Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/14905
Record ID: fdf99185-4956-44fb-92ad-b8d9faff9155
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorNancarrow, Heatheren
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-30T23:15:51Z-
dc.date.available2022-06-30T23:15:51Z-
dc.date.issued2005en
dc.identifier.citation3 (4), June 2005en
dc.identifier.urihttps://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/14905-
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherQueensland Centre for Domestic and Family Violence Researchen
dc.subjectImpact on children and young peopleen
dc.subjectTheories of violenceen
dc.subjectChild protectionen
dc.titleFrom the director: but what about the men?en
dc.title.alternativeQueensland Centre for Domestic and Family Violence Research Newsletteren
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.catalogid1141en
dc.identifier.urlhttp://www.noviolence.com.au/public/reader/news12.pdfen
dc.subject.keywordnew_recorden
dc.subject.keywordJournal article/research paperen
dc.subject.keywordQueenslanden
dc.subject.keywordInvalid URLen
dc.description.notesThis article summarises the issues of child protection and domestic violence prevention. It refers to the Domestic Violence Resource Centre Inc., the Queensland Council of Social Services and PeakCare Queensland’s concerns about current child protection practice in Queensland in the context of domestic violence, and how they had invited Carolyn Kubitschek and Jill Zuccardy to discuss their experience in these issues. The invited experts are lawyers from New York with experience in representing battered women and children, including in the litigated case of Nicholoson v Scoppetta that resulted in New York’s Supreme Court ruling that the State cannot remove children from their mother’s care nor prosecute them for child abuse just because they are victims of domestic violence. The anecdotal situation in Queensland is that statutory child protection workers responding to child abuse in the context of domestic violence would use the following strategies: use exposure to domestic violence as a basis for applications to have children taken into care; as a child protection measure, require women to apply for a protection order to include their children (and under the threat of children being removed from their mother’s care); and seek arrangements with support workers to report on the referred women with regard to the ‘insights’ the women gained from counselling and their likelihood of returning to a violent relationship. It questions and challenges how these strategies of keeping the children away failed to acknowledge the men who are predominantly perpetrating the abuse as the problem. It suggests that these strategies do not address the perpetration of violence but seek to hold women accountable for the potential harm of exposure to men’s violence against women. It also suggests that the theoretical frameworks within the 2 ‘sectors’ are not compatible and current child protection practice does not reflect domestic violence sector objectives in protecting women and children from violence. It calls for leadership in the development of a new integrated framework that does not try to privilege the needs of children over those of women, nor the needs of women over children, but one that addresses both women’s and children’s right to be free from violence. It refers to the establishment of a Child Safety Research Advisory Group to lead research to inform policy and practice in child protection.en
dc.identifier.sourceQueensland Centre for Domestic and Family Violence Research Newsletteren
dc.date.entered2005-08-25en
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Who's citing