Parliament’s latest domestic abuse debate makes the point
First People blogs can often overlap and make similar points. One reason for this is the overlap between the charity’s areas of focus. Inevitably, there is a lot ofoverlap between homelessness, rough sleeping, declining mental health and domestic abuse.
Another reason is the points being made are usually borne out of a mixture of advocacy, frustration and sometimes a little bit of hope for the issues the charity wishes to help fix.
While the arguments can often overlap, it is rare that points being routinely made play out quite perfectly in Westminster.
A recent Westminster Hall debate on domestic abuse survivors, recorded in UK Parliament’s official Hansard, offers a revealing snapshot of how domestic abuse is currently framed. First People has long advocated for ensuring male victims of domestic abuse feel seen and listened to. The debate revealed exactly why.
At first glance, the debate on March 18th appears wide-ranging and serious in intent. Opening the discussion, Lib Dem MP Ben Maguire highlighted the scale of domestic abuse in the UK, citing figures that an estimated 2.2 million women and 1.5 million men experienced abuse in the past year. These numbers alone should prompt a more nuanced national conversation than the one that was had.
As the debate unfolded, a familiar pattern emerged. The policy framework underpinning much of the discussion remains the government’s “Violence Against Women and Girls” strategy. As the minister, Jess Phillips, reiterates, this category is defined as crimes that “disproportionately affect women”—while still technically including male victims. This duality lies at the heart of the problem.
Women outweigh male victims by an estimated 700,000 according to the cited figures. Out of the total 3.7million, women make up 60 per cent and males account for 40 per cent. Despite the split, the policy underpinning the debate specifically centers on females. Male victims are recognised in theory, but in practice they’re grouped into systems that aren’t designed for their needs.
“In the light of International Women’s Day having just passed, and with the government’s long-awaited violence against women and girls strategy still fresh in our minds, I want to take this opportunity to assess how government support for domestic abuse survivors holds up in practice”, Maguire said in his opening remarks.
Therein lies the problem. It is not my view that it is intentional ignorance, but a societal norm which has emerged.
The debate - titled: “Domestic Abuse Survivors: Government Support” - is not specific to women. Maguire makes the point directly by mentioning the 1.5million male victims. Yet in closing his opening statement, he references the strategy and international day pertaining only to females.
This should probably go without saying, but in light of a recent Louis Theroux documentary it feels even more important to say - none of this is to diminish the very real and devastating impact of domestic abuse on women.
The statistic that one woman is killed every five days by a partner or ex-partner rightly commands incredible sensitivity and attention. I also think the recent manosphere documentary should alert people to the very real dangers women face without doing anything other than minding their own business and living their lives. But effective policy must be capable of holding two truths at once: that women are disproportionately affected, and that a significant minority of victims are men whose experiences are often less visible.
An important point to raise is also not just what was said in Westminster Hall, but what was missing. There is no sustained discussion of male-specific provision, no detailed examination of service gaps, and no clear strategy for ensuring that male victims are more than an afterthought within a broader framework.
The debate shows that Parliament is engaged, concerned, and active on domestic abuse. But it also reveals a conversation still struggling to fully encompass the diversity of those affected.