The above types of abuse can all be happening at once within many households. So domestic violence is not just about physical hurt, but a multiple of acts can be deemed under such a title.
Social factors are contributed to the causes of domestic violence, such as poverty, housing conditions, economic worries, children and most off all stress. One important factor that concerns domestic violence is the presence of male dominance. In the past wives and their offspring were the properties of the husband. He was legally responsible for her behaviour and so he could treat them accordingly he was in fact the judge and juror within the four walls. Research that has taken place in Scotland has shown that
“Differential marital responsibility and authority give the husband both the perceived right and the obligation to the control of his wife’s behaviour and thus the means to justify beating her” (Dobash and Dobash 1979: 93) A now defunct law that was in place in England was known as the “ Rule of Thumb”. This entails the husband having the right to hit his family with an object that was no wider than their thumb (Muncie and McLaughlin 2001: 206). This was seen as acceptable! So it is not surprising that some men could and would take advantage of such situations, this is not to say though that it was fair. The pressures of coexisting and surviving within the home are especially high when presented with poverty, as M Levi (1997) states in his research ‘Violent Crime’, “In poor neighbourhoods where people suffer from low self esteem, violence is often seen as crucial to maintaining a man’s reputation” (cited in Croall 1998: 190). This is just one of many explanations as to why the crime of violence is committed and not a reason. Somehow people are easily appeased when given an explanation, this does not create a solution. Yet as a point made by Saranga (1996 cited in Muncie and Mc Laughlin: 183-227) argues, that the above quotation does not explain violence in the middle class homes. So there are many excuses and explanations to justify and create reasoning as to why a person commits acts of domestic violence but yet there are also counter arguments and it seems that no one can create a reasonable answer to end such atrocities. Although the “Rule of Thumb” law has been quashed and it is no longer acceptable to commit such crimes, it was still viewed in a majority of cases as a private matter. The police were reluctant to get involved; they would mediate and calm such disputes down. (Could this be viewed as violence being acceptable in the home?) Research by Dobash and Dobash in 1980 found that police defined domestic violence as ‘rubbish work’ it was not ‘real’ violence as it was a private matter and they sympathized with the male counterpart (police forces were predominantly male), although this is not all police officers view but it was still the majority.
( 29/09/2002)
Below is a quote by an American prosecutor, “Take a felonious assault case involving a domestic quarrel. Does this deserve to be tried by a twelve-man jury? We are much better off if they kiss and make up rather than if we put him in jail.” “Stanko (1984): 129.” This type of attitude was unbelievably dominant in earlier years. So it is apparent to see why victims of such criminal acts are reluctant to come forward.
In defence for the police maybe the fact that it would prove to tough to prosecute and or they may have feared the repercussions that would occur once they had left the scene.
The Government are now tackling domestic violence in a campaign known as “Living Without Fear”. Laws have since been revised and amended to make it easier to prosecute individuals and also to protect the victims in such dilemmas. This now gives the police and the victims a clearer view on how to tackle such disturbances. The Crime and Disorder Act (1998) has placed a requirement on local authorities and police in which they are to act accordingly. Other changes in the law are the introduction of the Protection from Harassment Act (1997); this makes it an offence to behave in such a way that a person feels harassed or fearful of violence. This tackles the psychological aspects of domestic violence. (Home Office1.7: 3)
Part VI of the family Law Act (1996) consists of consistent set of civil orders that deal with the occupation of the family home in order to help the victim without too much of a drastic change (Ibid). With such vigorous law changes it makes the problem of domestic violence possible to solve, theoretically it does, but why is it still prevalent? Is this because the information is not reaching the people that need it? People who are suffering from such torment will find it hard to gain access to such help as they could be fearful of the repercussions, or they have not got the confidence in which to gain access. Either way the information is there and maybe it should be highlighted more. It could save someone’s life, or give them confidence to leave such situations if they know that there are people who can help.
People who have been lucky enough not to be in such a position of not having suffered such crimes, tend to take the blinkered view that “Why do they not leave? Why put up with it? They must like it!” This is known as victim blaming (Dobash and Dobash1992) the victim could if they wanted to stop the abuse. Yet if you take the above questions and reverse them to, “Why does the violence not stop? Why do they do it? Then the final question, they must like it!” The first set of questions is easier to answer, they hold a simple reprieve for the conscience of the public but most importantly they also blame the victim. They can be easily answered thus easing the public’s conscience; meaning domestic violence does not have to happen. Just removing the cause does not remedy the problem. Yet the latter questions have a long-winded approach, and it means that something further has to be created in order to cease the production of violence. Maybe domestic violence should be more publicised then more people could be aware of such situations. All of this bypasses the fact that there is a problem; the majority of the public (unless they are affected personally by domestic violence) will just see the problem in black and white. There is a problem, it can be solved so why is it not? What happens to the emotions of both the victim and the abuser?
They ask for it! They must deserve it, reverts back to the victim-blaming mode that is prevalent within the culture that is domestic violence. Usually people who are entrapped within these circumstances are unfortunately misled when forming new relationships, as nobody would withstand physical abuse from the onset unless they were backed up with threats. The subtle approach such as the mental abuse is usually the starting point. The little comments that eventually corrode the self esteem, if they are lucky it stops there.
“ He definitely sapped my confidence over the years. It’s a drip on your head… and I got to believe by the end that I was hopeless at everything, that everything he said about me was actually true. Which is another reason why I did not leave, because if I was that hopeless, how on earth was I going to exist on my own?” (Kelly L (1988): 131)
If they are not it will more than likely progress onto violence, but this is not before the relationship has become emotionally charged. Walklate (1995:91) comments that by undermining a women’s self esteem and threatening them with losing their children, threats which women take this seriously. There are a lot of factors concerning domestic violence in which a person can be made to believe, thus resulting in the relationship continuing. So for a partner to leave a damaged relationship will have to be under such immense pressure, combined with low self worth would be an incredibly hard decision to make. The mind games alone would make a person struggle on their own, but backed up with the threats “ no-one will want you! I will kill you if you leave! Along with the violence it is easy to see why certain people have no options but to stay.
Another myth that concerns research for domestic violence is one that it only affects women. This is not so. "The most unreported crime is not wife beating -- it's husband beating" (Steinmetz cited in Langley & Levy 1977).
A study was done which compared male and female domestic violence. In that study, it was found that 47% of husbands had used physical violence on their wives, and 33% of wives had used violence on their husbands (Gelles 1974). Although the statistics show that women are at a higher risk of becoming a victim it is still relatively high for men. Society has created sex roles in which men are seen as sturdy and self reliant, in comparison to the weaker more feeble aspects of women. Due to these roles that society has placed upon individuals the likely hood of men reporting such crimes is slim, taken with the stigma that is attached to domestic violence it is a wonder that there are any reports of such incidences.
The view in which the majority of the public see are ones in cartoons (women chasing the man with a rolling pin) (Saenger 1963) this is seen as funny, yet if the tables where turned would people still laugh? According to research it shows that women are just as likely to commit offences of violence against their partner. It is just that the outcomes of such offences are less likely to need medical attention. The difference between reporting of such crimes is that “husband beating” is in the minority (due to lack of statistics and above explanations), and they only truly come to light when fatalistic violence occurs. (Wilt & Bannon 1976) This is not to soften the blow that women really are not that badly treated it is just an extension that domestic violence covers both sexes.
Domestic violence no longer exists! Nobody would put up with such abuse, would they? This is another myth, because it happens behind closed doors and it is not an everyday occurrence, people think that it is only a minority of people that it happens to. Domestic violence is typically not headline news every week, so it is easily forgotten. Records show though that “ every minute in the UK, the police receive a call from the public for assistance for domestic violence.” (Stanko 2000,1:2) This shows that the problem is still there for many people.
One of the main concerns in dispelling the myths is to relocate the facts to the forefront of research. Progression could then lead hopefully onto resolving such myths.
This piece only scratches the surface of domestic violence. There are a lot more myths and realities involved with domestic violence and why it happens, such as alcohol and drug misuse. The affect it has on family life, pregnancy within relationships, homosexuality, elder abuse and other such questions like, does it create a cycle of violence? Are weapons used? Does it always end in death? Finding the causes is a valid place to start researching such acts, but they will never be able to prove that it no longer exists, as there are a lot more unreported cases happening throughout the world, that unfortunately will not come to light, due to the stigmas and fear that are still in place with domestic violence. Until the myths are changed then hopefully it will lead to a better understanding of the victims and the offenders, and then the really hard work will begin in ending such terrible acts.
Most people are in ignorant bliss about domestic violence. Those that do suffer though from the violence are extremely brave to report such incidences, but a larger number will unfortunately suffer in silence. There are a lot of services in use for people needing help, unfortunately there are not a lot of places available to met the requirements. Services are mainly set in place for women and due to the ratio of victims and availability there are not enough places for everyone. More funding needs to be in place for both sexes, and the research into domestic violence on men needs more researching. It is a subject that has many avenues in which to investigate, but whether they will lead the researcher to finding an answer to resolve such incidences rather than creating theories or excuses for domestic violence. After reading material that concerns domestic violence, the conclusion is still the same, that nobody has the right to physically hurt or abuse another person and it goes to show that domestic violence is a powerful tool when used in the wrong hands.
Bibliography
Croall H 1998 Crime and Society in Britain London Longman
Daly and Wilson 1988 Homicide New York: de Gruyter
Dobash R Emerson and Dobash R P 1979 Violence Against Wives Open Books London
Dobash R Emerson and Dobash R P 1992 Women, Violence and Social Change Routledge London
Gelles, R.J. 1974The violent home: A study of physical aggression between husbands and wives Sage, Beverly Hills CA,
Heindensohn F Crime and Society 1989 Macmillan Press London
H M Inspectorate of Constabulary, Multi Agency Guidance For Domestic Violence
Kelly L 1988 Surviving Sexual Violence Cambridge Polity Press
Langley, R & Levy, and R C. 1977 Wife Beating: The Silent Crisis_ Pocket Books, New York
Maguire M et al 1997 Oxford Handbook of Criminology 2nd Edition Oxford University Press
Muncie E and McLaughlin 2001The Problem Of Crime London Sage
Saenger, G. 1963"Male and female relation in the American comic strips" in the funnies: An American idiom M. White & R.H. Abel editors, The Free Press, Glencoe IL,
Stanko E 1984 Intimate Intrusions London Routledge and Kegan Paul
Stanko E 2000 The Day to Count: A snapshot of the Impact of Domestic Violence in the UK Criminal Justice
Walklate S 1995 Gender and Crime: An introduction London Prentice Hall/ Harvester Wheatsheaf
Wilt, G.M. & Bannon, J.D. 1976 Violence and the police: Homicides, assaults and disturbances The Police Foundation, Washington DC,
