A scheme to protect women from domestic abuse by removing violent partners from the family home is being scrapped by the Government as part of its drive to cut public spending.
Boo! Hiss! Eeeeeevil Tories want women to be beaten up! They HATE women!
Sorry, I came over a bit ‘Independent’ there for a moment…
Let’s look at this in detail, shall we?
Under the so-called "go orders" planned for England and Wales, senior police would have been given the power to act instantly to safeguard families they considered at threat.
Violent men would have been banned from their homes for up two weeks, giving their victims the chance to seek help to escape abuse.
Hmmm, that bit about ‘considered at threat’ is a bit worrying, isn’t it?
If the violent partner – sorry, violent
man, because it’s only ever going to
be a man, right? – has committed an offence serious enough, shouldn’t they be behind bars anyway?
But Theresa May, the Home Secretary, has decided to halt the scheme, which was due to be piloted this autumn and be rolled out nationwide next year, The Independent has learnt.
She has told charities that she had taken the decision to save money and because of worries about the legislation setting up the orders.
So it was legislative problems as well, not merely money?
And why would that be?
David Hanson, the shadow policing minister, accused the coalition Government of seeming "happy" to allow potential victims to become actual victims.
"Domestic violence should be a priority for ministers. It has been a hidden crime for far too long," he said. "The first duty of a government is to protect its citizens."
Yes, indeed it is.
ALL its citizens. Including men.
So why just the emphasis on female victims? And why the worry about legislative difficulties? Is this something potentially explosive, then?
Plans for Domestic Violence Protection Orders – modelled on similar schemes in Switzerland and Austria. – passed into law in April. Although they were championed by the former home secretary Alan Johnson, they received the support of all main political parties.
They were aimed at intervening in cases where police were worried about violent behaviour within a household, but did not have enough evidence to bring a criminal charge.
Ah. I see.
Now it’s all clear…
It’s no wonder Teresa May has guided the Home Office away from this potentially-deadly little time-bomb left behind by the Harriden and her coterie of harpies…
Although 750,000 incidents are reported to the police each year, fewer than one-third of them result in criminal charges.
I wonder why?
Is that because the women involved decide that ‘he luvs me, really..’ after the beating, and refuse to co-operate?
Does the ‘Indy’ have a case study ready to tug at our heartstrings? Why yes, it does:
I was attacked and battered by my boyfriend for nearly two years before I finally decided enough was enough.
Two years..? Shouldn’t it be ‘weeks’?
Sorry, am I reading this right? *checks* Why, yes, it seems I am.
It would happen twice a month and I would often call the police. They would usually ask him to leave, but he would just sit on the garden wall and the police said they couldn't do anything because he was not committing any offence, it was still a domestic argument.
And yet, despite this, you stayed with him?
What, might I ask, did you expect the police to
do about it, then? I’ve no doubt if you’d expressed a desire to leave, there would have been plenty of help.
I finally found the courage to leave him after he attacked me when I was pregnant.
*checks blood pressure* Damn, how high can this go before the top of your head blows off? Any doctors read this who might know?
Look, sweetie, you know full well that this man is a dangerous, violent thug, yet
you get yourself pregnant by him?
I went to court and took out a molestation order which means he cannot come near the property or speak to me about anything other than his daughter.
Oh, well done! Good for you! A little bit late, perhaps, but then…
Oh, wait a minute! If you took action (finally) to resolve the problem, why are you here in support of this barmy new (and potentially discriminatory) suggestion that…
Oh. Right:
I think giving the police the power to keep violent partners away from their partners for two weeks would have been very helpful.
Because you
didn’t want to go to the trouble, did you? You wanted
someone else to do all the work for you, didn’t you?
Because you are yet another fine example of a generation growing up to expect the state to take every action on your behalf, to take all responsibility so that you don’t have to…
It used to be very frustrating that my partner would come back to my house just hours after I had called the police and there was not much I could do. When I felt in danger I knew there were things I could do, people I could phone, but I could never do it when he was around. I am sure other women who are now in the situation I was in feel the same.
But if I knew he would not be back for two weeks it would have given me time to do something.
Really? And yet, you managed just fine without it, didn’t you?
I might have been able to get the help I needed sooner."
You didn’t
need ‘help’, sweetie. You needed a swift kick up your lazy arse so you’d see sense and sort out your own problem. Did you actually
learn anything from this experience, I wonder?
Oh. Right. You learned that if you just hang on long enough – and manage to stay alive – someone else might decide to fix it
for you…
