ࡱ > l o c d e f g h i j k g * bjbjVV 7 r< r< q | ~ , ) ) + + + .+ .+ .+ 8 f+ | - .+
n . @ ( @ @ A Υ Ү < _ a a a a a a $ + ) ) @ A b N
Z Z Z ) @ L :* A G Z _ Z Z N K ) T * @ A W':S | 0 3 d
0
' p R p ` \ p + Z Z
p ' : Measurement of family violence at a population level: What might be needed to develop reliable and valid family violence indicators?
Pauline Gulliver1, PhD; Associate Professor Janet Fanslow2, PhD
1 Research Fellow, New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse
2 Associate Professor, Social & Community Health, School of Population Health, The University of Auckland; Co-Director, New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse
The New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse can be contacted at:
New Zealand Family V i o l e n c e C l e a r i n g h o u s e T m a k i I n n o v a t i o n C a m p u s T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f A u c k l a n d P r i v a t e B a g 9 2 0 1 9 , V i c t o r i a S t r e e t W e s t
A u c k l a n d 1 1 4 2 N e w Z e a l a n d
P h o n e : + 6 4 9 9 2 3 4 6 4 0
E m a i l : i n f o @ n z f v c . o r g . n z W e b s i t e : w w w . n z f v c . o r g . n z
I S S N : 2 2 5 3 - 3 2 1 4 ( p r i n t ) I S S N : 2 2 5 3 - 3 2 2 2 (online)
Recommended citation
Gulliver, P., Fanslow, J. (2012). Measurement of family violence at a population level: What might be needed to develop reliable and valid family violence indicators? Auckland, New Zealand: New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse, The University of Auckland.
Acknowledgements
Thank you to Debbie Scott (Australian Institute of Family Studies), Professor Jane Koziol-McLain (Auckland University of Technology ) , H e r a C l a r k e ( M o r i A d v i s o r y G r o u p o f t h e T a s k f o r c e f o r A c t i o n o n V i o l e n c e w i t h i n F a m i l i e s ) a n d K i r i H a n n i f i n ( N a t i o n a l N G O A l l i a n c e a g a i n s t F a m i l y V i o l e n c e ) f o r p r o v i d i n g c o m m e n t s o n e a r l i e r v e r s i o n s o f t h i s p a p e r . T h a n k y o u t o R a d h a B a l a k r i s h n a n ( F a m i l ies Commission) for information on the role of family violence data in the government policy environment. Finally, thank you to Nicola Paton (New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse) for her contribution throughout the development of the issues paper.
Contents
TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480613" Glossary PAGEREF _Toc328480613 \h 4
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480614" 1. Introduction PAGEREF _Toc328480614 \h 5
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480615" 2. Background PAGEREF _Toc328480615 \h 7
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480616" 2.1 Definition of family violence PAGEREF _Toc328480616 \h 8
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480617" 2.2 What do we mean by measurement? PAGEREF _Toc328480617 \h 11
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480618" 2.2.1 Surveillance PAGEREF _Toc328480618 \h 12
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480619" 2.2.2 Monitoring PAGEREF _Toc328480619 \h 12
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480620" 2.2.3 Research PAGEREF _Toc328480620 \h 13
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480621" 3. Data sources in New Zealand PAGEREF _Toc328480621 \h 16
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480622" 3.1 Police PAGEREF _Toc328480622 \h 17
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480623" 3.2 Court data PAGEREF _Toc328480623 \h 18
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480624" 3.3 Government social service agency data (i.e. Child Youth and Family data) PAGEREF _Toc328480624 \h 19
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480625" 3.4 Hospital discharge data PAGEREF _Toc328480625 \h 19
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480626" 3.5 NGO administrative data PAGEREF _Toc328480626 \h 21
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480627" 3.6 Population-based surveys PAGEREF _Toc328480627 \h 21
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480628" 3.6.1 Crime Victim Surveys PAGEREF _Toc328480628 \h 22
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480629" 3.6.2 The University of Aucklands Youth2000 PAGEREF _Toc328480629 \h 23
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480630" 3.6.3 Family violence specific surveys PAGEREF _Toc328480630 \h 23
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480631" 3.7 Research studies PAGEREF _Toc328480631 \h 24
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480632" 4. International experiences PAGEREF _Toc328480632 \h 26
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480633" 4.1 Surveillance through linking multiple administrative data sources, from Scotland PAGEREF _Toc328480633 \h 26
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480634" 4.2 Enhancing data from existing sources, from the USA PAGEREF _Toc328480634 \h 27
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480635" 4.3 An example of using crime surveys, from the UK PAGEREF _Toc328480635 \h 28
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480636" 4.4 Including violence-specific modules in other general population surveys, from the USA PAGEREF _Toc328480636 \h 29
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480637" 4.5 Family violence specific population-based measurements, from the USA PAGEREF _Toc328480637 \h 30
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480638" 5. Discussion PAGEREF _Toc328480638 \h 32
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480639" 6. Conclusion and recommendations PAGEREF _Toc328480639 \h 34
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480640" References PAGEREF _Toc328480640 \h 37
HYPERLINK \l "_Toc328480641" Appendix 1: Definitions of family violence PAGEREF _Toc328480641 \h 40
Glossary
TermDefinitionAdministrative data setData sets maintained by government agencies for monitoring resource use and for policy development and implementation.JurisdictionsThe limits within which any government or court has authority (e.g. province or state, administrative boundaries such as police districts).Operational definitionSpecifies what is meant by the theoretical definition in terms of observable, measurable variables.Pre-processing of dataCleaning a data set to ensure that inconsistent or incomplete data is removed and errors have been corrected.Theoretical definitionSpecifies what is meant by a concept or term, allowing a common understanding of that concept.
Introduction
The purpose of this Issues Paper is to review some of the available sources of data on family violence, assess strengths and limitations of these data sources, and to assist the reader to develop an understanding of the issues associated with family violence data collections. In particular, there is a focus on assessing these data collections in relation to the production of indicators for family violence (see Section 5).
Indicators are intended to provide simple and reliable estimate of trends over time. To be useful, valid and reliable, indicators should be based on data that is complete and that measures what it claims to measure consistently, exhibiting little variation due to subjectivity ADDIN EN.CITE Department of Education and Training235[3]23523548Department of Education and Training,What makes a good performance indicator?9 May 2012Department of Education and Training. Queensland Governmenthttp://deta.qld.gov.au/publications/strategic/evaluation/pdf/good-performance-indicators.pdf[ HYPERLINK \l "_ENREF_3" \o "Department of Education and Training, #235" 3]. In The Good Indicators Guide, the following analogy is used to describe an indicator:
Imagine a car dashboard: an indicator is a warning light flashing on the dashboard. It is fed by one of many streams of data maybe oil level, temperature etc It flashes when all is not well, suggesting we stop the car. The indicator alerts us to something worthy of investigation (pg 6 ADDIN EN.CITE Pencheon236[4]23623627Pencheon, D.NHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement, The Association of Public Health ObservatoriesThe good indicators guide: Understanding how to use and choose indicatorsCoventryNHS Institute for Innovation and Improvement[ HYPERLINK \l "_ENREF_4" \o "Pencheon, #236" 4]).
The reliability and validity of the indicator is important, because it tells us when a response is required. If the flash on the dashboard alerts us at an inappropriate time (when there is nothing wrong with the car), this can result in unnecessary inconvenience. Similarly, if an indicator is based on data that is influenced by factors unrelated to changes in family violence, it can inappropriately redirect resources.
A related goal of this document is to support a wide range of readers to develop an understanding of the issues associated with family violence data collections. The paper concludes with suggestions for future work that could assist the development of family violence indicators in New Zealand. People who may be interested in the content of this paper will range from members of the public with an interest in family violence to those involved in the development of government policy.
The New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse was motivated by a desire to keep this information in an accessible and readable format. Therefore, while we have sought to identify key issues associated with family violence data, we have not discussed each point exhaustively. Where more detailed discussion on a topic might be of interest to some readers, literature has been highlighted that may be of use. In addition, at the end of each section we have produced a summary of key points.
Some topics are not addressed within the scope of this paper. This Issues Paper will not answer the question of whether family violence indicators can be developed and the process for doing so. Further work is required to understand the flow of data through administrative datasets, potential points of influence on the data and how changes in organisational business practice impact on data collection before reliable and valid indicators can be developed. In addition, this paper will not address family violence prevention, nor the theoretical underpinnings of prevention. Previous publications are available that address both of these issues ADDIN EN.CITE Fanslow2005242[5]24224227Fanslow, J.Families CommissionBeyond sero tolerance: key issues and future directions for family violence work in New ZealandResearch Report No 3/052005AugustWellingtonFamilies Commission[ HYPERLINK \l "_ENREF_5" \o "Fanslow, 2005 #242" 5].
Background
Government agencies, non-government organisations and researchers all require reliable measures of family violence and its components in order to understand the magnitude of the problem, to identify strategies that are effective in reducing the magnitude of the problem and to effectively target resources. For these stakeholders, the availability of good quality family violence data could help to answer such questions as whether there are changes in the trends of family violence (is it increasing or decreasing), whether family violence is becoming more severe, whether the nature of family violence is changing (e.g. from less physical to more psychological assault), and whether there exists good quality regional data which can inform local interventions.
As the national centre for collecting and disseminating information about family violence in New Zealand, the New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse has a strong interest in the quality of family violence data. In this paper we:
Draw attention to the data that is currently available in New Zealand;
Assess the strengths and weaknesses of this data in relation to monitoring trends in family violence at the population level;
Highlight opportunities for further development of existing datasets, drawing on the experiences of other developed countries;
Consider some of the implications for reporting family violence data at the national level; and
Suggest some future courses of action which could support the development of reliable and valid family violence indicators.
This Issues Paper discusses both fatal and non-fatal family violence events. There are a number of sources of fatal family violence data in New Zealand which, if interrogated and reported upon consistently, could provide an indication of trends over time. It is in the interrogation and reporting of non-fatal family violence data that New Zealand, and many other countries, experience difficulties.
Definition of family violence
Definitions are the starting point for all measurement of family violence, so that we can be clear about what we are counting. Without consistent definitions underpinning our data collection systems, we cannot hope to answer policy questions about trends over time.
There are different types of definitions. Theoretical definitions explain what is meant by a concept, allowing a common understanding of that concept. An example of a theoretical definition might be that family violence is comprised of different components or types of violence, such as child abuse and neglect, intimate partner violence, and violence against older people. Operational definitions explain what is meant by the theoretical definition in terms of observable, measurable variables. Differences in operational definitions (for example, between organisations or changes in definition over time) can create challenges in when trying to make comparisons.
This issues paper will focus on the definition of family violence used by the Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families ADDIN EN.CITE Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families2011190[6]19019048Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families,Background to the family violence indicators201113 March 2012Ministry of Social Developmenthttp://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/work-programmes/initiatives/action-family-violence/family-violence-indicators.html[ HYPERLINK \l "_ENREF_6" \o "Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families, 2011 #190" 6], as it encompasses differences in relationships between the victim and family or household members who may or may not be related but are living in family-like relationships. This definition was derived from the New Zealand Government Statement of Policy on Family Violence ADDIN EN.CITE Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet1996247[7]24724727Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet,Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Department of Social WelfareNew Zealand Government Statement of Policy on Family Violence1996JuneWellington[ HYPERLINK \l "_ENREF_7" \o "Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 1996 #247" 7] and the Domestic Violence Act 1995.
The definition of family violence used in the Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families indicators report is the Te Rito definition:
a broad range of controlling behaviours, commonly of a physical, sexual and/or psychological nature, which typically involve fear, intimidation and emotional deprivation. It occurs within a variety of close interpersonal relationships, such as between partners, parents and children, siblings, and in other relationships where significant others are not part of the physical household but are part of the family and/or are fulfilling the function of family. ADDIN EN.CITE Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families2011190[6]19019048Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families,Background to the family violence indicators201113 March 2012Ministry of Social Developmenthttp://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/work-programmes/initiatives/action-family-violence/family-violence-indicators.html[ HYPERLINK \l "_ENREF_6" \o "Taskforce for Action on Violence within Families, 2011 #190" 6].
By using a wide definition, we seek to acknowledge the many different forms that family violence can take, as well as the wide variety of relationships that can be involved in family violence and the cultural contexts in which these will exist. We also acknowledge both the similarities and the unique dynamics of violence across family relationships and across the lifespan. However, by adopting this wide definition, we must also acknowledge that there are some datasets which do not routinely include aspects of family violence, such as psychological or financial abuse. Such wide definitions also allow for the existence of grey areas where there is uncertainty concerning whether an act constitutes family violence.
We also acknowledge that both theoretical and operational definitions can be contentious, and that there are a range of definitions, including those that reflect M o r i A D D I N E N . C I T E <