16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence Day 1

All abuse is defined in our Domestic Violence Act, it is our manual. The regulations for our courts and SAPS are premised on The Domestic Violence Act. All forms of gender-based violence are described in the Act.

The Domestic Violence Act is significant legislation but sadly like many others, it is a great ligislation in ink only. It is the same if you are reporting any sexual, physical or non-physical form of abuse, the experiences in the system and outcomes are that there is no point in getting a protection order because there is no protection.

The Domestic Violence Act was introduced to provide maximum protection against domestic abuse. Domestic violence does not discriminate, it affects all humans and yes it is nuanced and complex. However, our most vulnerable; women, children, the elderly, and our LGBTQ community are more at risk of being victims of Domestic Violence because they are;

• Unable to leave abusive relationships.

• Unable to access help,

• Unable to get proper support.

• Unable to be protected.

• Unable to recover and live a life free of fear, harassment, and abuse and have agency of and for their lives.

  
  

"GBV is a severe socio-economic problem, which is fundamentally rooted in unequal power dynamics between women and men" - President Ramaphosa

At enormous expense and effort, we have a Gender Based Violence National Strategic Plan in response to thousands of women who took to the treets all around South Africa demanding an end to GBV; there is a lot that has been developed and implemented, and progress has been made, and it will take time to see other benefits. Despite a collaborative multi-sectoral effort by all stakeholders, the vulnerable fall through a huge crevasse.

My own and hundreds of victims are not experiencing fundamental change; what we experience is that the system has not improved and continues to fail the victims consistently at every level; there is little to no protection; in fact, the opposite is expressed Victims are put more at risk.

We talk about the system but the system is made up of people, civil servants (employed to serve) are employed to perform critical tasks, Those in the justice cluster have an even greater responsibility TO PROTECT VICTIMS.

There is still a perception that domestic violence is physical abuse and the most harmful form of abuse, and as long as other equally harmful forms of abuse, the non-physical forms of abuse are given the same significance, we will not see a significant reduction in GBVF. Physical abuse is never experienced in isolation and vicitms expereince multiple forms of abuse and it is important to understand and identify all the forms of abuse the vicitm has experience so that the vicitm can be properly protect.

The lack of proper training is evident every day in our family court cluster. I have yet to meet a person who works in the system and understands coercive controlling behavior, the tools, the intersections, and the impacts. In the absence of proper training and a vicitm centric approach to victims they will not be protected, our courts are denying victims protection, excusing and normalising controlling abusive behaviour.

Emotional and psychological abuse, intimidation, threats, harassment, stalking, and economic and financial abuse are all behavioural tactics to coerce and control and there are many different tools used to coerce and control: money, children, employment, sex, shelter, and the legal system are the most common ones.

It is critically important that everybody who works in the family courts and any professional who deals with family matters has a comprehensive understanding of all forms of abusive behaviour, their intersectionality, and their impacts otherwise vicitms experiences will not change.

We should not have to spell out the impacts of withholding money like child support, settling divorce agreements, or preventing one from working,

We should not have to spell out what harm is caused by gaslighting.

We should not have to spell out how our self-esteem has been eroded because of verbal and psychological abuse.

We should not have to spell out how living in fear of being punished or harmed because we did not comply with conditions set out by a controller impacts our physical well-being; if we do disclose, it is used as a weapon to discredit or further harm the victim.

We should not have to explain in great detail that we have no support due to the isolation tactic of controllers.

If these people were informed - they would understand the many risks and act in a manner and with the urgency required to protect victims.

There is very little, if any, PROTECTION for victims in maintenance courts, children’s courts, domestic violence courts, and divorce matters and courts. If these courts ignore and diminish domestic violence, WHO SHOULD be protecting victims?

The rhetorical question is WHY DO WE HAVE A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT if it is not doing what it is legislated to do especially in family courts, vicitms are told not to focus on the past but work towards the future. The truth is that this continues long into the future expecially if you have children born from the relationship causing unbelievable harm.

We deserve better and Government should DO better

Beware the risks when you become a mother

When men are asked how many children they have, often with jest they say "That I know of?" and everybody burst out laughing.

In a country like South Africa it is endemic and far from comedic, in fact, it is a tragedy.

I wonder what percentage of men can state, with certainty, how many biological children they have.

Women in South Africa are often told to stop having children with men who have children with multiple women.

This was posted on my group and it is not an unusual post.

"The father of my two children said he is going to resign from work because he is unable to afford all his expenses as he has to share his salary with lots of people. He received a summons from a few other baby mamas."

‼️ A woman can't stop her partner or the father of her children from having unprotected sex with other women.

A woman has no control over her partner's or ex-partner's sexual behaviour and men don't truthfully disclose how many 'potential' children or exactly how many biological children they have. Women often only find out years later by chance or through financial assistance requests/demands from the mother. A woman can give a child up for adoption and a new partner will probably never know unless she discloses or the child looks for their biological parents. There is no financial obligation and impact though. Both men and women have a right to disclose or not, the difference is the financial impact. If men are in a relationship or married they should disclose if they are financially contributing to another child as it impacts on their joint income.

Men avoid their financial responsibility towards children they co-created when they are no longer in a relationship whereas women have to provide irrespective of their financial standing or situation. They can't just disappear or resign as the poster shared of the father of her children.

More men dispute paternity because they are not sure where they have planted their seeds as opposed to women not being sure who planted the seed. Paternity should be established but the way it is conducted in our courts casts aspersions on women's sexual behaviour. Nobody knows how many times a man has been taken to court where paternity is in dispute and society does not really seem to care. In some cultures, it is a sign of virility, a sign of manhood.

Women are blamed for having children with irresponsible men. Women don't always choose irresponsible men, they find out afterward that he is irresponsible. If I knew then what I know now I might not have had five children. Not wanting to wear a condom is a sign of irresponsibility but if a woman refuses to have unprotected sex in the moment, she could be raped. If she was she is unlikely to report it as her behaviour would come under extreme scrutiny. She might have consented and at that point, if she declines, she withdraws consent. Consent is not widely understood.

Many wives or partners stay with their man who fathers a child outside their relationship, how many men would stay if their partner was carrying another man's child, my guess is 000,01%

Absolutely, more women should be responsible for their reproductive health and not have children or more children, that's assuming of course that there is always a balance of power - no coercion, no control, and no rape.

Access to prevention should be more accessible to ALL women, sadly the more impoverished and rural areas do not provide adequate access to female contraceptives yet condoms are freely available with ease, and no prescription is required yet men are not using them.

Education, yes there is a lot more education that can and should happen, in the home and socially about reproductive rights and health.

Affordability is often cited as a criterion but in a country with such high levels of abuse, unemployment, and poverty there will always be financial challenges for women having and raising children.

Women might have been financially secure, independent, or in a relationship but that can all change overnight due to divorce, illness, retrenchment, death, separation, or some other tragedy, and end up financially compromised.

A committed relationship or marriage is another criterion cited, no relationship is guaranteed to last forever sadly no matter how good one's intentions are.

Don't have children with different fathers! often referring to single mothers yet many women have been married to different fathers, how is it different? I have children from two marriages I am no different from a single mother. There are no guarantees you won't end up divorced, two-thirds of marriages end up in divorce.

Women are blamed for trying to trap men by having babies, sure coercion could happen in multiple forms BUT men are in control of their sexual reproduction, how many children they have and with whom.

Women mostly take responsibility for the consequences of their reproductive behaviour and raise their children. Women know how many children they have.

It's not rocket science, a child is the result of unprotected sex.

If you are a male and a child is a consequence of unprotected sex you will pay for many years or your parents will pay. That's the law don't blame women, men must take responsibility for the outcomes of their sexual behaviour.

If you are a woman and have unprotected sex you have a great chance of falling pregnant. Women can abort or go ahead with the pregnancy. If women go through with the pregnancy they must be prepared to 'fight' for child support as most men don't voluntarily pay.

When women become mothers, unplanned, planned, married, or single they are at risk of possibly raising their children with little or no financial and physical support irrespective of their race, class, religion, culture, or socioeconomics.

Sexual health includes STDs but is not focused on in this post.

Coercive Control is covert.

A couple separated in October 2020 and the divorce process is ongoing.

Shortly after the separation, the wife and child moved from the former matrimonial home in Kyalami, Midrand (where the husband remains resident), to Pretoria East.

Whilst not knowing the full story or reading the court documents, a few observations and questions come to mind.

1. They have been separated since October 2020 and the divorce is still ongoing - Why is it taking so long?

Is it the financial aspects or co-parenting that is holding the divorce up?

I suspect both as there are professionals involved some of who are involved to resolve the co-parenting.

2. Their child must have been about 18 months old when they got separated. The mother appears to be the primary parent as she took the child to play school if not every day, most days.

3. The mother moved to Pretoria East when they got separated - has the fact that she moved to Pretoria East always been an issue or just now?

I suspect selective. He states she enrolled their child at a play school near her. This might be because she had to find employment or she had employment and needed to place the child in care during the day, it has been 3 years do one can assume there is acceptance.

4. Does the mother live alone or with family, not many women can afford their own accommodation unless she is employed and or provided for during the separation.

"He complained that this left 100% of transportation for him between Kyalami and Pretoria. This resulted in him spending hours in traffic to exercise contact with the child."

5. Did he have contact with the child during the week and if so how many times a week? Was the inconvenience to him greater than that to the mother who did it more regularly?

6. The husband alleged that since their separation, the wife had adopted a high-handed and dictatorial approach to all decisions about the child’s care and had made unilateral decisions. The wife, on the other hand, said that the husband has made ever-increasing demands that are not in the interest of their child.

7. When you are together couples make joint decisions or one would make certain decisions like financing and the other to do with running the household and the childcare, these are often gendered.

You can imagine the conversation going something like "We need to find somewhere for our child to go when I go back to work". "Find somewhere that is convenient for you as you will be doing most of the dropping and collecting"

So you separate and now the same logic is not applied.

8. Power imbalances - he says she adopted a high-handed and dictatorial approach since they got separated. Was she more compliant in the matrimonial home and now that she is not she can be more assertive? Is he pushing back?

9.She says "he is making ever-increasing demands that are not in the best interest of the child.". - When it seems people no longer have the control they used to, they exert it in other ways.

The judge stated "Sadly divorce, separation or any kind of dispute between the mother and the father exposes children to a great deal of acrimony. Ordinarily, while the parents engage in a legal battle, the poor children become the arena of the struggle.”

10.The parents started discussing schools in March last year, the father wanted the child enrolled at a school in Centurian, and he says the mother said she would consider it.

What happened between March and September?

How many discussions were had around this and how did they end? I guess they did not go well because the mother enrolled their child at a school near her.

11. Did she ever have a choice/voice during the discussions or was it an 'instruction' that she did not comply with, he states she 'misled' him because she said she would consider it.

She appears to have considered it and it being 29kms away it was not the best option. You might think she only considered her conveniance, well if she is the primary parent and doing most of the driving her circumstances should be the main consideration.

The distance is not just kilometers driven, it is the time spent driving, the time a 5-year-old would have to wake up every day. The petrol cost, 29kms x maybe 4, the wear and tear on the car. How far would it be from her place of work if she was working?

12. When he found out he informed the school that he did not consent.

"Experts who are counseling the parents and the child advised the parties that it was important for the child to attend a school midway between the parties' respective homes for ease of contact between both parents."

13. Who are these 'experts' are they hired guns? Are there regulations and Codes of Best Practice for these experts?

14. The court meanwhile disagreed with the idea of the school halfway between the parties' respective homes. It said for the child to make it in time every day to school, it means she will have to leave her mother’s home in the early hours of the morning so that the mother could navigate the traffic.

“Surely that will be torture for the child and it will be serving the interest of the parents and disregarding the best interest of the child,” the court said in ordering the mother’s choice of the school."

15. If these experts were domestic violence informed and not biased, they were they would have focused on the child's best interest and taken the primary parent's circumstances into consideration because it is in the child's best interest because that parent is doing the daily care work.

As an expert on coercive behaviour, one can see signs of the behaviour. This is a textbook.

One takes into consideration, power imbalances, timelines, the words used, and the punishment and reward of compliance. The self-focus - one party was more focused on self.

I am sure if she had the financial means she would have approached the court before he did.

There is more to this story, it is not over by a long shot.

The core issue needs to be identified and addressed until then, this will continue.