DHRs SAFEGUARDING LEARNING TO DATE Domestic homicide review

DHRs – SAFEGUARDING LEARNING TO DATE

Domestic homicide review process (snapshot) Domestic Homicide occurs CSP informed and decides on whether the homicide meets criteria of DHR (Within one month of homicide) Conduct DHR: Chair to draft Overview Report, Executive Summary and Action Plan (Within 6 months of CSP decision to hold DHR) Review agreed by Review Panel and sent to commissioning CSP agree Review and send to Home Office Criteria met: CSP commission DHR and Review Panel establishes terms of reference, appoints Chair and commissions agency IMRs and relevant reports QA Group assesses Review as adequate/inadequate according to guidance. Review is published, stored centrally by HO and lessons learned disseminated by QA Group via bulletin and web page.

Learning the Lessons ‘The repetition of past mistakes may amount to institutional incompetence’ (Mc. Pherson, 1998) ‘I am convinced the answers lie in doing relatively straightforward things well’ (Laming, 2003)

Some observations - sources • Delivered accredited training for DHR chairs to 94 delegates • Quality Assure approximately two DHRs a month • Chairing DHRs (18) • Acting as a sounding board for other Chairs • Recent Home Office publication on DHRs

Some observations • Lack of understanding how central the family are to the process • We need to have a new conversation about information sharing and risk – professional judgement / listening to victims is critical. • Engagement with perpetrators outside of the CJS is limited

• Issues with thresholds / definitions of vulnerable • Lack of professional curiosity • Engaging with the unengaged • Attribution of bruising to falls / age related conditions • Sons with mental health / substance use issues • Lack of carer assessments • Lack of risk recognition for carers

• Understanding abuse as a power issue and not a relationship issue • Financial abuse far higher in older age group • Disability doubles the risk • V little data – BCS cuts off at 59 • Risk is often multi-faceted • Complex needs – a significant failing • Coercive control is a better indicator of risk than physical violence

Finally… • Always assume that your report – IMRs and ORs – is being read by those that loved the victim. Would the report seem adequate to you? • DHRs are a great opportunity to think differently about domestic violence. They are a new framework which allows us to really test our service provision against the needs of real victims and their real circumstances

Every Body Matters