This book set out to examine Nordic approaches to tackling men's violence in families, by studying policies, practices and issues arising from the contexts of Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. The previous chapters have engaged in a variety of ways with these issues, looking in particular at parenting in the context of men's violence, children's perspectives on living with domestic abuse, professionals’ responses and the responses and discourses of policy makers. The book began with a caution regarding the nature of the Nordic welfare systems. While these systems may be seen as successful when compared with those of other countries with respect to many aspects of welfare in general and the criminalisation of violence against women in particular, at the same time they have failed to address other aspects that are of critical importance to women's and children's safety and wellbeing. In particular, the lack of incorporation of domestic violence by professionals and policy makers of children's experiences and needs in circumstances of domestic abuse – where the mother is being abused by her partner/children's father – highlights even more starkly the contradictions in welfare policies that are supposedly ‘child-centred’. The intervening chapters have provided much detail and discussion of the developments and contexts that have created these welfare approaches and contradictions. In this final chapter, I look at some of the main strands that have emerged from the previous chapters, their relevance to current developments in English family policy, and the lessons that may consequently be drawn for a wider audience.

I will begin by briefly outlining some of the key developments in English policies and practices with regard to the tackling of men's violence in families, and will use the lessons and conclusions from the Nordic examples to reflect on these.

Policy developments in England

Compared with the experiences of the Nordic countries, in England the move to tackle men's violence in families began earlier, from the beginning of the 1970s, with the nationwide development of refuges to house and support women and children fleeing violent men and limited legislation providing civil protection. However, it was not until the 1990s that both the state and other agencies began to take a more prominent role and that ‘mainstreaming’ – as discussed by Jonassen (Chapter Six) in relation to Norway – became more evident (Hague et al, 2000; Skinner et al, 2005).