Domestic and sexual violence in Australia: Current evidence and the potential role of forensic science

Abstract

Violence perpetrated against women in Australia is being referred to as at crisis point. The National Plan for Violence Against Women and Children outlines the national collaborative approach to addressing this issue. While paramount to the successful apprehension of domestic and sexual violence perpetrators, forensic science escapes specific consideration in the National Plan. Only a single reference to the word “forensic” is contained in the 144-page document- “Ensure victim-survivors have access to timely forensic examinations”. Forensic science must play a larger role in responding to increasing family, domestic, and sexual violence (FDSV).

In using the National Plan as a foundation, this review collates available Australian data to provide commentary and summarise the experiences of victim-survivors, the current legislative climate, and future directions that may address this challenge. Much of the literature captures FDSV, but for this research, only domestic, otherwise referred to as intimate partner violence (IPV), and sexual violence (SV) will be commented on, owing to their close association with forensic science as a judicial tool.

1. Domestic and sexual violence

There is increasing momentum of research into Family, Domestic and Sexual Violence (FDSV) as a major public health and welfare crisis in Australia [1], as well as other Western nations. While individuals from varying demographics are affected, FDSV disproportionately affects women and children [2]. It is for this reason that, as a public health and welfare issue, it is examined more broadly as a violence against women (VAW) crisis, as has also been seen globally for some time [3,4]. In Australia, the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children [1] (the “National Plan”) seeks to address two types of VAW: family and domestic violence and sexual violence. FDSV can have serious short-term, long-term or permanent health and welfare outcomes [[5], [6], [7]] that often interact and compound with behavioural and economic outcomes [5]. Experiences of FDSV are varied and complex, some involving physical violence, sexual violence, and/or emotional or psychological abuse [2]. Furthermore, violence against women, particularly sexual violence, may be perpetrated by individuals not known to the victim-survivor, despite being less common [8]. While significant political and legal discussion is being generated around the greater cause, forensic science as a tool for combating FDSV is rarely considered.

Understanding the conceptual framework of FDSV as a broader issue is necessary for examining the experiences of victim-survivors and, in turn, understanding the nuances necessary for effective criminal investigation of these cases. Family violence might be considered the overarching definition that describes violence occurring in familial relationships, including parents, children, siblings, intimate partners, kinship relationships, foster or other carers, and co-residents [2]. Family violence is the preferred term for family and domestic violence (FDV) in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (First Nations) communities because it encompasses the extended families, kinship networks, and community relationships in which it may occur [9,10]. Domestic violence (DV), often used interchangeably with intimate partner violence (IPV), is a form of family violence that occurs between current or former intimate partners [2,11]. Sexual violence refers to a broad scope of sexual activity resulting from force, manipulation, or coercion, including sexual assault, threats, or harassment, not necessarily perpetrated by someone known to the victim-survivor [2,12,13]. While each of these definitions appears to describe a discrete cohort of victim-survivors, the intersectionality of family, domestic, and intimate partner violence with physical and sexual violence is common (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

The interplay of family, domestic, intimate partner and sexual violence. Domestic (or intimate partner) violence is a subset of the broader family violence. Sexual violence takes on many forms and can be perpetrated by a range of persons both within the family and intimate partner relationships as well as outside of them.

2. Australian data

Estimating the prevalence of violence against women remains challenging due to under-reporting and inconsistencies in how different data sources conceptualise and measure violence. Nevertheless, national datasets provide a consistent picture of the scale and nature of the problem. Nationally, the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW) reports that 23% of Australian women—approximately one in four—have experienced physical and/or sexual violence by an intimate partner since the age of 15 [14,15]. Earlier findings from the 2016 Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Personal Safety Survey (PSS) similarly demonstrate that one in six women have experienced physical or sexual violence by a current or former cohabiting partner since age 15 [15,16]. More recent data reinforce these findings. The 2021–22 PSS found that 22% of women have experienced sexual violence since the age of 15, a measure that includes both sexual assault and sexual threat. Of those women, 20% experienced sexual assault and 5.5% experienced sexual threats, with the majority of perpetrators being men known to the victim [16].

Beyond sexual violence, broader measures of intimate partner violence (IPV) show substantial gendered disparities. A national survey using the Composite Abuse Scale (Revised)—Short Form reported that 48.4% of women had experienced at least one form of intimate partner violence, and 33.7% had experienced multitype IPV, involving more than one type of abusive behaviour. These patterns are more pronounced among younger women, who report higher IPV prevalence than women aged 35 and older [17]. In 2022–23, women were 6.8 times more likely than men to be hospitalised due to assault by an intimate partner, with the highest rates among women aged 25–34 [18]. This age-related vulnerability reflects a broader trend across multiple data sources whereby younger women face disproportionately higher risks of intimate partner violence [17,19].

Some communities and identities in Australian society are more vulnerable to experiencing violence at higher rates, but also in ways that intersect with other forms of discrimination and disadvantage. Where data is available, it does not always capture and describe the complexities of these intersectionalities. For instance, national reporting on the health and welfare of LGBTQIA + individuals is often compromised by shortcomings in data collection relating to gender, sexual orientation, and innate variations in sex characteristics [20]. The PSS attempted to capture the experience of LGBTQIA + women through a sexual orientation binary; those who identified as heterosexual, versus those who identify as gay, lesbian, bisexual or who used a different term [16]. The latter were found more likely to experience sexual violence (13%) than heterosexual women (2.4%), with both groups experiencing sexual violence by a male perpetrator (98%) [16]. Matthews et al. indicated that non-heterosexual individuals (70.2%) report experiencing IPV more than their heterosexual counterparts (43.1%) and that transgender and gender diverse people also experience disproportionately high rates of violence [17]. This often stems from forms of discrimination, such as withholding of gender-affirming hormones or HIV medication, shaming their identity, or threatening to 'out' them [21].

First Nations women are also a high-risk population, experiencing violence at disproportionately higher rates than non-Indigenous women [22,23]. Although Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples comprise less than 3% of the Australian population, they are more likely to experience violence than any other group [24]. For nearly two decades, First Nations women have experienced homicide rates averaging eight times those of non-Indigenous women [22,25]. Violence-related harm extends beyond fatalities. Assault-related hospitalisations occur at 32 times the rate seen among non-Indigenous women, with large jurisdictional variation, for example, in the Northern Territory, victimisation rates have been recorded at 18 times those of any other state or territory [22].

Sexual violence is also prevalent in First Nations communities [26,27]. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women experience violence by both Indigenous and non-Indigenous perpetrators [28]. The experience of First Nations women must be examined within the context of Australia's colonisations and the ongoing intergenerational trauma and structural violence that they face [22,29,30]. Systematic racism and discrimination have fostered a strong distrust of institutions, particularly police, leaving First Nations women even more vulnerable to experiencing violence and thus compounding disadvantage [31]. Despite a high rate of sexual assault in First Nations communities, one regional sexual assault service reported limited use of their services, which may also be evidence of a distrust of institutions and services that exist to provide support [27]. Comparison of linked police and health data of mothers and their children who were victim-survivors of FDV further supports evidence of distrust, particularly in policing agencies with an overrepresentation of First Nations women and children, but also a discrepancy between sources [32]. Forty-three percent of mothers in the police data and 73% of mothers in the health data were Indigenous. Despite First Nations women being more likely to be hospitalised due to violence than their non-Indigenous counterparts [23,33], the degree of discrepancy between police and health data may be attributable to a distrust of, and mistreatment by, police historically or even within recent history [32]. If there exists an ingrained disbelief in fair law enforcement, the full potential of modern forensic science may remain untapped in these cases. In the health system, Aboriginal Health Liaison Officers provide the link between medical professionals and First Nations communities, perhaps explaining some of the disparity seen in this data. A similarly structured interface for First Nations people accessing the policing system may alleviate some of this hesitation.

First Nations women experience disproportionately high rates of misidentification as the primary aggressor in domestic violence incidents [34]. This misidentification often stems from a lack of trauma-informed policing, particularly during callouts where victim-survivors may display resistance or use defensive force. It may also arise from a failure to recognise systems-abuse tactics, in which perpetrators manipulate events to redirect suspicion onto the victim [34]. Of particular concern are reports that such misidentification has led to false or pressured guilty pleas, or to plea negotiations pursued solely to correct the error [35]. With first responding officers often responsible for early investigation briefings, these narrative biases can easily manifest within the forensic investigation of such incidents.

These unequal outcomes raise an important question for the forensic sciences: are investigative practices, resources, and technical capacities being applied equitably across all communities? As a multidisciplinary field spanning policing, medicolegal services, and varying forensic expertise, forensic science plays a critical role in the recognition, investigation, and prosecution of violence. Ensuring that marginalised and highly victimised groups receive investigations equivalent in quality, rigour, and resourcing to those afforded to other victims is essential for both justice and prevention. A more equitable distribution of investigative attention may not only improve accountability but also contribute meaningfully to reducing these persistent disparities.

3. Australian attitudes towards violence against women

In some ways, it is unsurprising that there is a VAW crisis in Australia when examining the attitudes of Australians. The 2021 National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey (NCAS) provides some insight into persisting problematic attitudes and shortcomings in community understanding of VAW [36]. Whilst findings indicated that young Australians' understanding of and attitudes towards VAW are improving, this improvement is occurring slowly. An improvement was seen between 2017 and 2021 in the recognition and attitudinal rejection of VAW in some areas; however, not in attitudes that maintain DV, minimise the seriousness of violence, or blame victim-survivors. There was also an apparent disparity in perception of the proximity of violence to respondents, 91% agreeing it is a problem in Australia, but only 53% agreeing it is a problem in their suburb or town [36], suggesting a ‘not in my backyard’ attitude. While frontline police and adjacent agencies likely have increased insight into affairs outside of their own residential communities, laboratory-based scientists undertaking analyses of evidence associated with VAW cases may be subject to the same contextual biases that minimise the problem.

Young respondents held stronger attitudes than older groups that reject rigidity in gender roles and limits to women's autonomy, yet this was not true for attitudes that deny women's experience of gender inequality [36]. A separate Victorian report indicated that over one-third of young male respondents (18-30 years) agreed that they felt social pressure to adhere to 'Man Box' rules regarding masculinity, specifically those pertaining to hypersexuality, aggression and control [37]. Those who identified with rigid masculine stereotypes were 17 times more likely to report that they had hit an intimate partner than respondents who did not [37]. More vigorous disagreement among young respondents was also seen for attitudes that objectify women and disregard consent [36]. Interestingly, young respondents rejected sexual violence more strongly than domestic violence [36].

The NCAS also highlighted some lingering harmful attitudes held by respondents [36]. Some of the survey prompts and the associated agreement were:

• ⁃25% believed women who do not leave an abusive partner are partially responsible for the continuation of violence,
• ⁃34% believed sexual assault allegations are often used to get back at men,
• ⁃23% believed domestic violence is a normal reaction to day-to-day stress,
• ⁃19% believed that at times, a woman can make a man angry enough for him to hit her without meaning to Ref. [36].

4. Health outcomes

IPV, including emotional abuse, in both cohabitating and non-cohabitating relationships, is predicted to contribute to 5.1% of the disease burden among Australian women aged 18-44 years [15]. Comparatively, Australia ranks poorly in the Global Burden of Disease Study, with the calculated disability-adjusted life-years (DALY) rate per 100,000 in the 700-799 bracket— equal to Afghanistan, Argentina, and the United Kingdom. Only the United States of America, New Zealand, Bolivia, Papua New Guinea, Greenland and sub-Saharan Africa have higher rates [38]. The authors acknowledge widespread, harmful impacts of IPV across regions regardless of economic development but do caution that inconsistencies in reporting practices and willingness to disclose such violence may be a factor.

In Australia, IPV provides a greater contribution than any other known risk factor, including tobacco or illicit drug use and high cholesterol. This burden is five times higher among First Nations women compared to their non-Indigenous counterparts and makes the greatest contribution to the gap in the burden between these two groups. Health outcomes linked to IPV include anxiety, depression, suicide, self-harm, alcohol-use disorders, pregnancy and birth complications, and homicide [15,39]. Distress caused by mental health conditions that follow women's experience of IPV and sexual violence is tacitly described and labelled by diagnostic criteria, with debate in the literature as to whether IPV causes incidental symptoms or pre-existing conditions put individuals at greater risk of IPV [40,41]. Moulding et al. reported that most women (87%) who had received a mental illness diagnosis had been given one after IPV commenced, 70% of whom reported having good wellbeing prior to their experience of IPV, albeit self-reported data [40]. Poor mental health outcomes are often described as stemming from a loss of sense of self, compounded by other losses because of coercion and control by perpetrators, such as income, housing, and social support and participation [40]. FDV is one of the leading causes of homelessness in Australia [1], which is often an outcome of strategic minimisation of harm when leaving or choosing not to return to an abusive relationship [42]. Evidence suggests that the availability of housing services is beneficial for mental health outcomes, perceived safety, and intent to leave abusive relationships [43]. Improving housing services and accessibility is one of the Actions in the National Plan to End Violence Against Women, for this reason [1,44].

The proximal effects of IPV are well researched, however, long-term effects on physical health and health-related behaviours are less understood [45]. Furthermore, not all studies include both sexual and psychological abuse in their definitions of IPV, making cross comparison challenging [11]. Stubbs and Szoeke provide insight into the long-term effects that may affect Australian women [45]. Psychological abuse was seen as a significant risk factor for chronic diseases and poor health symptoms in several studies. Some health outcomes identified as being associated with IPV included diabetes, cardiovascular conditions, contracting sexually transmitted diseases including HIV, obesity, and altered brain connectivity in regions of the brain involved in cognitive-emotional control, with no prior brain injury [[45], [46], [47], [48], [49]]. Further research addressing these long-term physical health outcomes and health-related behaviours is needed within the Australian context. Moreover, due to the indirect mechanisms behind the physical health sequelae of IPV, more research is required to hypothesise the causes of identified relationships [29].

The experience of violence is a major risk factor for suicide [50]. The Coroner's Court of Victoria found that 1 in 3 of First Nations individuals who died by suicide in 2018-21 had a history of experiencing or witnessing family violence during their childhood [51]. Between 2009 and 2012, 42% of females who died by suicide in Victoria had a history of experiencing interpersonal physical, psychological, or sexual violence [52]. Suicide rates are higher among men [53], with the majority of those included in the same Victorian study being perpetrators of violence only (48.9%), and in the six weeks prior to death (35.5%) [52]. Hence, targeted prevention and improvements to help-seeking services for male perpetrators of violence are necessary to prevent suicide in both males and females [52].

5. Australian legislation addressing domestic and sexual violence

Domestic violence, including some forms of sexual violence within familial relationships, is criminalised under section 4AB of the Family Law Act 1975 [54]. This federal legislation goes beyond physical and sexual assault, attempting to capture emotional abuse, including coercive or controlling behaviour that instils fear, as well as acts of financial abuse [54]. A clause is also included referring to preventing a family member from making or maintaining connections to family, friends, or culture, which holds significance for victim-survivors with strong religious, spiritual, or cultural ties [55]. This federal legislation addresses family and domestic violence in the context of family law proceedings, such as those to do with parenting orders and relationship disputes [56].

Legislation addressing family, domestic and sexual violence varies by Australian jurisdiction. Both recent and ongoing legislative changes are being made across Australia in response to the VAW crisis. For example, the Family Violence Legislation Reform Act 2024 (WA) [57] amends a range of Western Australian legislation, including the Restraining Orders Act 1997 (WA) [58]. A family violence restraining order (FVRO) is a reactive protective order that seeks to provide safety to victim-survivors, primarily with the concern of immediate prevention of violence. Amendments to section 5A include coercive control in the definition of family violence, which acknowledges the repetitive and cumulative effect of some forms of abusive behaviours, beyond potentially isolated physical assaults. Amendments also require high-risk FDV offenders on bail or otherwise supervised in the community to wear electronic monitoring devices. Although FVROs are civil protection orders, breaching an FVRO is a criminal offence, regardless of the inherent criminality of that breaching behaviour [58]. This provides some recourse to victim-survivors who either do not want to progress to criminal proceedings or who cannot, such as for victim-survivors of coercive control. This is particularly important considering that coercive control is a significant risk factor for intimate partner homicide [59,60]. In the context of FDV, modern homicide crime scene investigation should consider the elements of coercive control when collecting evidence to establish the ‘what’ and ‘why’ aspects of crime reconstruction. Other Australian states, including New South Wales and Queensland, have established standalone coercive control legislation [61,62], with Tasmania having criminalised non-physical forms of abuse, such as economic and emotional abuse and intimidation, in 2002 [63].

Every Australian state and territory have their own legislation that establishes what constitutes certain sexual offences and the penalties that apply. In recent years, several states and territories have revised their consent laws, moving toward affirmative models of consent [64]. These models operate with the intention of moving responsibility to the perpetrators of sexual violence instead of having the burden of proof of consent placed on the victim-survivor. Despite intentions to encourage more communicative sexuality, there is polarity across the literature due to the continuous and ongoing nature of affirmative consent being inconsistent with how individuals tend to negotiate sexual interaction, but also the varied ways such models are implemented across different jurisdictions [65,66]. The Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) recently conducted an inquiry into justice responses to sexual violence available in Australia, which is discussed in a later section (65).

The matter of sexual consent is regularly a challenge in forensic science when investigating sexual assault scenes. Oftentimes, investigators are faced with a scenario where the act of sexual assault is not challenged by the victim-survivor or accused, and crime scene and forensic scientists are left pondering the evidentiary ‘value’ of results that have historically been used to demonstrate an act has occurred, such as identification of semen or a DNA profile from an accused. In cases where consent is challenged, traditional attitudes among investigators suggest that the forensic toolkit is rendered ineffective. A proposed strategy is to redirect the strength of forensic findings to traditional scientific principles of hypothesis testing, rather than relying on the simplistic presence or absence of one's biometric signature within a scene. While the truth around consent may never be answered through forensic means, other aspects of a victim-survivor's or accused's version of events may. In a hypothetical scenario whereby forensic evidence supports elements within a victim's statement, it suggests that their version of events is likely accurate, and by extension, their recount of consent may also be true. This is further strengthened if forensic evidence conflicts with an accused's statement. The converse also applies and may help discern false claims against accused persons. This approach requires a shift in attitudes from conventional forensic detection to intelligence-based forensic science. Forensic intelligence has demonstrated great utility for volume and property crimes, and to some degree sexual assault also, evidenced by decreased victimisations and substantial return on investment in a range of studies [38,67].

6. Reporting and policing of violence

Surveys and inquiries suggest that a large proportion of violent victimisation remains undisclosed to police and therefore never progresses to forensic examination [68]. According to the 2021-22 PSS, for the most recent sexual assault experienced by respondents in the last ten years, police were contacted in 8.3% of cases, and by the victim-survivor themselves in 7.7% of cases [69]. Without a formal report, no forensic investigation can be mounted making forensic science powerless until improvements in reporting are made. While many sexual assault clinics will service victim-survivors without formal police reporting, observations and evidence taken are often destroyed following a cooling-off period of no report. This leaves victims with limited or no support, perpetrators not brought to justice, and evidence-based intervention seemingly volatile. Non-reporting of sexual assault is unsurprising— an Australian review of the barriers to formally reporting sexual violence identified a range of psychosocial, procedural, and societal barriers across the literature [70]. These include but are not limited to; fear (of consequences, mistreatment, shame, societal stigma and humiliation); a lack of knowledge with respect to reporting and legal process; and denial or minimisation of the incident, stemming from a lack of evidence or accountability by the perpetrator [70]. The trend is again amplified in First Nations communities, with some studies suggesting that as much as 90% of violence against these women goes unreported and thus, never even comes into the orbit of law enforcement and forensic agencies [68,71]. Despite the lack of formal reporting, a study analysing femicide in First Nations communities between 2006 and 16 across numerous Australian jurisdictions found that most women (88%) interacted with police in relation to domestic violence before their death, for many, on multiple occasions [72].

The barriers to formal reporting of sexual assault are complex and valid and do not affect all victim-survivors in the same way. Many are beyond the control of lawmakers or the law enforcement and forensic community, except for those within the procedural category. There are intersecting personal characteristics associated with different group populations, not limited to societal, political, cultural, or economic, that may stem from inequality and discrimination and implicate willingness to interact with police [30,69]. It is not uncommon for victim-survivors to report having a negative or retraumatising experience with police or the criminal justice system, sometimes referred to as 'secondary victimisation' [73]. The rhetoric that forensic science provides little to no value when consent is argued is an example of laissez-faire attitudes sometimes expressed to victims by investigators. Studies in juror decision-making may contradict these approaches to forensic evidence recovery however when considered with reference to how cases are presented at trial. The ‘Story Model’ [74] asserts that evidence is taken and incorporated into a narrative, which jurors apply their own reasoning and biases to form the official judgement [75]. The positioning of evidence that reinforces prosecutorial storytelling narrows the scope for jurors' own cognitive artifacts to misinterpret what may have happened during the commission of a sexual offence.

The shortcomings of formal reporting have led to an increase in the establishment and use of informal reporting options [76]. Such options are typically in written form or digitally accessible, and both anonymous and confidential [76]. Reporting options that do not constitute an official statement are important mechanisms that facilitate intelligence gathering, assist with crime mapping, and allow victim-survivors to share their experiences and connect with the appropriate support services [76,77]. These platforms are available in New South Wales (the Sexual Assault Reporting Option – SARO), Queensland (the Alternative Reporting Option – ARO), the Australian Capital Territory for non-recent SA, and Victoria (Sexual Assault Reporting Anonymously – SARA), despite being an online tool not directly associated with police [76].

A qualitative study of the experience of victim-survivors of sexual assault who opted for, or would opt for, an alternative reporting option identified five key reasons for this decision:

• ⁃Fear and/or intimidation associated with formal reporting.
• ⁃Regain power and/or control.
• ⁃Document/share their experience.
• ⁃Protect their community.
• ⁃Gain access to support services [76].

A separate study analysed self-report data from the experience of 284 victim-survivors of a recent sexual assault who reported to an NSW sexual assault service [78]. Findings indicated that an integrated response that addresses both psychosocial and medical needs, as well as the option for reporting to police, resulted in an overwhelmingly positive response [78].

Recorded crime data suggest that reporting rates of DV to police may be increasing, with acts intended to cause injury recorded at 92,259 (27%) offenders in 2023-34, compared with 78,421 (19%) in 2016-17 [79,80]. This offence includes DV. The Australian Institute of Criminology suggested three reasons for the apparent increase in crime rates. It may be that DV is increasing, whether there are more offenders or offenders are becoming more violent, attitudes towards violence against women in the community are improving, and/or police responses to DV are improving [81]. There also appears to be a 'hierarchy' of abuse types and associated reporting behaviours. Physical violence has the strongest association, followed by sexual violence, with other non-physical forms of abuse, including emotional abuse and stalking or harassment, demonstrating the weakest association [81]. This was also seen in a more dated study examining domestic violence incidents in the ACT, with police being more likely to proceed against a perpetrator if both verbal and physical violence were involved (61%), and apparent physical injuries were present (48.5%), perhaps supporting the strength of having forensic evidence in these cases [82]. It tends to be more serious incidents that involve physical harm to the victim-survivor that are reported to police [83]; hence, other forms of abuse, such as coercive control, are not reflected in the recorded police data [84,85]. Further, the burden of providing evidence of the experience of abusive behaviours often falls on the victim-survivor, who is implicated by the effects of the abuse, particularly in the case of coercive control [86].

Health care practitioners often serve as first responders for women who experience violence [18,29]. Between 2022 and 23, 93% of individuals (n = 275) who were hospitalised due to sexual assault were females, not including emergency department or hospital outpatient activity [18]. Primary care providers must be educated and prepared to respond to sexual assault and IPV presenting victim-survivors in a trauma-informed way that facilitates open discussion about their experience [87]. Health care providers can be a unique mechanism for victim-survivors to disclose their experience, in a way that facilitates a compassionate response, referral to appropriate resources and services, and the ability to address any potential adverse health outcomes that may stem from their experience, without having to engage with the criminal justice system [87,88]. This is particularly true in rural, remote, and regional communities where there is not only pervasive violence, but also unique barriers to help-seeking. Such barriers are not limited to issues with service delivery and proximity, isolation, lack of privacy and fear of disclosure, and culture and attitudes in those communities which foster the perpetration of violence [27,88].

7. Evidential difficulties in domestic and sexual violence cases

The discrete nature of a large proportion of domestic violence offending makes evidencing harm caused to victim-survivors difficult. The most common form of evidence used in domestic violence cases is the victim statement [89]. Police body-worn camera (BWC) footage from the scene of domestic violence incidents is generally considered beneficial and strengthening for prosecution, however, it cannot capture the patterns of coercive and controlling behaviour often experienced in abusive relationships [90]. Concerns have also been raised that BWC footage may facilitate misidentification of the primary aggressor, potentially allowing perpetrators to provide false or misleading evidence about themselves as blameless or undermining the victim-survivors' credibility to those who are not trauma-informed, for example, if they are behaving erratically [34]. A common challenge to successful prosecution in FDSV cases seems to be the victim-survivor's engagement with the justice process and their perceived credibility [91]. Should police responding to a scene not consider the incident as serious, for instance, if there is no physical harm, they may respond in a way that does not facilitate the collection of the appropriate evidence, thereby implicating the victim-survivor's credibility [92]. This further reinforces the benefits of a truth-seeking, hypothesis-based application of forensic science to such cases. Furthermore, most abusive relationships occur in a coercive, controlling dynamic, which impedes the ability of victim-survivors to collect evidence of their experience safely or at all [92]. The burden is therefore on forensic science to corroborate or refute the statements of the victim-survivor and the accused.

Medical forensic evidence is a vital form of evidence used to substantiate allegations of sexual assault, however, there is a 72-h collection critical period in which specimen viability decays [93]. Specimens obtained through Early Evidence Kits (EEK), notably urine and vulval gauze wipe, are effective in the recovery of spermatozoa, in some cases, even more so than that of subsequent full forensic specimen collection [94]. Gauze is a challenging substrate though, being too large for forensic DNA pipelines without some intervention beforehand. Techniques for evidence recovery on gauze are largely unpublished, so the research lags real-world execution in terms of best practice recommendations. Destruction of Sexual Assault Investigation Kits (SAIK) occurs at varying intervals if there is no police report made. In Australian jurisdictions, this ranges from 3 months in New South Wales to 12 months in Western Australia and South Australia [[95], [96], [97]]. Data on this sort of semi-reporting is scarce, but 5869 incidents of sexual assault were reported to NSW police in 2018, with just 397 incidents (7%) resulting in a proven sex offence up until January 2023; a total of 5% of reports ended in perpetrators serving a custodial sentence. Notably, in only 15% of cases (872) was legal action taken [98]. The low attrition and success rate of reported sexual violence likely incites hesitancy to report, and in a time frame that allows effective collection of forensic evidence, or before destruction after collection. In Australia, sexual assault evidence testing backlogs are not widely reported, suggesting that turnaround times from collection to reporting are rapid enough to escape mainstream critique. A recent exception is that observed in the state of Queensland, stemming from a broader range of quality breaches culminating in a state parliamentary enquiry [99]. In some countries, sexual assault evidence backlogs are extensive. Most notably, the United States of America reports several jurisdictions with backlogs spanning decades, and in many cases, evidence is abandoned rather than waiting for processing by crime labs [100,101].

8. The national plan to end violence against women

In October 2022, the Australian National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children 2022-32 was released [1]. The plan is a national policy framework that seeks to guide the Australian community towards ending gender-based violence through prevention, early intervention, response, recovery and healing. Implementation of the plan is set out in two five-year Action Plans, alongside a standalone Action Plan to address the disproportionate experience of violence by First Nations women and children [44,102]. This framework is unique from previous plans in that the lived experience of victim-survivors is central, and it was developed in consultation with them as well as frontline services, advocacy groups, FDSV organisations, researchers and the public [1,103]. Accountability, intersectionality, ongoing evidence-gathering, and evaluation underpin its functioning [1], yet forensic science as a mechanism for improvement receives only a minor mention. The National Plan acknowledges the need for an intersectional approach that captures the unique and complex experience of victim-survivors. Furthermore, the lack of national consistency in terminology and conceptual approaches to data collection is an issue that the National Plan aims to address to achieve clarity, improve evidence-based interventions and measure progress [1].

The first ten broad actions that the Commonwealth, state, and territory governments have committed to implement are: gender equality, evidence base, workforce capability, capacity of systems and services, perpetrator accountability, action against sexual violence, partnership with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, programs for children and young people, justice responses, and access to housing [44]. Forensic science should be central to the evidence base, perpetrator accountability and justice responses actions, yet it is only referred to once in the 144 pages of the document, with reference to Improve justice responses to all forms of gender-based violence. The associated action is-

"Ensure victim-survivors have access to timely forensic examinations, medical care and trauma specialist crisis counselling."

While the beneficial services provided by sexual assault clinics cannot be overstated, this action appears to lack an understanding of the multiple agencies and their needs in improving forensic science responses to FDSV cases.

Progress towards targets is currently tracked through four progress reports: the annual First Action Plan 2023-2027 Activities Addendum Updates, National Plan outcomes reporting, the annual Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence Commission report to parliament, and individual program reports [44,[104], [105], [106]]. The activities addendum provides publicly available, transparent updates on activities taken towards specific actions, how they will be implemented and the status of those activities [104].

9. Recent work addressing justice responses to domestic and sexual violence

Under Action 9 of the National Plan to End Violence Against Women and Children, the Commonwealth government is funding $6.5 million over four years to strengthen sexual assault and consent legislation [1,104]. Part of this activity was to establish an Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC) inquiry into justice responses to sexual violence, primarily concerning law reform to improve the experiences and outcomes of victim-survivors in the justice system [104]. The ALRC tabled the final report in January 2025, making a total of 64 recommendations [107]. The recommendations are informed by both consumers and agents of the criminal justice system, including those with lived experience, particularly those who are disproportionately represented in sexual violence data. It also emphasises the importance of engagement of those with lived experience in the review and evaluation of all resulting reforms [107]. A significant proportion of the recommendations seek to address the re-traumatisation of victim-survivors throughout the justice process. For instance, to disallow cross-examination of complainants by unrepresented accused persons, allow pre-recording of evidence, provide flexible conditions for complainants, and ensure access to intermediaries at all stages of the process. They also seek to ensure equitable access for all victim-survivors, for example, increasing accessibility and use of interpreters, funding rural, regional, and remote police agencies to ensure they have appropriate technology for recording and playing evidence, and amending legislation to make restorative justice options widely available. Finally, the ALRC makes several recommendations to ensure ongoing evaluation and accountability in the justice system. Examples include establishing independent task forces in every state and territory to review reports made to police in the 12- 18 months prior that did not progress to a charge, establishing a task force ensuring a quality assurance framework for police interviewing of complainants, and training for agents of the justice system on the myths and misconceptions relating to sexual violence.

Following the homicide of a Perth mother and daughter by a friend's ex-partner in a double murder suicide in 2024, Western Australian Police conducted an inquiry into the police response in the weeks preceding [108]. It was reported that the family of the perpetrator contacted police on several occasions before the homicides, where there was a failure to recognise and act upon the posed risk. Risk assessment was not conducted correctly by the responding officers, meaning they did not exercise the powers under the Restraining Orders Act 1997 [58], nor the Firearms Act 1973 [109], that would have put the perpetrator under a 72-h protective order, and allowed them to seize his firearms [108]. Insufficient action was taken to determine whether the perpetrator was a fit and proper person to hold a firearms license or possess firearms on the grounds of his medical state, despite being warned of his deteriorating condition following the recent marriage separation and a minor stroke. There was also insufficient action taken by police regarding alleged firearm offences, following the family reporting an unsecured or unaccounted for firearm in his collection. Other noted issues included failure to share all victim contact information with partner and support agencies, and poor risk-related medical information sharing between the Department of Health and WA Police relating to the perpetrator's access to firearms. The final report on the inquiry made 18 recommendations for the Western Australian Police Force to implement. The recommendations focused on developing a stronger police response in the FDSV context through improving risk assessment, risk management, workforce development, and information sharing. This incident highlighted the need for further work to ensure the Australian police have the capacity to respond effectively to FDSV.

10. Conclusion

The violence against women crisis in Australia is a complex and pervasive health and welfare issue. It affects a large proportion of the population, and has serious short- and long-term physical, psychological, economic, behavioural, and health consequences. While the focus of this research is on the Australian experience, very few nations escape the increasing prevalence of FDSV and its effects on victim-survivors and those close to them. The nuance of the individual experience of victim-survivors cannot be understated. On average, one woman in Australia is killed every week by an intimate partner [110]. The disproportional representation of women in the domestic and sexual violence statistics is unwavering; hence, the current capacity of the Australian criminal justice system is not sufficient to protect them from harm, and forensic science plays a central role in improving these outcomes. Forensic science plays a critical part in both the investigation and prosecution of sexual crimes by providing scientific support for victim-survivors' testimonies as well as identification of perpetrators.

Further, the disproportionate rates of experiencing violence in marginalised groups who are vulnerable to compounding disadvantage point to action and reform beyond a one-size-fits-all approach. It is for this reason that the input of both agents and consumers of the criminal justice system, particularly those with lived experience, is crucial to implementing change that will meaningfully impact the lives of victim-survivors. It is also important that all points in the justice process function in evidence-based and trauma-informed ways, including police, healthcare providers, support organisations, individuals working in the court system and other institutions and agencies, including forensic science. Further, those who may come into contact with victim-survivors must have a robust understanding of what constitutes family, domestic and sexual violence to be able to intervene and provide the appropriate support. The safety and wellbeing of victim-survivors is the highest priority.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Bronte Hall: Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation. Brendan Chapman: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Supervision, Project administration, Investigation, Conceptualization.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.