Family Violence committed by women and men.
Here are several article from New Zealand refuting feminasi claims that family violence is perpetrated by men against women. Interestingly Families Commission chief executive Paul Curry says he accepts Mr Fergusson's findings that men and women are almost equally involved in
lower level domestic violence.
Well if he accepts it why is the government actively lying to its people?
Regards
Simon
<http://www.radionz.
Radio New Zealand
13 November 2006
Researcher disputes higher levels of domestic violence by men
A Christchurch health researcher says the Families Commission is
reinforcing a misleading view of family violence.
The commission is backing the international White Ribbon Day, which calls
on men to speak out against violence towards women, and its website says
New Zealand has a high rate of men's violence towards women.
However, Professor David Fergusson from the Christchurch School of Medicine
says there have been a series of studies in New Zealand, including his own
longitudinal study, which show domestic violence levels for males and
females are largely equal.
Families Commission chief executive Paul Curry says he accepts Mr
Fergusson's findings that men and women are almost equally involved in
lower level domestic violence.
Mr Curry says the figures are a blot on society and show violence needs to
be tackled by the whole community.
------------
Newswire
13 November 2006
Family Violence Campaign Criticism
A Christchurch health researcher says the Families Commission is
reinforcing a misleading view of family violence.
The Families Commission is backing the International White Ribbon Day,
which calls on men to speak out against violence towards women.
Its website also says New Zealand has a high rate of men's violence towards
women.
But Professor David Fergusson, from the Christchurch School of Medicine,
says there have been a series of studies in New Zealand, including his own
longitudinal study, which show domestic violence levels by men and women
are largely equal.
The Families Commission doesn't dispute the findings and agrees violence is
an issue for everyone.
------------
The New Zealand Herald
13 November 2006
Domestic violence campaigners accused of bias
By Simon Collins
Two top health researchers have accused the Families Commission of
"ideologically driven" bias in presenting domestic violence as a problem of
men battering women.
Professor David Fergusson and Associate Professor Richie Poulton said their
respective long-term studies of people born in Christchurch and Dunedin in
the 1970s showed that most domestic violence was mutual.
"In a high proportion of these couples, we are seeing mutual fighting. It's
brawling," said Professor Fergusson.
In contrast, the commission is backing White Ribbon Day on November 25,
which asks men to wear a white ribbon to show that they do not condone
"men's violence towards women".
The commission, chaired by former Race Relations Conciliator Rajen Prasad,
was set up by the Labour Government in a deal with Peter Dunne's United
Future party after the 2002 election. It has a budget of $8.2 million a year.
The private spat between the professors and the commission began after last
year's White Ribbon Day, when commission chief executive Paul Curry said:
"Almost all family violence is carried out by men on women and children."
The two professors wrote to the commission in March objecting to this claim.
Commission principal policy analyst Radha Balakrishnan said Mr Curry now
accepted that he had made a mistake but stood by the claim that the worst
domestic violence was perpetrated by men.
"We are talking about the most serious and lethal cases where perpetrators
are predominantly men and the sufferers are predominantly women and
children," she said.
"The gendered nature of intimate partner violence is really important."
But in an email to the Herald, Professor Fergusson said: "It is my frank
view the commission's stance on domestic violence is not being guided by a
dispassionate and balanced consideration of the evidence.
"Rather, it is being guided by an ideologically driven model that assumes
on a priori grounds that domestic violence is a male problem and that
female-initiated domestic violence does not exist or is so trivial that it
can be ignored in the commission's policy focus."
The country's longest-running study of a birth cohort, covering 1037 people
born in Dunedin in the year ending March 1973, found that 37 per cent of
women and 22 per cent of men who had partners by the age of 21 had
perpetrated acts of violence against their partners ranging from "pushing,
grabbing or shoving" (29 per cent of women, 21 per cent of men) up to
"beating up" (1 per cent of both men and women).
At age 21, 360 of the young people in the sample agreed to bring their
partners to be interviewed too, providing what was said in 2001 to be the
world's "largest study of abuse in a representative sample of couples to date".
The results showed that both partners abused each other in most couples
where any abuse occurred.
Only 6 per cent of men committed abuse when both partners agreed that the
woman did not commit any abuse, but 18 per cent of women committed abuse
where the man did not. Male and female abusers shared "the same history of
childhood conduct disorder and adolescent juvenile delinquency long
predating their partner abuse".
The researchers concluded that women were not simply defending themselves
against male attackers but that both sexes' violence stemmed from
deep-rooted personality traits such as distrusting other people and being
prone to anger, arising from a mix of genetics and upbringing.
They therefore recommended therapy for men and women, possibly including
joint counselling for couples - an approach that is strongly opposed by
anti-violence agencies.
These results were mirrored last year by Professor Fergusson's study of
1265 people born in Christchurch in 1977, of whom 1003 were re-interviewed
at age 25.
Again, similar numbers of men and women reported violent acts against their
partners - 6.7 per cent of men and 5.5 per cent of women said they had
carried out minor assaults such as pushing or shoving, and 2.8 per cent of
men and 3.2 per cent of women reported severe assaults such as punching,
kicking or beating up their partners.
Ms Balakrishnan said both studies used a wide definition of "violence".
"Most people would consider it family violence where there is physical
violence, where there is fear, where you are afraid for your safety," she said.
She pointed to a national Justice Ministry survey of 5300 households in
2001 which found that 21.2 per cent of women, but only 14.4 per cent of
men, said they had ever had a partner who "used force or violence on you,
such as deliberately hit, kicked, pushed, grabbed or shoved you, or
deliberately hit you with something, in a way that could have hurt you".
Police statistics also show that men dominate the worst cases of family
violence, including 31 out of 35 family homicides last year.
Professor Fergusson agreed that the homicide figures showed that the worst
family violence was perpetrated by men. But that was such a small group
that it did not show up in his sample of 1003 people.
He said the commission was "trying to have a bob each way" by saying that
it was focusing on this tiny proportion of severe violence, yet also
suggesting that domestic violence affected a fifth of the population.
------------
Scoop
17 November 2006
White Ribbon Day � 25 November
Press Release: Families Commission
White Ribbon Day � 25 November
National launch of events � 20 November
Over the next week many people around New Zealand will be wearing a white
ribbon to show they do not tolerate or condone violence against women.
A week of national activities will be launched in Wellington on Monday 20
November.
The White Ribbon campaign is an international movement initiated by men to
end violence towards women and the United Nations has adopted 25 November
as its International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women.
The campaign encourages men to examine their attitudes and behaviour toward
women and challenge the attitudes and behaviour of other men.
Violence against women includes physical abuse but many men do not realise
that threatening and controlling behaviour, psychological and sexual abuse
are also acts of violence, said Paul Curry, Chief Executive of the Families
Commission.
�No violence within families is acceptable. As men, we need to promote
respect, equality and safety within our relationships. If we don�t, then we
are not teaching our sons that these qualities are vital to strong, healthy
relationships, and we are not teaching our daughters that they deserve
respect, equality and safety in their relationships with men,� he said.
New Zealand has a high rate of violence towards women. In 2004 there were
just over 3,100 convictions recorded against men for assaults on women and
a 2001 national victims� of crime study showed that close to one in five
women experienced sexual assault or sexual interference at some point in
their lives. Last year police recorded 63,000 incidents involving family
violence.
This year dozens of government, social service and voluntary agencies as
well as UNIFEM (the UN Development Fund for Women) are working together to
raise awareness of White Ribbon Day and the week leading up to it.
More than 200,000 individual white ribbons (26 kilometres of ribbon) will
be distributed free throughout the country by organisations concerned about
family and sexual violence. Amnesty International, YWCA and other agencies
will also be focusing on violence against women used as a tool of war.
More information and a list of some of the events are available on
http://www.whiterib
------------
The Ashburton Guardian
18 November 2006
Editorial Comment November 13
By Grant Shimmin
There�s some debate in the media today about the validity of the White
Ribbon campaign against domestic violence which culminates in White Ribbon
Day on November 25.
We feature the first of a number of prominent men in the district speaking
out against domestic violence in today�s edition.
According to a report today, two health researchers are accusing the
Families Commission of �ideologically driven� bias for painting domestic
violence as a problem of �men battering women�.
Most domestic violence involving couples is �mutual�, they say, involving
�brawling�.
Which is a fair point, which should not be ignored, and one they certainly
have the right to make.
But to rip into a worthy campaign in order to do it seems a wrong approach
to me.
Violence by men against women, and children, is a problem in our society as
it is in many others and getting people to stand up and publicly speak out
against it has got to be a good thing.
I'm proud that the Guardian is able to be a part of it.
---
Ashburton Guardian Co Ltd
199 - 205 Burnett Street
PO Box 77
Ashburton
New Zealand
Customer Service (03) 307-7900
Classifieds (03) 307-7965
Missed Paper 0800 274 287
Fax (03) 307 7980 (Editorial)
(03) 307 7981 (Advertising)
Email: enquiries@theguardi
www.ashburton.co.nz
www.ashburtonguardian.co.nz
------------
The Dominion Post
24 October 2006
It's a family matter
By Anna Chalmers
What does the Families Commission do?" the headline on the agency's website
asks. Good question, and obviously one the commission knows it needs to answer.
Its critics say it is an $8 million waste-of-space. The crown entity
employs more than 30 staff, who commission research and write the odd
report which is left to collect dust, they say.
It has no legislative teeth and, despite its title, cannot advocate for
individual families.
"It doesn't seem to have a job that can't already be done better by another
agency," National MP Judith Collins says.
A vocal critic from the outset, Ms Collins says the commission has
delivered less than she expected. "I've been very disappointed. As the
Families Commission I would have thought it would have more grunt."
David Benson-Pope, responsible for the commission as Social Development
Minister, says he is "satisfied" with its work. But its future seems far
from assured with no decision about funding after its initial budget runs out.
The commission was the outcome of a coalition deal negotiated by United
Future leader Peter Dunne when the party signed up with Labour after the
2002 election. It was given a four-year budget of $28 million and its own
legislation.
It has a wide ranging brief. The Families Commission Act 2003 defines
"family" as: "a group of people related by marriage, blood or adoption; an
extended family; two or more persons living together as a family; and a
whanau or other culturally recognised family group."
In a lavishly illustrated brochure the commission outlines its functions
as: increasing awareness and understanding of issues families face;
encouraging public debate; commissioning new research; examining the impact
of public policy and providing advice to government agencies.
But Ms Collins says the commission has little to show for its existence.
It was heavily criticised for its $900,000 "What makes your family tick?"
campaign, which asked Kiwi families about life in New Zealand, but drew
only 2500 responses � less than 1 per cent of New Zealand's 600,000 families.
Key initiatives this year such as The Couch, an online discussion forum
where parents are quizzed on various topics, and its support for the
already established non-violence White Ribbon Day, will not produce
tangible outcomes, she says.
Critics also point out that the Social Development Ministry already has a
families and community services division, which employs more than 120
staff. Established in 2004, it has a similar role: "to lead and coordinate
government and non-government actions so that support for families and
communities is coherent and focused at areas of greatest priority".
Numerous non-government agencies and universities, such as Victoria
University's Roy McKenzie Centre for the Study of Families, are conducting
similar research.
Ms Collins also points out that the Children's Commission operates on a
much smaller budget � just over $1.5 million � and is more vocal and
effective. Unlike the Families Commission it can investigate cases, such as
the murder of Masterton sisters Saliel Aplin and Olympia Jetson.
The commission's founding father, Mr Dunne, admits he had hoped the
commission would be more vocal on family issues.
But he does not agree it has been given too wide-a-brief, or is replicating
work. "We worked very hard on the definition . . . It's important � it
seems to me � for a body like this, it cannot be too exclusive."
He said goodbye to the commission on the day it was launched, but "like any
parent whose kids were leaving home, you hope that they did the right
thing". That includes making more of an impact on the public. "I think that
it's proved its worth . . . It now needs to be prepared to move forward �
there will be a lot of issues coming up over the next few years that they
need to be critically involved in and taking a stand on."
Families Commission chief executive Paul Curry and chief commissioner Rajen
Prasad acknowledge the agency has work to do in the public's eyes. They
promise results soon. "The momentum is building quite significantly. It's
there to see and progressively from here you'll see much more focus and a
more constant stream of work coming out," Mr Prasad says.
The former race relations conciliator admits the commission's first year
was tough. "As commissioners we were trying to understand it, we were
trying to appoint staff and fend off the public criticism of an
organisation set up through a coalition agreement.
"It had never been done before. Nobody had set up a Families Commission �
and that's anywhere."
In its first year there was the controversial departure of chief executive
Claire Austin who left after five months with a $50,000 golden handshake.
Mr Prasad said at the time "governance and operational models" had not
lined up.
He admits the commission's "bold" mandate has also been problematic. "The
public expectation was that we would take up individual cases immediately
and the effects could be seen more easily."
Mr Curry, who next month will have been in the job a year, acknowledges
there are a multitude of agencies already dealing with issues affecting
families, but says the commission's role is vital because the state sector
and non-government agencies all operate in silos.
"While the Government looks at families, they do it through the lens of
housing, employment, social welfare or health (ministries) � and that's
relevant to those portfolios, but you need to have an agency that looks at
how that integrates � through the lens of families."
He also denies the commission is replicating work already done, citing its
research into what parents think of out-of-school childcare services, which
involved talking to more than 300 parents and 16 communities.
The commission's report will feed into the Government's other work in the
area and "it will make a difference", he says.
"(The commission's) view is an important voice in the debate � other
agencies may say it is more economically beneficial to have both parents
working, but we can look at the impact on the families.
"I think the big issue for the commission is we could be all things to all
people, so we have purposely identified what we think are the priority areas."
Mr Curry lists its priorities: positive parenting, positive family
functioning, family economics and family knowledge. "In each of those we've
got specific pieces of work."
This includes contributing $2.5 million of its budget during the coming
year to family violence initiatives, including the White Ribbon Day.
"On my watch I would hope to see a change in accepting family violence."
Mr Prasad admits accessing a multitude of families has been tough.
In the past three weeks, he has visited Nelson, Motueka, Queenstown,
Whangarei, Kaitaia, South Auckland and Taupo consulting with the community.
The other part-time commissioners � two in Christchurch and one in each of
Wellington, Palmerston North and Auckland � work two days, mainly attending
school and community meetings.
"They are very active advocates, they talk to our people and understand the
local issues and bring all of that back to Wellington (headquarters)
The important thing for the commission is to know "what it's questions are
and we're getting better at that," Mr Prasad says.
Mr Curry says the momentum of the commission's work is building and
delivers this to his sceptics.
"If we can't make a difference and help families, why should we exist?" It
has a wide ranging brief. The Families Commission Act 2003 defines "family"
as: "a group of people related by marriage, blood or adoption; an extended
family; two or more persons living together as a family; and a whanau or
other culturally recognised family group."
In a lavishly illustrated brochure the commission outlines its functions
as: increasing awareness and understanding of issues families face;
encouraging public debate; commissioning new research; examining the impact
of public policy and providing advice to government agencies.
But Ms Collins says the commission has little to show for its existence.
It was heavily criticised for its $900,000 "What makes your family tick?"
campaign, which asked Kiwi families about life in New Zealand, but drew
only 2500 responses � less than 1 per cent of New Zealand's 600,000 families.
Key initiatives this year such as The Couch, an online discussion forum
where parents are quizzed on various topics, and its support for the
already established non-violence White Ribbon Day, will not produce
tangible outcomes, she says.
Critics also point out that the Social Development Ministry already has a
families and community services division, which employs more than 120
staff. Established in 2004, it has a similar role: "to lead and coordinate
government and non-government actions so that support for families and
communities is coherent and focused at areas of greatest priority".
Numerous non-government agencies and universities, such as Victoria
University's Roy McKenzie Centre for the Study of Families, are conducting
similar research.
Ms Collins also points out that the Children's Commission operates on a
much smaller budget � just over $1.5 million � and is more vocal and
effective. Unlike the Families Commission it can investigate cases, such as
the murder of Masterton sisters Saliel Aplin and Olympia Jetson.
The commission's founding father, Mr Dunne, admits he had hoped the
commission would be more vocal on family issues.
But he does not agree it has been given too wide-a-brief, or is replicating
work. "We worked very hard on the definition . . . It's important � it
seems to me � for a body like this, it cannot be too exclusive."
He said goodbye to the commission on the day it was launched, but "like any
parent whose kids were leaving home, you hope that they did the right
thing". That includes making more of an impact on the public. "I think that
it's proved its worth . . . It now needs to be prepared to move forward �
there will be a lot of issues coming up over the next few years that they
need to be critically involved in and taking a stand on."
Families Commission chief executive Paul Curry and chief commissioner Rajen
Prasad acknowledge the agency has work to do in the public's eyes. They
promise results soon. "The momentum is building quite significantly. It's
there to see and progressively from here you'll see much more focus and a
more constant stream of work coming out," Mr Prasad says.
The former race relations conciliator admits the commission's first year
was tough. "As commissioners we were trying to understand it, we were
trying to appoint staff and fend off the public criticism of an
organisation set up through a coalition agreement.
"It had never been done before. Nobody had set up a Families Commission �
and that's anywhere."
In its first year there was the controversial departure of chief executive
Claire Austin who left after five months with a $50,000 golden handshake.
Mr Prasad said at the time "governance and operational models" had not
lined up.
He admits the commission's "bold" mandate has also been problematic. "The
public expectation was that we would take up individual cases immediately
and the effects could be seen more easily."
Mr Curry, who next month will have been in the job a year, acknowledges
there are a multitude of agencies already dealing with issues affecting
families, but says the commission's role is vital because the state sector
and non-government agencies all operate in silos.
"While the Government looks at families, they do it through the lens of
housing, employment, social welfare or health (ministries) � and that's
relevant to those portfolios, but you need to have an agency that looks at
how that integrates � through the lens of families."
He also denies the commission is replicating work already done, citing its
research into what parents think of out-of-school childcare services, which
involved talking to more than 300 parents and 16 communities.
The commission's report will feed into the Government's other work in the
area and "it will make a difference", he says.
"(The commission's) view is an important voice in the debate � other
agencies may say it is more economically beneficial to have both parents
working, but we can look at the impact on the families.
"I think the big issue for the commission is we could be all things to all
people, so we have purposely identified what we think are the priority areas."
Mr Curry lists its priorities: positive parenting, positive family
functioning, family economics and family knowledge. "In each of those we've
got specific pieces of work."
This includes contributing $2.5 million of its budget during the coming
year to family violence initiatives, including the White Ribbon Day.
"On my watch I would hope to see a change in accepting family violence."
Mr Prasad admits accessing a multitude of families has been tough.
In the past three weeks, he has visited Nelson, Motueka, Queenstown,
Whangarei, Kaitaia, South Auckland and Taupo consulting with the community.
The other part-time commissioners � two in Christchurch and one in each of
Wellington, Palmerston North and Auckland � work two days, mainly attending
school and community meetings.
"They are very active advocates, they talk to our people and understand the
local issues and bring all of that back to Wellington (headquarters)
The important thing for the commission is to know "what it's questions are
and we're getting better at that," Mr Prasad says.
Mr Curry says the momentum of the commission's work is building and
delivers this to his sceptics.
"If we can't make a difference and help families, why should we exist?"
posted by TheFamilyCourtPhenomenon @ 11:43 PM
0 comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home