Earlier this year the UK Government put out a call for evidence around ‘Tackling violence against women and girls: funding’. The Home Affairs Select Commitee has now released a report on this which highlights the need for longer term focus on preventative approaches, an enhanced need for research and evidence around what works, and ringfenced funding for ‘by and for’ services. The full report is available here. I submitted evidence for this call which is outlined in full below and is published in the report above and can be found as a stand alone document from the commons library here.
Written evidence submitted by Dr Jade Levell (TVF0008)
Evidence Submission: Tackling Violence Against Women and Girls: Funding
Introduction
The recognition of children as direct victims of domestic violence and abuse (DVA) marks a significant step forward in acknowledging the profound impact of such experiences on young lives. However, this legal recognition has not been matched by the necessary ringfenced funding to support these vulnerable children. Despite the clear need for dedicated resources, there remains a substantial gap in consistent and national funding for children who have experienced DVA.
This fragmented and inconsistent approach to funding and support services leaves many children vulnerable and without the necessary interventions to address their experiences of domestic violence. Without dedicated funding and a cohesive national strategy, these children are at risk of continued trauma and adverse outcomes, including involvement in further violence and gang activities. It is crucial that policymakers prioritize ringfenced funding for children-specific DVA support to ensure that all children who have experienced domestic violence receive the help they need, regardless of their location or their parents’ involvement.
Children are legally recognised as direct victims of DVA, but this has not been followed by ringfenced funding for them
Despite children being legally recognized as direct victims of domestic violence and abuse (DVA), there remains a significant gap in consistent and national funding dedicated to supporting them. This lack of ringfenced funding means that many children who have experienced DVA are left without the necessary resources and support to address their trauma and rebuild their lives. Research by the Domestic Abuse Commissioner ‘ A Patchwork of Provision’ (2022), found that just 29% of DVA victims and survivors who wanted support for their children received it. The mapping showed a postcode lottery of support for children and significant regional disparity. This fragmented and inconsistent approach to funding and support services leaves many children vulnerable and without the necessary interventions to address their experiences of domestic violence. Without dedicated funding and a cohesive national strategy, these children are at risk of continued trauma and adverse outcomes, including involvement in further violence and gang activities. It is crucial that policymakers prioritize ringfenced funding for children-specific DVA support to ensure that all children who have experienced domestic violence receive the help they need, regardless of their location or their parents’ involvement.
Contemporary policy and intervention frameworks silo out violence in a way which creates a fractured intervention pathway that fails to prioritise childhood DVA
During 2024-2025 I have been collaborating with the National Childhood Mortality Database (NCMD) and a team from Emergency Medicine at the University of Bristol. Our paper (currently unpublished- forthcoming) reports on analysis from case files collated by the National Childhood Mortality Database (NCMD) on children in England and Wales who died through stabbing. 145 CYP who died of knife wounds and submitted to the NCMD between April 2019 and March 2024. A detailed analysis was undertaken of 57 eligible CYP where full NCMD records were available after the completion of the child death review process. The case file analysis that is focused on in this paper is particularly the experiences of violence prior to the fatal injury. The findings were that the fatal violence that the children experienced was often not the children’s first experience of violence victimisation. Contemporary policy thinking frames serious youth violence (SYV) as a distinct and separate issue to domestic violence and abuse (DVA). Analysis of the NCMD case files presents these forms of violence as more intertwined in the lives of children who die through stabbing; a substantial proportion were both victims and perpetrators of diverse forms of violence before they died. The majority of children who died through stabbing had also been victims of childhood domestic violence and abuse (DVA) in their home, yet none had received children-specific DVA support from a specialist service. The fatal violence that the children experienced was often not the children’s first experience of violence victimisation. Findings in the paper highlight the ways in which contemporary policy and intervention frameworks silo out violence in a way which creates a fractured intervention pathway that fails to prioritise childhood DVA. Our findings suggest there is a significant missed opportunity for early intervention at the point of childhood DVA experience which may reduce children’s risk of further violence victimisation and perpetration at a later stage.
Funding services for children around DVA may prevent later Serious Youth Violence
My research (Levell, 2020, 2022) delves into the intricate relationship between childhood domestic abuse and gang involvement among boys. It highlights how these young men, often overlooked in domestic violence policy and practice, navigate their journey to manhood amidst pervasive violence, poverty, and racial marginalization. Boys have historically been the blind spot in DVA policy and professional practice, often neglected due to the perception that they are potential perpetrators rather than victims. This issue is particularly acute for boys and young men who are criminalized and labelled as gang-involved by their teenage years. My research also explores the intersection of masculinities and social inequalities, drawing on concepts like hegemonic masculinity and protest masculinity. It examines how race, ethnicity, and class influence gendered identities and how these boys cope with co-existing harms such as sexual violence, school exclusion, and peer-on-peer violence. The findings reveal that these boys, invisible as child survivors of domestic abuse, become hyper-visible as gang-involved offenders.
Our current approach to funding via the Serious Violence Duty creates a hierarchy of violence, prioritising public violence over private violence
The current approach to funding via the Serious Violence Duty inadvertently creates a hierarchy of violence, where public violence is prioritized over private violence. This framework places the responsibility on local areas to define what constitutes ‘serious’ violence, often leading to a dominant focus on violence occurring in public spaces among under 25-year-olds and extra-familial harm. Consequently, funding allocations are directed towards interventions that address serious youth violence in public settings, rather than early interventions that target domestic violence and abuse (DVA) experienced in childhood.
This focus on public space violence overlooks the critical need for early intervention in cases of childhood DVA, which is a significant precursor to later involvement in serious youth violence. By not addressing the private violence that occurs within the home, the current funding approach fails to provide comprehensive support to children who are at risk of becoming both victims and perpetrators of violence. Early intervention at the point of childhood DVA experience is crucial for breaking the cycle of violence and preventing the escalation to more severe forms of violence later in life. Therefore, a more balanced approach to funding is needed—one that recognizes the interconnectedness of private and public violence and prioritizes early intervention for children affected by DVA. This would ensure that children receive the necessary support to mitigate the long-term impacts of domestic violence and reduce their risk of further victimization and involvement in serious youth violence.
Conclusion: Children’s DVA support needs to be a funding priority
In conclusion, it is imperative that children who have experienced domestic violence and abuse (DVA) receive dedicated and consistent funding for support services. The current fragmented and inconsistent provision leaves many children without the necessary help, exacerbating their vulnerability to further violence and gang involvement. By prioritizing early intervention and ensuring that children-specific DVA support is available, we can address the root causes of serious youth violence and provide these young individuals with a safer and more stable future. Investing in these services is not just a moral obligation but a crucial step in breaking the cycle of violence and fostering healthier communities.
References
Children’s Commissioner (2024) Childrens-mental-health-services-22-23. London. Available at: file:///C:/Users/Jade Levell/Downloads/Childrens-mental-health-services-22-23_CCo-final-report (1).pdf.
Domestic Abuse Commissioner’s Office (2022) A Patchwork of Provision. London.
Levell, J. (2020) ‘Using Connell’s masculinity theory to understand the way in which ex-gang-involved men coped with childhood domestic violence’, Journal of Gender Based Violence, xx(xx), pp. 1–15. doi: 10.1332/239868020X15857301876812.
Levell, J. (2022) Boys, Childhood Domestic Abuse, and Gang Involvement: Violence at Home, Violence On-Road. Bristol: Policy Press.
jadelevell.com 