Howard's Christmas present
Back in dim dark history, when federal finance minister John Fahey was NSW premier, he distinguished himself by noticing a serious social problem: given the option, many women and children would rather live in emergency shelters than stay at home with their families.
In 1992, he advocated removing the refuge option and offering a monetary reward to husbands and fathers who managed to keep their wives and offspring home. The problem was, he said, "We encourage people to leave the family by simply providing money in the welfare area with refuges, with hostels, departmental officers and counselling and everything else ... I want to go back to that traditional family and see a lot more support happening, instead of encouraging people to walk away from the responsibilities and therefore walk away from that unit that the family has always stood for."
The National Committee on Violence estimated in 1990 that one in three couples experience at least one instance of domestic violence, one in 10 experience chronic (at least once a year) domestic violence, and that for one in 25 the violence is continuous.
In Australia, 95% of all domestic violence is perpetrated by men, and women and children are predominantly the victims. One in five women admitted to the Royal Brisbane Hospital's emergency department is a victim of domestic violence, and 42% of all female murder victims in Australia in 1990-1991 were killed by their husbands.
Many families are horrible places to be. The family system enforces a social division of labour in which women are defined by their child-bearing role and assigned tasks associated with the care of family members. Apart from privatising social responsibilities, this set-up also institutionalises the unequal distribution of income, status and wealth, a pattern of dependence and exploitation which is being reinforced by the Howard government's cuts to social security, public housing, legal aid and wages.
The capitalist family is, in general, a repressive and conservatising institution, inculcating all the social values and behavioural norms that individuals must acquire in order to survive in class society. It teaches children submission to authority and distorts human relationships by imposing on them economic compulsion, personal dependence and sexual repression.
This is not to say that families do not meet many of people's most basic material and emotional needs; they do, but at a price — especially for women.
We are now approaching the danger season for domestic violence — Christmas. This is a time when families can become like pressure cookers without valves, when explosions — fuelled by alcohol consumption, increased money pressures and the compulsion to spend time together — happen.
This Christmas, the government cuts to services that enable some people to escape abusive family situations are kicking in. The Domestic Violence Advocacy Service (DVAS) — NSW's only statewide community-based organisation — is facing a funding cut that will force it to shed one of five workers dealing with the legal aspects of domestic violence. Refuges — already coping with only about a third of demand — are losing the one-off grants that allowed them to run special needs programs.
Social security and housing services — essential to providing longer term alternatives — are already very difficult to get, despite the priority currently given to those escaping violent domestic situations. One DVAS worker told Â鶹´«Ã½ that budget cuts to these services are making them virtually impossible to access, forcing more women to stay in violent relationships.
Young people — of whom more than 50,000 are homeless today — are similarly affected. A survey by the Youth Accommodation Association in NSW found that 64% (or 9000) of those seeking temporary refuge in the first six months of 1989 had to be turned away due to lack of facilities. This situation has not improved.
In May, a prime ministerial task force on youth homelessness was announced to examine whether the youth homeless allowance — received by only 7296 people nationally during January — is too accessible. Some conservative parents' groups and major newspaper conglomerates claim it is, and that not enough resources go into "reconciling" young people with their families. They want young people stripped of the allowance and forced to rely on their families. Similarly, rental assistance will no longer be available for young single people.
Fahey and Howard are doing what they promised: removing women and children's already limited options for independence from abusive families, all in the name of cost savings — money that will instead be used to further subsidise big business, whose profit levels already owe so much to a family system founded on women's blood, sweat and tears.
By Jennifer Thompson