Hi
I worked for a short while as a therapist in the area of domestic
violence and violence in general. In Australia Domestice Violence
seems to mean violence against women and children. For instance if a
man has been in prison for violence against men solely, he can't
attend anger management programs once he leaves prison. These programs
are only for men you have hurt women and children. The term Violence
means violence against men, predominantly by men. That area is largely
unfunded by the helping profession, but it is the largest form of
violence, and has a huge effect on families, that is if you believe
that fathers and brothers are important. Not everyone does. (
One thing that i get angry about (that's ironic!) in this area is the
way society seems to pertpetuate the problem. It does this by putting
most of its supportive resources into supporting women and children
victims not male perpetrators, often who despartely want help. So
society gets what it says it doesn't want. The cycle gets repeated. My
theory behind this is that we need someone to blame, someone we can
say to 'you are bad, violent, evil' so we maintain the situation of
male perpetration (is that a real word?) and the stereotypical
aggressive male. (I think Dan's piece in the Jan 2006 Knowing Field is
a fantastic read on this subject, in his work with prisoners)
I came across situations where i was put under pressure not to counsel
male perpetrators. And it came up in other ways. I remember going to a
Government function to acknowledge social workers and a benefactor who
was there, when they found out I counselled male perpetrators said 'oh
you poor thing, i bet you would rather not do that'. My answer wasn't
very pleasant.
So this makes me think, if I am right, systemically, who benefits from
perpetuating the problem? Has anyone had experience of such a
representative in a constellation of family violence or something
similar?
David Mathes....Melbourne (occassionally) Australia
