2021: Best practice: Protection against violence against women during COVID-19

The focus of this best practice analysis were implemented measures for the protection of women against intimate partner violence. Already at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, experts warned of an expected increase in violence against women, which is always noticeable in times of crisis. COVID-related measures, particularly during lockdowns, further exacerbated the situation. The specific challenge during the lockdown was that as a result of the quarantine-related "being locked in" at home, a situation of control was created – or an already existing one was further reinforced. As a result of short-time work (german: Kurzarbeit) and unemployment, in a large number of families both the (potential) perpetrator of violence and the victim largely stayed together at home. As a result it was often not possible for women to make unnoticed phone calls - for example, to contact a police station or a counseling center - or to leave the home.

The aim of the study was to gain an overview of best practice examples from other EU countries and then to discuss them with experts from the field of IPV/VAW with regard to their applicability and usefulness in Austria. In a first step, a comprehensive desctop research of measures against violence against women in all EU countries was carried out. The research was based on the COVID-19 Global Gender Response Tracker and the homepage of the Council of Europe. Based on this research, measures that could be applied in Austria were selected in the next phase of the project and discussed with experts in Austria, including representatives of the Autonome Österreichische Frauenhäuser (AÖF), the Intervention Center against Violence in the Family in Vienna (IST) and men's counseling centers. Discussions were also held with experts from selected EU countries.

In the course of the research project, it was found that the majority of measures introduced to prevent violence against women as a result of COVID-19 were merely reactive in nature, and much less resources were allocated to prevention. Merely reacting to violence against women is not enough; a strenghened focus on preventive measures and their sustainable implementation is necessary - especially to better mitigate the long-term consequences of COVID-19. Another relevant finding of the report was that in most countries it was primarily the work of NGOs and civil society that ensured that offers and services continued to be available and accessible (online) during the crisis, despite and precisely because of COVID-19. Politicians often failed to protect vulnerable and marginalized groups, while NGOs and civil society took on underfunded or unpaid government tasks. Most of the measures planned and implemented during COVID-19 failed to take into account intersectional perspectives and thus the different needs of vulnerable groups such as migrants, persons with disabilities or LGBTIQ persons. To illustrate this omission, it is worth referring to a statement published by the Lesbian and Gay Association in Germany, which stated that the COVID-19 measures hit the LGBTIQ-community - and within it, again some more than others from an intersectional perspective - harder than other population groups. In numerous German states, for example, the exemptions from contact restrictions planned for Christmas were made only for the closest family circle and relatives. This concept of family is described by the association as heteronormative, and doesn’t reflect the lived reality of many LGBTIQ persons, who have often broken contact with their biological family and instead build their own chosen family. Restrictions such as these therefore further increase already existing social isolation. LGBTIQ persons are also frequently exposed to domestic violence and discrimination - this particularly affects young people who still live with their parents. Violence in LGBTIQ partnerships is also extremely taboo and hardly noticed - as in heterosexual relationships, it can be assumed that there will be an increase in partner violence due to COVID-19 related measures. The German Lesbian and Gay Association therefore called on policymakers to consider the LGBTIQ community in COVID-19 measures.

Migrant women have only been targeted as a vulnerable group in a few countries, for example Greece, Finland or Portugal. Other countries have tried to reach women from Roma communities, LGBTIQ+ women or women with reduced hearing. In the UK, for example, an emergency text mes-saging service was set up for people with speech and hearing disabilities. People being affected from violence could register for this service online and send a text message to the hotline in case of an emergency, stating their location, situation, and required support.

The COVID-19 pandemic represents an opportunity to create new structures to combat violence against women, or to better finance and expand existing structures for victim protection and support and make them more sustainable overall. Institutions in the field of violence protection have been underfunded and understaffed for years, and COVID-19 has made this underfunding even more apparent. The current crisis, which is still ongoing, has highlighted existing gaps in the fight against domestic violence or violence against women and thus the need for improvement. Furthermore, it must be assumed that the economic consequences of COVID-19, increased unemployment and loss of income, and thus violence against women will continue to be an issue even after the pandemic is over - the time to prepare for this is now.

COVID-19 was and is the reason why violence against women is (again) increasingly perceived and discussed. This awareness of the problem must be seen as an opportunity and used to ensure that violence against women remains a constant political issue, that experts in the field of violence pro-tection are more closely involved in political decision-making processes and, above all, that sufficient and sustainable funding is secured for existing structures. It is essential that policies are always planned and implemented in a gender-sensitive manner - and as far as possible on an intersectional basis. Finally, continuous evaluation and monitoring of implemented measures and, related to this, a stronger consideration of scientific research are necessary. The research conducted for this study has made it clear that while it is partly well known which measures have been implemented where, there is a lack of knowledge about which measures have been effective and what advantages and disadvantages, if any, can be noted. However, such information is necessary for qualification as good practice.