A new study claims almost ten percent of New Zealand women experience domestic violence while pregnant.
Auckland University reached the finding after interviewing almost 3,000 women about their experiences of abuse. It found three quarters of women who had beaten while pregnant were abused by the same person, usually the child's father, before they became pregnant.
What a shame they didn't include a question about the welfare status of these women. Other non-NZ studies have revealed increased likelihood of violence during pregnancy at younger ages, particularly where young girls have older partners. These studies also show welfare receipt is an associated factor. The following graph is from US research;
It seems to me that either the EMA or DPB (or sickness benefit for that matter - in 2007 2,252 16-19 year-olds received a sickness benefit for pregnancy related reasons) is a two-edged sword for young women. On the one hand, as the common argument goes, the assistance gives her a chance to remove herself and any other children from an abusive partner (although it is doubtful whether he would ever have been financially supporting her in the first place.) On the other, however, it gives him a strong motivation to control and pursue her.
The best protection for young women is education and increased work-related earnings. These have been shown to decrease the likelihood of experiencing domestic violence. But how often do you hear them being suggested?
1 comment:
The DPB means women do not have to be discerning in their choice of provider. The state provision will usually be better anyway. In fact the worse a provider she chooses the more assistance she gets.
In another world a young man although only able to provide a very humble existence is proud to provide for his wife and child. He is on the road to better things. She is creative in her frugalness learning such things as baking her own bread. She finds second hand clothing and still looks good. She looks for ways to save money and to earn it. She may start a cottage business at home, or look for ways to increase her husband's income.
I do not believe "education" is the answer for young women. A woman will seek it for herself when needed or desired. What is needed is the removal of a government that removes all consequences for wrong or unwise choices.
There is nothing ignoble about raising a new generation, nothing wrong with choosing motherhood over career or choosing to balancing both or choosing no children. What is ignoble is forcing other people to pay for this choice
regards
Mum of 8
Yes I am guilty of being a recipient of Working for other people’s family. Do we honestly believe that a household needs $180,000 to adequately care for 8 children? For that is the income threshold for our household to be free of welfare.
Reduce our tax that we might provide for ourselves and remove the disincentive to earn more.
Post a Comment