Inadequate protection for abused women

THE EDITOR: It is reported that Julliette Cummings was murdered after obtaining legal protection by the courts from an abusive relationship. Since application of the law granting such protection, there have been quite a few similar murder cases and exhibitions of savagery. One becomes very concerned when public expressions betray sentiments that seem to say “so be it.” Logic dictates that the society seeks remedies. One wonders whether part of the problem lies in the limited legislation governing the powers of the courts in awarding such protection. Could the courts not be empowered to insist that the individual against whom the protection order is granted, be compulsorily made to undergo courses in anger management, psychological counselling and whatever those more expert in this area consider necessary?

Could it be that a better understanding by the accused and subsequent control of those forces leading to such irrational behaviour possibly minimise the frequency of such savagery? The law is a reflection of our society. We need to make fundamental modifications to some societal approaches and become realistic about what we propose to achieve, including forms of rehabilitation for offenders, in areas in which counselling has shown improved results. Otherwise, we are unlikely to see significant benefits for the society in spite of our best intentions. Upgrading the law in this area could possibly mean lives saved, less orphans and money well spent.

C E BERRIDGE
Newtown