Rosie Batty, mother of murdered child Luke Batty, slammed Studio 10 host Joe Hildebrand this morning on live television for comments she found deeply distressing.
The panel, which includes Hildebrand, Jessica Rowe, Ita Buttrose, and Sarah Harris, were discussing changes to Victorian law that could make it a crime not to report child abuse.
This is how Hildebrand opened the discussion: “Obviously you can’t help but feel a huge amount of sympathy for anyone who’s in an abusive relationship but … you have to get out, you absolutely have to get out. There are huge economic costs associated with that, yes there are often other things, but anything is better than staying in an abusive relationship. Frankly, to say that you’re going to not report a case of child abuse or child sex abuse by your partner because you are scared for your own safety, I’m sorry, it is not an excuse.”
By the time cameras crossed to Ms Batty, she was visibly distressed. “Joe, your comments are so, so misguided,” she said. “If you minimise how it feels to feel unsafe, and when we’re talking about unsafe, we’re talking about the risk to our lives, we’re talking about when women finally may decide to leave their partners they have the most risks.”
Watching this grieving mother in utter despair on camera is deeply uncomfortable. Please be warned, this may be distressing to some viewers.
You can watch the full interview here, which aired on Network Ten this morning.
Top Comments
I can help put this into perspective- you think/know you're child is being sexually abused, so naturally a lot of women will report this. Then your child Is questioned by JIRT police investigators, then by the department, taken to specialist counselling, examined by doctors for proof of abuse.
They end up with conflicting accounts of what the child has disclosed, or they have pressed the child and asked leading questions. The mother tells her child to tell the people truth about what they have disclosed and the mother is often accused of coaching the child into making these statements. If the police press charges, IF, then you have to go to court, IF the perpetrator is found guilty, he/she gets a minimal sentence.
This perpetrator, if he is the father, can still apply at the family court for visitations of the child. Which the mother can not attend or supervise. The perpetrator can still get supervised visits, or unsupervised time with the child, depending on how everything pans out. The mother is often looked at as vindictive, especially in family court, and she can lose custody of her child permanently. The court can accuse her of emotionally abusing her child for insisting her child has been sexually abused. So it is not just a case of leaving the man, reporting the crime and everything being sweet afterwards. It can become a woman's worst nightmare. Domestic violence and child sexual abuse are inter linked. The systems works against women and children in every way. Trust me, I've been there.
Here is an idea, how about instead of having police officers who have to deal with "real crime, such as drugs, robbery, etc" deal with DV crimes. Why dont they hire police officers whos soul purpose of policing is in the DV sector, they will be considered higher than child protective service and family services, but are police officers who have the immediate right to arrest, investigate abuse, sexual abuse, and assist with men and women of domestic violence, attend homes immediatly if DV occurs, to prevent situations where calls for police are delayed due to "other more important crimes". Meaning, that they are still the police force, but only deal will DV issues. It is still policing, but only specific to domestic violence situations. As well all know child protective services, and docs is a slow process, and the current police force is dealing with larger crimes. And give police officers who are not allocated DV tasks ability to attend other crimes efficiently and the police offices who are allocated the DV policing more time to assist with DV issues.