@PWDAustralia Do these stats include legalised violence @PWDAustralia ?
And unreported violence?
How were the stats gathered?
And what do we need to do to get a more accurate picture of the rates & types of violence reported or experienced by women with disabilities?
&Their impacts?
Especially, legalised violence, which can, by definition, be ended by the strike of a pen 😑
It's very difficult, of not impossible, to report violence as a crime in places where violence has been legalised. Legalised violence doesn't count, and there are no mechanisms to exclude
illegal violence from legalised violence perpetrated by those empowered to legally enact violence on women with disabilities in circumstances where violence would not be legal against an abled woman.
Police will either refuse to accept complaints, or the staff will be empowered
under the eg mental health Act to prevent police from interviewing the complainant or gathering any physical evide of the allegations. Staff use this power, regularly, to prevent women making complaints of assault or sexual assault by staff from being interviewed by police,
receiving rape kit's, or having photographs taken of any physical injuries.
If violence which is not denied is reported to police, they are usually unwilling to investigate whether it breached the legalised violence stipulations in eg MHA
And even if it goes through a complaint
To a regulatory watchdog and is resolved as not having met the MHS requirements (thus not being legal violence) the regulator refuses to provide evidence to police because aren't allowed to provide a definitive legal finding on whether MHA stipulation on legality was breached
So there are, effectively, no mechanisms for a criminal complaint to be brought against staff for physical or sexual violence against women held under MHA
& It's common that even women who get police to investigate a complaint (without opportunity to record physical evidence)
That clinical staff will try to undermine the complaint, claiming the complainant is "of unsound mind" - the same reason used to prevent police obtaining objective physical evidence at time of alleged incident.
So whether the violence is admitted or denied, there's no mechanism for reporting or (if admitted) even determining, illegal violence.
So there are effectively no actionable laws against any type of violence against women held under an MHA, and it's "anything goes"
@threadreaderapp unroll
This thread please
@threadreaderapp unroll
This thread

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Falteringly moving on (again)

Falteringly moving on (again) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @FalteringlyOn

13 Oct
@RosenbergSeb @DavidColemanMP @ian_hickie @AUMentalHealth @CMHAustralia @NMHC @BEINGMHC So, once again, lobbies serve themselves, and, once again, the entire narrative of substantive equality is erased from the collective consciousness
This is not progress in implementing a ratified convention for substantive equality. This is not in the wider public interest 1/
@RosenbergSeb @DavidColemanMP @ian_hickie @AUMentalHealth @CMHAustralia @NMHC @BEINGMHC This is three men who have used influence and strategic association to build a lobbying empire, and in some cases, a charity empire practicing anticompetitive behaviour, and exploitation. Knowingly forcing mental health philosophy, medicalisation & judicialision 2/
@RosenbergSeb @DavidColemanMP @ian_hickie @AUMentalHealth @CMHAustralia @NMHC @BEINGMHC To serve their interests at the cost of wider discourse on diversity & substantive Equality
By continuing to perpetuate Prejudice and misinform on the distinction between a scientific finding and a preconceived philosophy assumed apriori 3/
Read 12 tweets
13 Oct
@VMIAC But are they for people who have diverse experience of advocating for substantive equality under a rights based/diversity based model of disability, @VMIAC ?
The issues of persons with "lived experience of mental health" seeking to impose their mental health philosophy 1/
@VMIAC On others and refusing to allow wider discussion of substantive equality inherent in CRPD guidance & international discourse to even take place.
How do we address substantive equality, within our ranks?
What accountability will be laid against persons with "lived experience" 2/
@VMIAC To uphold the rights of substantive equality and not to oppose them, for example by insisting that the peak body for persons experiencing crisis or Psychosocial disability continue to be clear "Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Council" 3/
Read 15 tweets
13 Oct
@MHReformVic @MHReformVic please do not ever say "mental health" without another, non-medical word
I appreciate you said "mental health and wellbeing" in the main title, but you reverted to "mental health needs of your region" alone in the text body.
@MHReformVic The wellbeing needs of a large diversity of many different communities, includes those people whose wellbeing is significantly damaged by exerting undue pressure and influence to view life through a "mental health" paradigm/philosophy 2/
@MHReformVic "mental health" is not an interchangeable word with wellbeing. It is a specific philosophy that posits wellbeing as a personal "health issue" situated within an individual, the construction shifts in its definition, but the latest one is that 3/
Read 27 tweets
12 Oct
@JDaviesPhD 🙄
I'm starting to feel, increasingly @JDaviesPhD that twitter psychologists not allies in human rights & substantive equality, but sharks who are actually guilty of what DX based med model proponents have been accusing them of: only seeking to supplant them as our new masters 1/
@JDaviesPhD I have **repeatedly** tried to say to you, & to @psychgeist52 and to @peterkinderman 3 people I had come to trust in as having honourable & reliable intentions that the continued reification of "mental health" and "intervention" philosophy runs contrary to human rights guidance2/
@JDaviesPhD @psychgeist52 @peterkinderman Rarely, do any of you *ever* respond & as yet *none* of you have ceased reification of mental health philosophy & intervention philosophy as top level discourse for where the psychology profession needs to go or how Psychosocial disability & crisis support sector needs to grow 3/
Read 19 tweets
10 Oct
@kbmann64 @notgoingquieter @DrNic16 You manage risk @kbmann64
That's how you stave off death or injury to the best of your ability
You need to sit down and look at the relative risks on both sides of the equation & make a decision
You also need to understand that you are making a decision that affects others
@kbmann64 @notgoingquieter @DrNic16 So the balance on the public interest, is that you need to make the decision that actually mitigates your risk of any vaccine harms, which is not just whether to take it, but which to take, and how to respond to any adverse effects with treatment
@kbmann64 @notgoingquieter @DrNic16 If you are a person who *genuinely* cannot take a vaccine because of *genuine* contraindications, then obviously you need to be accommodated. But if you are not such a person, but have made your decision based on ignoring the risks to yourself and to others of contracting
Read 7 tweets
10 Oct
@regnans @notgoingquieter @DrNic16 If you have concerns about the document, or any official document, the responsible thing to do is to sit down and outline those concerns, and consider what the document *should* say, and why it should say that, in the benefit of public interest as a whole. Then advocate 1/2
@regnans @notgoingquieter @DrNic16 That is the clarification I am seeking to make. You are an adult, and a member of a democracy. You do not have government-kings, you have elected representatives who are bound to listen to reasoned argument. You are equally bound to make reasoned argument, when you advocate 2/2
@regnans @notgoingquieter @DrNic16 What is really ridiculous, is that there has been a dearth on reasoned discussion within the community over the past few months, ever since Vic went into its second lockdown, conversation degraded. Instead of calm, rational analysis of what had gone wrong to cause an outbreak 1/n
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!