166 silhouettes representing French women victims of violence in 2007. Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

"I felt scared all the time": how children are the forgotten victims of domestic violence

>We need to help victims get away from abusive partners - but we also must recognise that children often need support and therapeutic help while they are still in these toxic environments.

It’s hard to imagine living in fear in your own home every day, but for thousands of children it’s a daily reality. In tonight’s BBC1 Panorama on domestic abuse, a young girl tells us exactly what it’s like to feel so afraid, to worry constantly that violence may erupt at any point at the age of just five: "I felt scared all the time. I did not know what he was going to do… I did not know if he was going to start hitting again." After being shaken and called a "little bitch", hiding in her wardrobe was sometimes the only thing she could do.

This child lived in fear for more than half her young life before her mother and her brother managed to escape; a hostage in a coercive and violent relationship. Her story is not unusual and an estimated 130,000 children in the UK live in this state of constant fear. NSPCC research estimates that one in 20 children experience constant or frequent domestic abuse at home during childhood.

This violence often exists alongside coercive and threatening behaviour which robs women, and sometimes men, of control. Children are often the pawns in this psychological and emotional terrorism, with an abuser sometimes threatening to kill or hurt children if a mother leaves. This kind of sustained, repeated exposure to stress and fear has devastating implications for children’s development. Police officers responding to incidents, as well as other frontline staff working with adult victims, must always be conscious of children in the home. But shockingly, this kind of awareness is too often lacking and the response is inconsistent. It is often too late before the child in domestic abuse cases is seen, or their needs thought about.

It is critical that we address the way in which we support children who are exposed to domestic abuse. Despite widespread recognition of the harm that children suffer as a result of exposure to domestic abuse, there is an inadequate supply of dedicated support services for children who are, or who have previously been, exposed to domestic abuse. The majority of services which do exist are recovery programmes that can only be accessed once a child is in a place of safety. However, this Panorama programme reminds us that abuse can continue for long periods of time before this place of safety can be reached. As well as highlighting the need to help victims safely exit abusive relationships, the reality reinforces the need to find ways to intervene early and help children who are still living in abusive environments. 

Witnessing domestic abuse is child abuse. It has severe consequences for a child’s immediate safety and is a factor in two thirds of serious case reviews, where a child has died or been seriously injured.  The Association of Directors of Children’s Services have recently stated that that "nearly every authority" states the prevalence of domestic abuse as a significant presenting issue in child protection plans and the reasons that children go into care.

Research also shows that exposure to domestic abuse can have profoundly detrimental effects on children’s development. It can have hugely negative impacts on their behaviour, affect their performance at school, derail their relationships, put them at greater risk of substance misuse or mental illness and increases the likelihood that they will experience violence in their own intimate relationships.

However, intervention and support can make a difference. While they are in short supply, there are services available to help children recover from the adverse consequences of domestic abuse. One is the NSPCC’s Dart programme. Dart helps children who are finding it hard to talk to their mums about what has happened, because of the difficult emotions involved for both. Another service, Caring Dads: Safer Children, works with fathers to show them the impact their violent or controlling behaviour is having on their children, and improve their parenting.

But what Panorama shows is that we also need a greater focus on early help for children who are being exposed to domestic abuse. The reality is that for many women affected, children will be living under the same roof for extended periods while terrifying and devastating abuse is continuing, with no end in sight. As well as services to help victims safely get away from abusive partners we must recognise that children often need support and therapeutic help while they are still in these toxic environments.

Early intervention is key if we are to better protect children and prevent the long-term damage experiencing domestic abuse can cause children. The NSPCC is currently looking at how we can provide services for children where domestic abuse is their daily reality. The image of children like the girl featured in the programme, cowering and afraid in her bedroom or hiding in her wardrobe, feeling powerless while her mother tries to protect her, is a powerful image of why services for others like her are so necessary. 

Panorama’s "Domestic Abuse: Caught on Camera", is broadcast tonight on BBC1 at 8.30pm. Tom Rahilly is Head of Strategy and Development for looked after children and high risk families at the NSPCC.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

Autumn Statement 2015: George Osborne abandons his target

How will George Osborne close the deficit after his U-Turns? Answer: he won't, of course. 

“Good governments U-Turn, and U-Turn frequently.” That’s Andrew Adonis’ maxim, and George Osborne borrowed heavily from him today, delivering two big U-Turns, on tax credits and on police funding. There will be no cuts to tax credits or to the police.

The Office for Budget Responsibility estimates that, in total, the government gave away £6.2 billion next year, more than half of which is the reverse to tax credits.

Osborne claims that he will still deliver his planned £12bn reduction in welfare. But, as I’ve written before, without cutting tax credits, it’s difficult to see how you can get £12bn out of the welfare bill. Here’s the OBR’s chart of welfare spending:

The government has already promised to protect child benefit and pension spending – in fact, it actually increased pensioner spending today. So all that’s left is tax credits. If the government is not going to cut them, where’s the £12bn come from?

A bit of clever accounting today got Osborne out of his hole. The Universal Credit, once it comes in in full, will replace tax credits anyway, allowing him to describe his U-Turn as a delay, not a full retreat. But the reality – as the Treasury has admitted privately for some time – is that the Universal Credit will never be wholly implemented. The pilot schemes – one of which, in Hammersmith, I have visited myself – are little more than Potemkin set-ups. Iain Duncan Smith’s Universal Credit will never be rolled out in full. The savings from switching from tax credits to Universal Credit will never materialise.

The £12bn is smaller, too, than it was this time last week. Instead of cutting £12bn from the welfare budget by 2017-8, the government will instead cut £12bn by the end of the parliament – a much smaller task.

That’s not to say that the cuts to departmental spending and welfare will be painless – far from it. Employment Support Allowance – what used to be called incapacity benefit and severe disablement benefit – will be cut down to the level of Jobseekers’ Allowance, while the government will erect further hurdles to claimants. Cuts to departmental spending will mean a further reduction in the numbers of public sector workers.  But it will be some way short of the reductions in welfare spending required to hit Osborne’s deficit reduction timetable.

So, where’s the money coming from? The answer is nowhere. What we'll instead get is five more years of the same: increasing household debt, austerity largely concentrated on the poorest, and yet more borrowing. As the last five years proved, the Conservatives don’t need to close the deficit to be re-elected. In fact, it may be that having the need to “finish the job” as a stick to beat Labour with actually helped the Tories in May. They have neither an economic imperative nor a political one to close the deficit. 

Stephen Bush is editor of the Staggers, the New Statesman’s political blog.