Groups and communities at risk of domestic and family violence: a review and evaluation of domestic and family violence prevention and early intervention services focusing on at-risk groups and communities

A review and evaluation of domestic and family violence prevention and early intervention services focusing on at-risk groups and communities. Summary This report sets out the findings of research into domestic and family violence (DFV) prevention initiatives focused on groups and communities identified as being at greater risk of experiencing DFV and/or having difficulty accessing support services. These groups include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women, women from Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Communities (CALD), people who identify as Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transsexual, Intersex and Queer (GLBTIQ), young women and women in regional, rural and remote (non-urban) communitie

Children affected by domestic and family violence: a review of domestic and family violence prevention, early intervention and response services

This report sets out the findings of research into domestic and family violence prevention, early intervention and response for children aged 0–8 years in New South Wales. Executive summary The report contributes to the development of the knowledge base on DFV prevention, early intervention and response strategies and the needs of children, and supports the implementation of aspects of the National Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women and Their Children and the NSW Government’s It Stops Here: Standing Together to end Domestic and Family Violence in NSW strategy. The research had two areas of focus: synthesising the literature on the impacts of DFV on children, and on the evidence for primary prevention and early intervention strategies for children aged 0–8 years; and identifying best practice approaches for primary prevention, early intervention and response for children aged 0–8, and identifying the extent to which these needs are met within existing DVF primary prevention, early intervention, and response approaches in Australia

Evaluation of the 2012 family violence amendments: synthesis report

This report sets out the overall findings of the evaluation of the 2012 family violence amendments. The evaluation examined the effects of amendments to the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)  that were intended to improve the family law system’s responses to matters involving family violence and safety concerns. Key messages Most separated parents don’t use family dispute resolution, lawyers or courts to resolve parenting matters after they separate Those parents who do use family law systems tend to be those affected by complex issues including family violence, mental ill-health, substance abuse and safety concerns for themselves and/or their children There has been an increased emphasis on identifying families with concerns about family violence and child abuse, however 29% of parents using family law system services reported never being asked about family violence or safety concerns Family law professionals indicated that better screening tools and approaches are required The reforms have supported sorting out parenting arrangements by agreement. This is likely to be due to a change in 2012 that means advisors tell parents that parenting arrangements should be in a child’s best interests Subtle changes in parenting arrangements are evident such as more parents with safety concerns reporting a shift away from overnight stays with fathers The proportion of children with court orders for shared care, where allegations of both family violence or child safety had been raised, fell after the reforms (from 19% to 11%) The proportion of court orders for shared care where neither family violence nor child safety was raised remained stable (22%): no significant change showed where only one issue was raised (17% pre-reform, 15% post-reform). Overall the main findings of the evaluation indicate that the 2012 family violence amendments are a step in the right direction in a reform agenda intended to improve the system’s response to family violence and child abuse concerns in post-separation parenting arrangements. See related content for seperate reports.   &nbsp

Genicular artery embolisation in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee (GENESIS 2): protocol for a double-blind randomised sham-controlled trial

Knee osteoarthritis is a leading cause of chronic disability and economic burden. In many patients who are not surgical candidates, existing treatment options are insufficient. Clinical evidence for a new treatment approach, genicular artery embolisation (GAE), is currently limited to single arm cohort, or small population randomised studies. This trial will investigate the use of a permanent embolic agent for embolisation of abnormal genicular arterial vasculature to reduce pain in patients with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis. Up to 110 participants, 45 years or older, with knee pain for ≥ 3 months resistant to conservative treatment will be randomised (1:1) to GAE or a sham procedure. The treatment group will receive embolisation using 100-micron Embozene™ microspheres (Varian, a Siemens Healthineers Company) (investigational use for this indication in the UK), and the sham group will receive 0.9% saline in an otherwise identical procedure. Patients will be followed for 24 months. At 6 months, sham participants will be offered crossover to GAE. The primary endpoint is change of 4 Knee Injury and OA Outcome Score subscales (KOOS ) at 6 months post-randomisation. The study will also evaluate quality of life, health economics, imaging findings, and psychosocial pain outcomes. The primary manuscript will be submitted for publication after all participants complete 6 months of follow-up. The trial is expected to run for 3.5 years

Intimate partner violence in lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex and queer communities

Intimate partner violence within LGBTIQ relationships was largely unacknowledged until recently and as such has been absent from governmental, policy and service/practice responses to intimate partner violence (Ball & Hayes, 2009). Research in the area has also been scarce (Calton et al., 2015). Government, policy, research, justice and practice-based responses to intimate partner violence have overwhelmingly assumed a heterosexual framework in which women feature as victims and men as perpetrators (Ball & Hayes, 2009). While LGBTIQ communities have had some effect regarding the acknowledgement of the issue within government agencies, this has not always translated into a substantive policy or practice response (Ball & Hayes, 2009; Tayton, Kaspiew, Moore & Campo, 2014). There has also been a lack of acknowledgement of intimate partner violence within LGBTIQ communities themselves. The reasons for this are multiple and complex and include an inability to recognise abuse outside of dominant understandings of gendered power dynamics (Irwin, 2006; Ristock, 2011)