Towards non-violence…
Violence towards another is surely to be condemned.
Research now shows that a woman’s partner and that person’s behaviour can play a predictive role on whether a woman continues with, or terminates, a pregnancy.
The secondary analysis of data from the Australian Longitudinal Study of Women’s Health, by Dr. Angela Taft and Ms. Lyndsey Watson, of Mother and Child Health Research, La Trobe University, was published on 03/04/07 in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health.
“The study of 9,683 young Australian women aged 22 to 27 found that those reporting either teenage abortions or abortions later in their 20s, were more than three times as likely to have been abused by a partner as those who didn’t terminate.”
I’m hoping that two things happen out of this data analysis.
1. The need to stop violence against women takes on broader community appeal.
2. People who insist on making comments such as abortions are the result of selfish women making lifestyle choices can have their assumptions challenged.
Image from here
April 13th, 2007 at 6:47 am
Suki, I know your time for blogging these days is slim, but this has to be the most restrained bit you’ve written on such a topic.
A closer examination of violence against Australian women would reveal a simpler fact- many men don’t consider threatening or shoving a woman around as ‘violence.’ The govt’s present TV ad campaign on the subject is better than almost any I’ve seen, but it’s going to take a lot more than a few 30 sec spots to shift the culture.
April 13th, 2007 at 6:56 am
but it’s going to take a lot more than a few 30 sec spots to shift the culture
Conversation starter….
What can a society do to stop domestic violence?
Health promotion on the TV seems a good start.
And not allowing Downer near the subject.. “The things that batter”. As I grow older and become more aware of what life, health, happiness, power and violence is, that comment becomes more and more horrible. What makes it worse was that the original title was “The things that matter”.
April 13th, 2007 at 9:59 pm
During the 80’s, when we first started wearing black, every Thursday for Thursdays in black, to highlight the plight of women who die every week as the result of domestic violence, it was an eye opener for the community.
Some Thursdays my badge and black attire would incite verbal abuse. Back then highlighting the reality of DV in the community was the domain of Uni students (usually us ARTS ones) and refuge workers.
Now, every sector of the community can’t help but be aware and informed.
If I seem restrained Weez, it’s more likely that I’m exhausted from the long, long time it continues to take for otherwise intelligent people, who really should know better.
And as for Downer the stupid Dave C-
The only good to come out of his ‘joke’ was the certainty that it (wobbling atop all his other ineptitudes) ended his leadership possibilities!
April 14th, 2007 at 4:58 am
Now, every sector of the community can’t help but be aware and informed.
That’s progress. Even though we now are lead by Howard and Bush, I can’t help but smile at the progress that has been made in these really important areas.
I guess it is thanks to people like you and your continued struggle.
April 15th, 2007 at 6:45 am
Dave C said:
One could start with DV education in elementary schools. It’s sad that we go to television ads as a first line. I firmly believe most government ad campaigns as such are more effective as politicking- crowing that the govt is doing something about a particular problem- than actually addressing the problem.
April 15th, 2007 at 11:48 am
Here’s a prime example of the govt’s misguided priorities:
Less ads. More emergency housing. Simple.
April 16th, 2007 at 5:46 am
One could start with DV education in elementary schools.
You’d have to work out a good system for getting it taught in schools. One which wouldn’t overwhelm the teachers and give the little kiddies nightmares – I guess.
Less ads. More emergency housing. Simple.
I think you’re right. In the place I work (in community health) they evaluate the effectiveness of each of their projects. I suspect we need to evaluate which works better for our tax dollar – TV or emergency housing and services.
TV ads campaigns can be effective, but they can also be a band-aid over a gaping wound which really needs surgery.
April 16th, 2007 at 7:26 am
Oh, that’s the easiest part… and conveniently coincides with anti-bullying efforts now on in many schools.
Emergency housing is priority #1. Most of the harm to DV victims stems from not having access to appropriate refuge. So many other dominoes fall when victims are forced into the streets- it’s hard to get a job without an address or a phone number. Care must be taken not to ‘ghettoise’ emergency housing; individual accommodations are best scattered throughout a community. A good example through more observing fortunate neighbours is a good teacher of life skills to those in strife. Going by that theory, there should be much more public housing in Vaucluse and Kirribilli. 😉
April 16th, 2007 at 7:50 am
Going by that theory, there should be much more public housing in Vaucluse and Kirribilli.
And destroy the land values – never. 😛
How do you know that the community housing is more effective than the TV campaign? The TV campaign seems to get to the closer root cause – the social values that allow DV – and work on changing those. In changing those it will reduce the pressure on the community housing.
Also, a TV campaign seems to address the problem across the whole of society, rather than just the kiddies. And it seems more cost effective than getting overloaded teachers to take on another one of society’s burdens.
Your thoughts?
April 16th, 2007 at 8:23 am
There’s 2 problems- the causes of and community attitudes around DV and the immediate need to care for the present victims.
There’s already not enough spending on emergency housing, necessary to address the most time-critical problem, that of sheltering DV victims and their dependents.
Of course, this goes nowhere without addressing the causations at a structural level, to reduce the future incidence of DV. When I consider the cost of a TV ad campaign vs development and presentation of DV education at a schools level, I’m going to assert that the latter will get you much more bang for the buck. One is not as likely to be running to the fridge during classroom time as one might be during 30 second TV commercials.
A TV ad campaign slaps at the problem; as I said, it’s more effective as a political activity notification than changing the behaviour of serial abusers. A directed education effort works on eliminating it at the roots by describing DV as a socially unacceptable act to those who don’t yet have that information.
DV is bullying in interpersonal relationships. We’re not talking about adding much to a teacher’s workload, particularly if we’re already talking about other bullying behaviours.
April 16th, 2007 at 10:09 am
When I consider the cost of a TV ad campaign vs development and presentation of DV education at a schools level, I’m going to assert that the latter will get you much more bang for the buck.
I take a different view. In my thoughts, community housing deals only as an after-the-fact action against DV. Community housing, counselling of victims are definitely needed and are definitely good – but they don’t change the underlying problem of social values which allow DV.
What is needed is campaigns which educate the public – such as the one on TV. In educating, there will be fewer incidents of DV in the future and hence less load on community housing.
My argument is based on the TAC ad campaigns. If they had put all of their money into building extra emergency rooms in hospitals for road accident victims, instead of their TV ad campaigns – our road toll would be far, far worse than it is now. Hence, the TAC ad campaigns are money well spent, just as the DV ad campaign.
April 16th, 2007 at 10:47 am
Like I said- there’s 2 problems… first, we need to sort out the present victims- then work on prevention and shifting attitudes. At this moment, there’s much more pressing things to worry about than what can be addressed with a TV spot.
What is TAC? Don’t know that acronym.
April 16th, 2007 at 11:03 am
TAC: Traffic Accident Commission.
Responsible for the “If you drink and drive, you’re a bloody idiot” campaign, and those ads which show the consequences of drink driving and speeding.
April 16th, 2007 at 11:28 am
ah, TAC is a Victoria thing. Gotcha.
April 21st, 2007 at 12:34 pm
I’ve been thinking about DV in Australian song recently.
Paul Kelly sang “Sweet guy”, and Split Endz sang “Charlie”. I’m not really a fan of Crowded House/Split Endz and have always loved Paul Kelly, but upon realising this – partially because of this post – my estimation of the two bands rose.
Just thought I’d share that.
April 21st, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Thanks Dave,
Speaking of music that has a deeper message, I have always admired Ben Harper for his song “Widow Of A Living Man.”
mama why does he treat me so cold
why do i feel so old
how long has he treated me unkind
or have i always been so blind
i’m the widow of a living man
why can’t the times stay the same
now i am begging him to change
what about all the plans we made
now i am so afraid
why does he hurt me so
i’m gonna need someplace to go
he’s no longer some kind woman’s son
mama i think that i had better run
April 22nd, 2007 at 9:54 pm
hey all,
I’ve been one of those very few front line workers doing anti-violence education in schools. what can i say? the school still had ultimate veto on what we said and though i was never censored it will happen. parents from fanatical religions tried to have our visits banned and as they worked in the front office we were monitored. we spoke to co-ed classes and some 15 year old boys appeared to already have entrenched sexist values & saw no problem with hitting a female partner. after every visit we were always approached by young women who had already suffered physical and sexual violence. you could see the pain on their faces before they ever spoke. these visits unfortunately were ad hoc at best and only organized because there was a school nurse who saw value in what we had to say.
i wish i had been able to do more of it. i felt on some days i was the only sympathetic face some of these kids had ever seen and that did mean alot to them. this includes raped girls, bullied boys and those grappling with their homosexuality in a hetrosexist environment. i as a strange outsider who was open about all these things helped these kids breathe easier for 60 minutes. imagine if i was allowed to give a lesson a week…….
education in schools is about providing emergency accommodation because abuse happens at every age, its about saving humans from years of violence from getting them out before it begins hopefully. but no amount of education mean shit unless they have somewhere safe to go because as we know the time of highest risk is when women leave.
i miss my old job sometimes. but i don’t miss the frustration of truly being able to do what really needed to be done!
April 22nd, 2007 at 10:04 pm
how sad that pro-choice has gotten to this. women need choice because stuff happens and no birth control is pefect and we make mistakes and forget etc. we know that incest and rape happen and these women should not have to birth these children if they don’t want to. and we fight for choice because abused women don’t want to subject children to the violence they suffer or the male abuser does not want the baby to exist.
we offer choice for women stuck between a rock and a hard place. it is sad that we can’t just fight for choice because it is a basic human right. it is sad that sooooo many other layers of violence and oppression exist against women, that we demand choice so we can limit their suffering. and the women aborting due to violent partners, i am certain are the ones most likely to feel regret, because their ‘choice’ felt almost like not one at all.
STOP VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN!!!!!
April 23rd, 2007 at 4:55 am
Cat:
Thank-you for both your work and your insights. I’m sure you would have made a huge difference in the kid’s lives.
October 18th, 2007 at 8:56 am
[…] Suki Has an Opinion at Machine Gun Keyboard has an intriguing post up about an Australian study which revealed that women in their teens and 20s who had chosen abortion were three times more likely to have been abused by a partner than those who did not abort. She considers the implications in light of the way women who have aborted are commonly accused of being “selfish” or whose abortions are categorized as a “choice” or “lifestyle choice […]