Reader’s Opinion | Mediation does not guarantee a fair encounter for the parties involved in intimate partner violence

Mediation instructor Minna Autere wrote (HS Opinion 2.6.) that he opposes the recording of the government’s program, according to which the mediation of family and intimate partner violence is generally being abandoned. According to Auteree, intimate partner violence occurs, for example, in connection with custody disputes and in addition to couples, also in other intimate relationships. Furthermore, according to Auteree, parties to violence, such as children, may have to wait for help for their experiences even for years as criminal and legal processes drag on.

We, experts in family and intimate partner violence work, consider the registration of the government program to be correct and important, especially from the perspective of those who experience violence. In contrast to, for example, mediating a fight at a nakki kiosk, intimate partner violence is about violence in a close human relationship, which involves different relationships of affection and dependence, but also the use of power. In addition to physical violence, intimate partner violence can be, for example, severe control of a loved one, mental invalidation, financial exploitation or stalking through digital means.

Our concern is whether all forms of violence in a close relationship, the severity and frequency of the violence will be revealed before or during the mediation. How is the safety of the parties taken care of and the end of the violence monitored?

Several according to studies, only a fraction of intimate partner violence comes to the attention of the authorities. When a criminal report has been filed for intimate partner violence, the violence has often continued for a long time in a different form. Referring domestic violence crimes to mediation gives the perpetrator, wider society and especially the victim a message that it is not a serious matter, a crime. There is a high risk that referral to mediation does not guarantee a fair encounter for the parties involved in intimate partner violence, where the victim’s rights and safety are primary.

“

There is a risk that the referral to mediation does not guarantee a fair meeting for the parties.

The EU has just approved a directive against violence against women and children, which emphasizes the responsibility of states and society to protect victims of family and intimate partner violence. The directive stipulates, among other things, that victims of violence “have an increased risk of intimidation, reprisals, and secondary and repeated victimization. Member States should ensure that special attention is paid to these risks and the need to protect the dignity and physical integrity of victims. Previous acquaintance or previous relationship with the offender is one factor that should be taken into account when assessing the risk of retaliation.”

Are agree with Auteree that all parties involved in intimate partner violence, including children, should receive help and support for their experiences or actions without delay. However, this should not be dependent on mediation, but the authorities and other actors who encounter the parties involved in intimate partner violence should systematically guide the parties to help. This requires time, resources, perseverance and solid cooperation between different actors.

We are very concerned about the funding cuts planned for social and health organizations. The providers of services specializing in intimate partner violence are mainly in the organization sector, and the work they do must be protected in the future.

Tiina Muukkonen

development manager

Riina Karjalainen

expert

family and intimate partner violence work

Association of First Aid and Shelter Homes

The reader’s opinions are speeches written by HS readers, which are selected and delivered by the HS editors. You can leave an opinion piece or familiarize yourself with the principles of writing at the address www.hs.fi/kiryotamielipidekeisuis/.