resolve domestic & family violence. Women & their children need aid to leave safely. Plus the majority of invited orgs are religious, not orgs that are Aboriginal-controlled, or run by disabled women, LGBTQIA & other orgs that directly specialise in #DFVhttps://twitter.com/CEOWomensSafety/status/1152741881375145985 …
-
-
-
Conservative Christianity ideals guiding policy and funding decisions are the reason why the 'he's a good bloke, really' discourse dominates. Patriarchy in motion, ultimately perpetuating violence against women and children
-
Absolutely. It's frightening to think that women r expected to discuss their experience of dv in the presence of the abuser. I doubt the trip home or the hours after wld be a safe experience. Seems the "good bloke" narrative is growing instead of being broken down under this govt
-
Exactly. 'The good bloke' should be forgiven, given 'another' chance. This discourse locks victims into staying in violent settings. And then there's endless blaming of women, for not leaving after abuse turns lethal. Awful curricular argument justifying violence.
-
That's right,yet another hurdle to overcome instead of funding proper support. Also psychologically it's devastating to share responsibility for 'fixing' the dv due to the inherent implication of shared blame. Like you said, "patriarchy in motion". This is no doubt a bkwards step
-
I'm wondering how they'll fund. As more programs move to outcomes-based funding, will it be based on number of referrals, or successful completion of a program, & if so, is keeping the family intact the goal? Because that would be an insidious outcome for victims. This is scary
-
By nature of the term 'couples counselling' &with religious orgs in majority hints that keeping marriages/families intact could be the goal&marker. A christian counsellor once wrote "if he was good enough to have children with he's good enough to be in the family". Scary, indeed!
-
Oh gosh, that's frightening and gross!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That depends on the extent of the DV. Unfortunately the term is used to capture everything from relatively low level behaviour which could be assisted by counselling through to extreme behaviour that requires immediate intervention.
-
'The extent of the DV' is a terrible phrase and misinformed Rehabilitation services for perpetrators is a separate issue. Forcing women into the counselling being proposed here is dangerous. Experts from DV have lodged formal submissions stating their objection based on evidence
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.