Women’s equality in the UK – A health check

Recommendations

Info

16.23 16.24 16.25 16.26 Faith based organisations and legal arbitration Under the Arbitration Act 1996, 34 bodies outside the justice system can offer arbitration in relation to certain types of civil dispute. Several organisations are using the Act to adjudicate on family and marital disputes in line with religion. There is evidence that bodies involved in applying religious law in the UK are discriminating against women in marriage and divorce. By forcing women to meet with their abusers and encouraging them to return to violent or forced marriages, they are also putting women at risk of further abuse, and are denying them access to justice. By allowing these bodies to operate in the UK, the Government is in breach of its obligations under CEDAW Article 16. (See Appendix: 31 for further information) Recommendation: All bodies involved in private arbitration around family law must be subject to the CEDAW principles and to key UK legislation protecting women’s rights, including the Sex Discrimination Act 35 and the Human Rights Act 36 Shared parental leave We welcome the Government’s announcement in November 2012 on shared parental leave and other support for working parents. However, this is a modest step towards greater sharing of caring responsibilities as there is likely to be limited take-up by fathers as the Government chose not to proceed with the four week extension of paternity leave originally included in their plans. The model of transferable leave adopted by the Government is a significant improvement on the earlier version outlined in the Government’s Modern Workplaces consultation 37 following significant campaigning from the voluntary sector and others. 38 (See Article 11 and Appendix: 15 for more information) Child maintenance/support The UK Government is set to introduce charges for parents with care (PWC) using the child maintenance system to require non-resident parents to provide financially for their children. We consider that the proposal to charge PWCs 7% to use the statutory system raises serious concerns under gender equality provisions of the Equality Act 2010 39 and CEDAW and will result in outcomes that are not in the best interests of the children. It is important to note that charging to use the child maintenance system will impact disproportionately on PWCs, 95- 97% of whom are women. This is reflected in the Department of Work and Pensions qualitative study published in 2006 which concluded that “[o]verall, non-resident parents appear to wield a disproportionate amount of power over establishing financial arrangements following a separation, regardless of the type of arrangements adopted”. 40 34. Arbitration Act 1996 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/23 35. Sex Discrimination Act 1975 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1975/65 36. Human Rights Act 1998 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/contents 37. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (2011) Consultation on Modern Workplaces http://www.bis.gov.uk/Consultations/modernworkplaces 38. Valuing Maternity (2012) Maternity and Parental Leave that Promotes Real Equality. Maternity Action: London http://valuingmaternity.org/ wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Maternity-and-Parental-Leave-Intro.pdf 39. Equality Act 2010 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/contents 40. Bell, A., Kazimirski, A., and La Valle, I. (2006) An investigation of CSA Maintenance Direct Payments: Qualitative Study. London: Department for Work and Pensions, Research Report No. 327 http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2005-2006/rrep327.pdf p41. This conclusion was met with the caveat that “all the parents in this study had eventually involved the CSA in their negotiations (or become involved through the parent with care going onto benefits)”. 168 Women’s equality in the UK: CEDAW shadow report 2013
Recommendations: • Parents with care should not be required to pay a collection fee to use the child maintenance system in the UK • If a collection fee is to be imposed, victims of domestic violence should be exempt from the requirement to pay a collection fee in recognition that direct payment is not a safe option where there is a risk of domestic violence Women’s equality in the UK: CEDAW shadow report 2013 169
Page 1 and 2:
Women’s equality in the UK - A he
Page 3 and 4:
Women’s equality in the UK - A he
Page 5 and 6:
Appendices (online only) Appendix 1
Page 7 and 8:
• the continued discrimination ag
Page 9 and 10:
• Develop a common model of analy
Page 11 and 12:
Article 9 - Nationality: One third
Page 13 and 14:
investment in social infrastructure
Page 15 and 16:
and increase the marginalisation of
Page 17 and 18:
have been no prosecutions in Englan
Page 19 and 20:
1 2 3 4 5 Introduction This is a Un
Page 21 and 22:
10 11 12 13 housing crisis, a ‘lo
Page 23 and 24:
1.1 1.2 1.3 Article 1 - Overarching
Page 25 and 26:
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 Women’
Page 27 and 28:
1.17 1.18 1.19 Young women We are a
Page 29 and 30:
2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 consult to “remov
Page 31 and 32:
2.12 2.13 discrimination”. Howeve
Page 33 and 34:
2.17 2.18 2.19 2.20 2.21 worsen gen
Page 35 and 36:
2.26 2.27 2.28 2.29 CEDAW and the l
Page 37 and 38:
3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 would “increase
Page 39 and 40:
3.15 3.16 3.17 and accountable EHRC
Page 41 and 42:
3.22 3.23 3.24 report is was partic
Page 43 and 44:
classes, migrants, and Gypsy, Trave
Page 45 and 46:
the institutional discrimination an
Page 47 and 48:
5.5 5.6 5.7 Case study: 8 Sandra li
Page 49 and 50:
5.12 5.13 5.14 issue. A more approp
Page 51 and 52:
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 Article 6 - Exploit
Page 53 and 54:
6.9 6.10 6.11 to the protection and
Page 55 and 56:
6.15 6.16 6.17 6.18 Office’s own
Page 57 and 58:
6.24 6.25 6.26 women and increase t
Page 59 and 60:
6.31 6.32 6.33 6.34 infrequent lap
Page 61 and 62:
7.1 7.2 Article 7 - Political and p
Page 63 and 64:
7.7 7.8 7.9 7.10 The House of Lords
Page 65 and 66:
7.13 7.14 7.15 7.16 7.17 Recommenda
Page 67 and 68:
7.21 7.22 7.23 Political representa
Page 69 and 70:
9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 Article
Page 71 and 72:
9.9 9.10 Mainstreaming gender in th
Page 73 and 74:
9.15 9.16 9.17 biased views towards
Page 75 and 76:
9.21 9.22 9.23 9.24 women. 47 (See
Page 77 and 78:
9.28 9.29 9.30 9.31 New family migr
Page 79 and 80:
9.35 9.36 UKBA, where men and women
Page 81 and 82:
9.39 9.40 9.41 9.42 • Do not redu
Page 83 and 84:
9.46 Research on immigration case m
Page 85 and 86:
10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.9 The Educat
Page 87 and 88:
10.13 10.14 10.15 10.16 boys and on
Page 89 and 90:
10.22 10.23 allow speakers to promo
Page 91 and 92:
10.29 10.30 10.31 10.32 Case study:
Page 93 and 94:
10.37 10.38 10.39 10.40 • Many wo
Page 95 and 96:
10.46 10.47 10.48 applications (fig
Page 97 and 98:
11.1 11.2 11.3 11.4 Article 11 - Em
Page 99 and 100:
11.8 11.9 are 754,000 women working
Page 101 and 102:
11.14 11.15 11.16 11.17 11.18 The g
Page 103 and 104:
11.24 11.25 11.26 per week or they
Page 105 and 106:
11.31 11.32 11.33 Introducing more
Page 107 and 108:
11.37 11.38 Case study: 83 Jasmine
Page 109 and 110:
11.42 11.43 11.44 11.45 At the 2012
Page 111 and 112:
12.3 12.4 12.5 12.6 of women and en
Page 113 and 114:
12.12 12.13 12.14 12.15 Translators
Page 115 and 116:
12.19 12.20 12.21 12.22 Barriers to
Page 117 and 118: 12.25 12.26 12.27 12.28 Gypsy and T
Page 119 and 120: 12.34 12.35 12.36 12.37 Older women
Page 121 and 122: 12.41 12.42 Recommendations: • Th
Page 123 and 124: 12.47 12.48 12.49 12.50 they are at
Page 125 and 126: 12.55 12.56 12.57 Case studies: 128
Page 127 and 128: 12.60 12.61 12.62 12.63 12.64 hospi
Page 129 and 130: 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 Article 13
Page 131 and 132: 13.11 13.12 13.13 13.14 children ne
Page 133 and 134: 13.17 13.18 13.19 13.20 Welfare ref
Page 135 and 136: 13.25 13.26 13.27 13.28 because in
Page 137 and 138: 13.32 13.33 Case study: 57 “As a
Page 139 and 140: 13.36 13.37 allocation of resources
Page 141 and 142: 13.41 13.42 Homelessness, including
Page 143 and 144: 13.47 13.48 BME women would be left
Page 145 and 146: 13.52 13.53 13.54 13.55 with some l
Page 147 and 148: 13.60 13.61 13.62 effect to their p
Page 149 and 150: 14.6 14.7 14.8 disabled and lesbian
Page 151 and 152: 14.14 Gypsy and Traveller women suf
Page 153 and 154: 15.6 15.7 15.8 15.9 15.10 15.11 The
Page 155 and 156: 15.14 15.15 15.16 purport to be vic
Page 157 and 158: 15.21 15.22 15.23 Case study: 35
Page 159 and 160: 15.28 15.29 15.30 15.31 has not pro
Page 161 and 162: 15.35 15.36 behaviour by male priso
Page 163 and 164: 16.5 16.6 people being forced into
Page 165 and 166: 16.10 16.11 16.12 16.13 16.14 16.15
Page 167: 16.21 16.22 frequently women’s ac
Page 171 and 172: 19.6 19.7 19.8 as well as for our c
Page 173 and 174: 19.13 19.14 19.15 19.16 The Governm
Page 175 and 176: 19.22 19.23 19.24 19.25 VAWG is a c
Page 177 and 178: 19.30 19.31 19.32 19.33 DV is still
Page 179 and 180: 19.38 19.39 19.40 perpetrators thro
Page 181 and 182: 19.43 19.44 19.45 Support for victi
Page 183 and 184: 19.49 19.50 19.51 19.52 Recommendat
Page 185 and 186: 19.57 19.58 19.59 19.60 BMER VAWG p
Page 187 and 188: 19.62 19.63 19.64 19.65 VAWG in hea
Page 189 and 190: 19.70 19.71 19.72 Invisibility of s
Page 191 and 192: 19.77 19.78 19.79 A number of repor
Page 193 and 194: 19.85 19.86 means more provision. T
Page 195 and 196: Annex 1: The Devolved Administratio
Page 197 and 198: to 41.8% of rural men. 16 Rural are
Page 199 and 200: Annex 2: The UK’s relationship wi
Page 201 and 202: Annex 3: UK reservations and declar
Page 203 and 204: ESA - Employment and Support Allowa
Page 205 and 206: Annex 5: Acknowledgements Many than
Page 207: Women’s Resource Centre is suppor
show all

Women’s equality in the UK – A health check

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?