Risk assessment and interventions for victims of domestic abuse: consultation response analysis

Overarching Themes

There were a number of common points and themes which emerged within the responses to many or all of the questions asked. These are set out below. In some cases, they are also further elaborated on in the analysis of responses to individual questions, where there is a specific aspect of the theme or point which is of particular relevance to that question.

1. Funding and resourcing

A number of responses highlighted a need for increased and/or more secure funding and resourcing for multi-agency risk assessments and working for victims of domestic abuse, as well as for the organisations that participate in it.

‘Funding and capacity seem to be the two main barriers to the successful running of MARACs and this needs to be addressed.’

– Scottish Borders Council

Responses noted that:

• resources are currently stretched
• there are concerns that increased work on multi-agency risk assessments and interventions could lead to less resources being available for other areas of organisations’ work
• secure funding can enable longer-term planning and job security
• financial resources should be available to directly support victims’ individual needs, such as housing
• Scottish Government should set out how this work is to be resourced
• adequate resources are especially important to ensure that a consistent standard is met across Scotland in multi-agency risk assessment and interventions for victims of domestic abuse
• a number of responses mentioned SafeLives’ cost-benefit analysis which suggested that resourcing multi-agency risk assessment and interventions for victims of domestic abuse would lead to public savings in the long term.

Some responses suggested that funding should be provided at national level.

Specific areas of this work noted as requiring funding included:

• data collection and analysis
• evaluation
• independent advocacy roles (highlighted as a priority)
• co-ordinator and administrator roles
• the Caledonian System

There was also a particular focus on the need for training to be funded and well-resourced. This was seen as important to ensure that it is available for everyone who it is decided should undertake it (see Question 1: Training). Resources were presented as important to ensure that training is practically available and accessible – for example, that it can be delivered in all regions of Scotland. Some responses proposed that training should be subsidised or funded centrally.

‘Previously IDAA training was funded centrally and this made it more accessible for statutory and voluntary organisations that are currently facing funding challenges.’

– Dumfries and Galloway Public Protection Committee

2. National-local balance

Several responses mentioned that there is a balance to be struck between implementing national standards, processes and resources to ensure consistency, and allowing enough autonomy at local level for these to be adapted to the local context. It was also noted that in many cases, standards, processes and resources have already been developed independently at local level in the absence of a national approach, and that this work should not be discarded.

Most of those who made this point suggested that producing national standards, processes and resources with the expectation that these would then be adapted to the local context would be the best way forward.

3. Supporting theory and values

Finally, many responses referenced values, approaches or ideologies that they felt should underpin multi-agency risk assessment and interventions for victims of domestic abuse. These are set out below.

Gender-based understanding of domestic abuse

Many responses stated that multi-agency risk assessment and interventions for victims of domestic abuse should be grounded in a gender-based understanding of domestic abuse which sees it as a function of gender inequality. Some also supported making an understanding of the gendered nature and dynamics of domestic abuse a key aim of training, and underlined that this competence is also essential for effective risk assessment and interventions. One response suggested that domestic abuse perpetrated by family members other than intimate partners should also be within the scope of this work.

On the other hand, another response argued that a gender-based understanding of domestic violence is transphobic and anti-male, interpreting it as a denial of violence experienced by men or perpetrated by women, as well as a dismissal of individual responsibility for carrying out abuse.

Equally Safe definition of domestic abuse

A gender-based understanding of domestic abuse is central to the national Equally Safe strategy. Some responses explicitly recommended that this multi-agency working should be rooted in the Equally Safe strategy.

Domestic abuse as caused by the perpetrator, not the victim

Some responses highlighted that it was important for those involved in this multi-agency working around domestic abuse to understand that abuse is caused by the perpetrator, not the victim, and that it is the perpetrator who poses the risk. They also noted that victims should never be blamed for the abuse. One anonymous response argued that in light of this, ‘solutions should focus on changes in perpetrators' behaviours rather than expecting victims to make all the changes’.

Intersectionality

Numerous responses mentioned that it is important to embed intersectionality within this work. Those with one or more of the following characteristics were specifically mentioned as being among those whose needs it is important to understand and meet:

• minority ethnicity
• disability, including those with learning difficulties
• LGBTI
• migrant status
• male
• children and young people
• class
• religion

Responses noted that those with these characteristics may have distinct experiences, such as ‘honour based’ abuse, specific barriers to disclosing and immigration status.

‘frontline staff across all public services and agencies that are involved in risk assessment and interventions for victims of domestic abuse would benefit from specific information on LGBT people’s experiences of domestic abuse, including barriers to reporting for LGBT survivors and how to deliver LGBT-inclusive support.’

– Stonewall Scotland

Victim-centred

The need to ensure that multi-agency risk assessment and response to domestic abuse is centred on, and led by, the needs of the victims that it aims to support, was another theme that emerged across responses. Some responses described a ‘holistic’, ‘empowering’ ‘dignified’ and ‘individually tailored’ approach, and noted that it should be based on victims being appropriately informed, and their voices heard, throughout the process. One response particularly emphasised a need for this work to take full account of family relationships and avoid responding to different family members in isolation.

Some responses framed this ‘person centred’ approach as being the alternative to one which is ‘service led’.

Based on risk and need

Similarly to arguing for a person-centred approach, many responses also proposed taking a risk- and needs-based approach to multi-agency risk assessment and response to domestic abuse. The Scottish Commission for Learning Disability also highlighted the importance of balancing risk with rights:

‘Historic exclusion, institutionalisation and a lack of accessible information has led to people with learning disabilities being shielded, overprotected and stopped from leading an adult life … It is critical that when working with people with learning disabilities who have experienced domestic abuse, that the MARAC process does not serve to enable a ‘prison of protection’. Instead MARACs should exist to support and ensure safety when appropriate.’

– The Scottish Commission for Learning Disability

Informed by lived experience

Just as many responses argued for the importance of a person-centred response to domestic abuse, so too did others suggest that the approach taken in all areas of the work, including training, risk assessment and guidance, should be informed by the lived experience and perspectives of victims (including children). Some also proposed drawing on the experience of frontline service providers. Consultations were suggested as one way to realise this approach.

Trauma-informed

Some responses suggested that this multi-agency work should be trauma-informed. NHS Ayrshire and Arran noted that this is important because those who experience trauma often have poorer outcomes and face more barriers to accessing services. They went on to say:

‘In addition, we know that trauma can affect people at any stage in their lives and that particular sections of the population (eg children) are more vulnerable to trauma. Therefore consideration needs to be given to the wider family unit, including children who may not have been physically harm but have been impacted by domestic abuse. This includes consideration of training for key staff on the need to recognise the impact of this trauma on the development and behavior of children and young people and local pathways to ensure support for children and young people.’

– NHS Ayrshire and Arran

One response suggested linking in to the national Transforming Psychological Trauma framework, and another to the (then upcoming) Scottish Psychological Trauma and Adversity Training Plan which offers guidance on developing, commissioning and embedding high quality trauma training.

Outcomes-focused

Some responses advised taking an outcomes-based approach to this work.

Evidence-based

A number of responses also argued for the importance of rooting all work in the available evidence. The need for any risk assessment tools or processes to be evidence-based was particularly emphasised, and respondents felt that guidance should be informed by data.

Involvement of perpetrators or victims in a professional capacity

Some responses highlighted a need to consider what should happen in instances where individuals who are involved in multi-agency working for victims of domestic abuse are themselves perpetrating or experiencing domestic abuse in their private lives. This would need to be considered from both aspects – to ensure that this does not compromise the support being offered to other victims as part of the multi-agency working in which these people are involved, but also to make sure that individuals experiencing domestic abuse in their personal life are able to access the support that they need.

Note: A number of responses provided information about work that their organisations have carried out, or processes that they have developed. Unless this information was explicitly responding to the question at hand, it was not included in the analysis. However, the responses for which permission to publish was given are all publicly available on the Consultation Hub website.