This is what Australians really fear.
Fair Agenda, a group campaigning for equality for women, released a poll today, indicating that most Australians perceive family violence to be more of a threat than terrorism.
An overwhelming 74% of the 1,006 people surveyed by Essential Research said that family violence was more or at least as much of a threat as terrorism. Only 18% of people surveyed viewed terrorism as the greater threat.
These statistics reveal an alarming disparity between public concern regarding domestic abuse and family violence, and governmental action. As the rate of violence continues to increase, the insufficiency of government funding for family violence services becomes more, and more of a problem.
In the poll’s accompanying statement, Australian of the Year and domestic violence advocate Rosie Batty drew attention to issues in governmental prioritisation. Rosie said: “We’re spending hundreds of millions extra on the war on terrorism, but women who fear for their safety are still being turned away from services because of a lack of funds.”
Batty calls for the government to put their “good will” into action. “Every day they wait,” she says, “more lives are put at significant risk.”
It is a sentiment echoed by Executive Director of Fair Agenda, Renee Carr, who states, “We’re in the midst of a family violence epidemic, yet inadequate government funding means thousands of women are still being turned away from the services that should be helping keep them safe.”
So far this year, at least 34 women have allegedly been killed as a result of family violence. Fairfax Media reports there are just 63 government-owned shelters in New South Wales, equating to only 350 beds, 90% of which are full.
As The Guardian reports, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) met in April to discuss several national issues, including the increasing instances of domestic violence in Australia. Batty and Ken Lay, former Victorian police chief commissioner, are on an advisory council for COAG, aiming to examine governmental approaches to dealing with domestic violence, and provide feedback in order to improve leadership on such issues.
The government has currently allocated $100m over a four year period, under a national plan to reduce instances of family violence. But Essential Research’s report indicates a further $33.8 million for specialist homelessness services is needed to aid the 28,000 women who are turned away from crisis shelters and services annually.
“We need to keep speaking out about this issue,” said Batty. “That’s why I’m urging people to stand with me beside victims by signing up at www.neveralone.com.au”
If you or someone you know is impacted by sexual assault, domestic or family violence, call 1800RESPECT on 1800 737 732 or visit www.1800RESPECT.org.au. For more information about a service in your state or local area download the DAISY App in the App Store or Google Play.
For more on the fight against domestic violence:
Lisa Oldfield admits: “I’ve been a victim of domestic violence, and I’m angry.”
At least 34 women have already been lost to domestic violence.
Yes, terrorism is ‘un-australian.’ So is paedophilia and domestic violence.
Domestic violence: Rosie Batty appeals for more media freedom to report on family violence.
Top Comments
Personally, I'm more 'fearful' of terrorism. I don't go around being literally afraid of a terrorist attack, but the idea that there's a real possibility an attack could happen here is confronting! Australia has been lucky in that we haven't been had a major terrorist attack here, but that doesn't mean we should stick our heads in the sand and pretend it's not a threat that our government and authorities should try to protect us from.
I'm not fearful of domestic violence, I'm appalled by it, angered by it,
and concerned by it. I also grew up with it, nowhere near as bad as
some have it, but has always been there. One of my closest friends is lucky to have survived her experience.
Terrorism/national security is an important issue, and so is domestic violence. Both need attention and funding, why the focus on batting them against each other? Both are highly complex issues, and to try and compare them doesn't do either one justice.
Because while we were able to find an additional $450 million to spend, a total of $1.2 billion in efforts to counter international terrorism, http://www.businessinsider.... the same government somehow seemed to justify solidifying the cuts to fund real intimate partner terrorism currently taking the life of a person at a rate of more than one a week http://www.smh.com.au/busin...
http://theconversation.com/...
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/...
But, like my comments below, you don't know how many lives were saved due to the $1.2 billion in anti-terrorism funding.
I fully agree that more needs to be spent on DV, but I can't see how you can compare one to the other without all the facts. And no-one is going to release all of their terrorism information.
As I said, both need the funds but playing one against the other doesn't do either justice. It actually takes the focus away from the fight against domestic violence.
Domestic violence NEEDS more funding, but at the same time the funds allocated to domestic and international terrorism are also necessary. Imagine the outrage if there was a major terrorist attack here and the government and authorities hadn't been doing anything to try and prevent it.
So why not fight to increase the funding for domestic violence, without trying to diminish the responsibility the government has regarding counter terrorism?
While I'm all for more money being spent in this area, the poll asked people based on what they knew about terrorism. It's quite possible the government knows a lot more about what is going on in the terrorism front than the general public, and where money will be most useful.
We occasionally hear about how police stopped an attack from terrorists before it started, how many are there that we don't hear about?
Of course, there's a lot of DV we don't hear about either.
Now, i'm not suggesting that any of this is necessarily the case, but it might need looking into somehow.
True but if you look at the.number of deaths caused by DV compared to terrorism (0) you will see what the bigger threat.True that we do not know what is going on behind the scenes to protect us from perceived terrorist threats,but if governments approached DV in the same way then the numbers of women dying from this scourge would decrease
Okay, and who do you think knows more about the known terrorist problems? The general population, or the anti-terrorist agencies?
1) If you want to go on total deaths then you should just put all money into heart disease.
2) Of course, but for some reason this has turned into an us vs them scenario where they are in direct competition with each other.
True, but as I said in my initial message I wasn't suggesting that it was true, just it's something to consider and investigate.
You don't think with all the headline news about DV that what's best for this government is putting a lot of $$ into DV? I could argue they are doing what's best for the country, not what's best for them.
I wasn't aware they were blaming all of that on terrorism. That wasn't the point of the article.