Type:	Journal Article
Title:	Reconceptualising domestic violence: a history of the Howard Government's approach
Other Titles:	DVIRC Quarterly
Authors:	Webster, Amy
Keywords:	Advocacy;Policy
Year:	2006
Publisher:	Domestic Violence & Incest Resource Centre
Citation:	3, Spring 2006
Notes:	General Overview:This Australian article argues that there is an incompatibility between the “conservative neo-liberal’ ideology of the Howard government and a structural or feminist approach to domestic violence, with negative consequences for victims. Key Argument:The key argument of the paper is that on a number of fronts the Howard government’s ideology and policies have disadvantaged women in general, and domestic violence victims in particular. Discussion:The article analyses the ideology of the Howard government as effectively dividing Australians into two camps: mainstream us and (minority) them, an ideology which has drawn on a critique of ‘political correctness’ as a process of silencing and excluding mainstream Australia. It is argued that those in a functioning traditional, mainstream family are seen by the Howard government as ‘us’, while minority groups, single mothers and women and children experiencing domestic violence are seen as ‘them’. The article makes comment on the Howard government’s reinterpretation of critical issues for women (such as childcare and domestic violence) as family concerns rather than structural issues, effectively limiting the mechanisms for change. In addition, it is argued that dismantling of government mechanisms designed to protect and promote women’s rights (e.g. Women’s Bureau, Sex Discrimination Officer, Affirmative Action Agency and Office of the Status of Women) has further set back women and domestic violence victims. It is argued that at the same time the government has given credence (and funding) to the rising men’s lobby, to the detriment of women’s groups. The article suggests the government has reconceptualised domestic violence, primarily by downplaying the role of gender and reframing domestic violence as ‘family violence’. It makes reference to the government’s support for intergenerational transmission of violence argument, described as violence passed down through dysfunctional generations of families, leading to limits on criminal punishment for perpetrators as they are also seen as victims of violence. It is argued that this approach also downplays the role of gender in violence. The author further argues that the intergenerational transmission of violence argument can be extended to minorities, to implicate those groups as sanctioning violence. The article associates domestic violence in the Howard government mindset with ‘un-Australian’ households and with ethnic or cultural minorities. Conclusions:The article concludes that the Howard government’s reconceputalisation of domestic violence over the last ten years has resulted in a return to a ‘pre-feminist era’ and effectively served to disadvantage women, particularly those experiencing domestic violence.
URI:	https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/16528
ISSN:	1324-4264
Appears in Collections:	Journal Articles

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