Abstract
ABSTRACT Anti-violence advocates continue to criminalise new gender-based violence offences, despite the evidence of unintended consequences for marginalised groups. Using an intersectional framework of risk, this article aims to understand what drives front-line domestic and family violence workers to engage the law for the protection of the women they support. The data draws from a study examining responses in domestic violence policy and service interventions to refugees in Southeast Queensland, Australia. Thirty-one interviews were conducted with front-line workers supporting refugee women experiencing domestic violence. Two-thirds of the interview participants are from refugee and migrant backgrounds themselves. Interview data analysis shows a combination of governing and managing actuarial risk across three themes: 1) Why a preference for the law? 2) Autonomy or discourses of responsibility? and 3) The mutual constitution of risk and inequalities. Highlighting the differences between those who address domestic and family violence on the front-line, the findings reveal that front-line workers are both constrained by and contribute to various assemblages of risk in the carceral nation state. I suggest key steps towards engaging front-line workers in an abolitionist agenda that centre on knowledge translation and research partnerships.
Published Version (Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.