Skip to main content

Concluding Remarks: The need for a contextualised response to domestic and family violence in rural areas

Sex Discrimination

Concluding Remarks: The need for a contextualised response to domestic and family violence in rural areas[1]

Side Event: Impact of violence against rural women

Commission on the Status of Women, 56th Session

United Nations Headquarters, New York, Conference Room A[i]

Elizabeth Broderick

Sex Discrimination Commissioner

2 March 2012


Violence against women is never easy to talk about.  But, if we are to succeed in our efforts to eliminate it, we cannot be afraid to address this issue openly and honestly.  We must name the problem, identify its causes, and ensure effective state action. 

If we don’t, women’s experiences of violence will remain hidden and perpetrators will be allowed to get away with their crimes with impunity, cloaked in the security of patriarchy.   

In closing I would like to revisit three of the issues that have come out of today’s panel and discussion.

Raising awareness of the barriers rural women face

The first theme concerns the need to raise awareness of the specific barriers victims and survivors face in rural areas.

All women have a right to live their lives free of violence.  This right is not dependent on where a woman lives—whether a woman lives in New York, Nuku’alofa or in far north Queensland, Australia she is entitled to live her life free of violence.

Yet, as the panellists will discuss, where a woman lives can and does have a significant impact on her ability to realise this right in practice.

Let me give an example. 

It is often assumed there will be law enforcement officials who will be able to enforce violence protection orders used in Australia. However, in rural areas such enforcement can be difficult where the closest police station is over an hour away by car or if the one police officer on duty is a friend of the perpetrator. 

As Lisa Pruitt of the University of California notes:

It is not that rural women are worse off than their urban or suburban counterparts; it is that their spatial circumstances and the consequences of those circumstances are relevant to the phenomenon of domestic violence….[ii]    

The challenge is to call attention to these circumstances.    

Tailoring responses to rural contexts

The second theme concerns theneed to tailor responses to domestic violence to take rural contexts into account.

As the panellists will explain today, the realities of living in rural area can mean:

  • geographical isolation, for instance physical distance from shelters and other services;
  • limited education and employment opportunities to assist victims and survivors to leave violence;
  • higher levels of socio-economic disadvantage;
  • difficulties in implementing prevention initiatives;
  • limited access to services and infrastructure; and
  • intimate and interconnected social relations.[iii] 

Another factor concerns the unique experiences of rural women following natural disasters. The research shows, the levels of domestic violence can increase in post-disaster contexts.[iv]   

The risk in failing to pay attention to the realities of rural women is that our responses to violence will ultimately prove ineffectual.  As I said at the beginning, the right to live free of violence is not dependent on where a woman lives – and our responses shouldn’t be either. 

Empowerment of rural women

The third theme and the overarching theme of CSW this year, concerns empowerment of rural women.

Violence against women undermines gender equality.  It also limits women’s capacity to participate in public life and hampers women’s full development and advancement. 

Rural women are resilient and resourceful individuals.  Here, at CSW, we’ve heard about many projects designed by and for rural women, with a view to ensuring their full development and advancement.  These initiatives should be celebrated and encouraged.

National governments must work closely with rural women to ensure that the necessary structures are put in place to enable their empowerment.  In the Australian context, for example, last year the Government introduced a National Action Plan to Reduce Violence Against Women and their Children, which identifies several actions for rural women including:

  • training for health workers in regional and rural areas to assist domestic violence victims and survivors, and
  • funding for the National Rural Women’s Coalition to implement primary prevention programs in rural communities
  • a twenty-four‐hour phone counselling service for victims.

However, there is still more that could be done. There is a need to ensure that there are sufficient services responding to the needs of women and girls who are or have experienced violence regardless of their urban or rural location, including:

  • prevention programs delivered in rural areas;
  • accessible and appropriate counselling services, shelters, refuges, accommodation, health care, legal services and other support services;
  • additional services and supports provided in post-disaster situations; and
  • specific services and support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women, culturally and linguistically diverse women and women with disabilities.

Ladies and gentlemen, can I please ask you to join me in giving our panel a warm and generous thank you for sharing their experiences and their insights. And thank you once again to the Australian and Solomon Islands Governments for hosting this panel.

Thank you.


[1] These are the complete concluding remarks, which due to time constraints, were unable to be delivered in full at the Side Event.

[i] The Commission on Status of Women 56 Side Event, Impact of violence against rural women, held on 2 March 2012, was co-sponsored by the Governments of Australia and Solomon Islands. The event was chaired by Ms. Elizabeth Broderick, Sex Discrimination Commissioner of the Australian Human Rights Commission. The panel speakers included:

  • Ms Julie Collins MP, Minister for Status of Women, Government of Australia (by video)
  • Excerpt from the Australian Story Episode, Courage of her Convictions, (2011).
  • Catherine Smith, survivor of domestic violence from rural NSW
  • Vickie Smith, daughter
  • H.E. Mr Collin Beck, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Solomon Islands to the United Nations
  • Ms Ofa Guttenbeil-Likiliki, Co-ordinator, Tonga Women’s Crisis Centre

[ii] Lisa R. Pruitt, ‘Place Matters: Domestic Violence and Rural Difference’ (2008) 23(2) Wisconsin Journal of Law, Gender & Society 346, at 355.

[iii] See T.K. Logan & Robert Walker, ‘Civil Protective Orders Effective Stopping or Reducing Partner Violence: Challenges Remain in Rural Areas with Access and Enforcement’, Carsey Institute Policy Brief No. 18 (2011), 1; Pruitt, above; Lisa R. Pruitt, ‘Toward a Feminist Theory of the Rural’ (2007) Utah Law Review 421, at 443-453; Margaret Alston, ‘Violence against Women in a Rural Context’ (1997) 50(1) Australian Social Work 15,at 20.

[iv] For a discussion of the relationship between natural disasters and domestic and family violence, see Milanda Rout, ‘Disaster Heartbreak Breeds Its own Cycle of Violence’ The Australian, 28 January 2012. At: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/disaster-heartbreak-breeds-its-own-cycle-of-violence/story-e6frg6z6-1226255752382 (viewed 2 February 2012); Megan Sety, ‘Domestic Violence and Natural Disasters’ Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse, Thematic Review 3, February 2012. At: http://www.austdvclearinghouse.unsw.edu.au/PDF%20files/Thematic%20Review_3.pdf  (viewed 2 February 2012); Debra Parkinson & Claire Zara, Way He Tells It (forthcoming 2012).