Resources for Violence Prevention Advocates

Good advocacy needs both urgency and care

Violence demands action. It also demands accuracy, responsibility and respect for the people whose lives sit behind the issues we discuss.

 

Strong advocacy can challenge institutions, policy, law and public attitudes without sensationalising violence or treating survivors as content.

 

Advocacy can be powerful. How we do it matters.

THE ROLE OF ADVOCACY

Advocacy can change what society accepts

Advocacy can expose gaps in systems, challenge harmful attitudes, influence governments, improve services, strengthen laws and bring experiences that have been ignored into public view.

It can also shape the way communities understand violence.

That influence carries responsibility.

People working publicly in this space should be prepared to question systems while applying the same scrutiny to their own claims, language and practices.

Credibility matters because inaccurate or careless advocacy can undermine the very change we are trying to achieve.

Principles
Responsible advocacy

Responsible public advocacy may include:

  • Verify claims before publishing
  • Distinguish between allegation, charge, conviction and legal finding
  • Use current, credible sources
  • Link to original research or official data where possible
  • Avoid sensationalising violence or trauma
  • Protect survivor privacy
  • Do not publish details that identify children or protected parties
  • Consider whether apparently harmless information could identify someone when combined with other details
  • Correct significant mistakes openly and promptly
  • Link people to support when discussing distressing topics
  • Avoid graphic detail unless there is a compelling public-interest reason for including it
  • Make space for complexity without using complexity to excuse harm
  • Be clear about what is evidence, interpretation, opinion or lived experience
  • Avoid presenting individual cases as proof of broad trends without supporting evidence
  • Centre accountability with those using violence rather than scrutinising victim-survivor behaviour
Survivor-centred advocacy

Survivors are not evidence to be collected for a campaign.

Good advocacy respects autonomy.

That means:

  • Seeking informed consent before sharing someone's story
  • Being clear about where and how their story will appear
  • Respecting decisions to remain anonymous
  • Allowing people to withdraw where reasonably possible
  • Avoiding pressure to disclose more than they want to share
  • Not assuming that every survivor wants to become an advocate
  • Recognising that survivors may have different views about law, policing, justice, prevention and reform
  • Avoiding language that reduces someone to the worst thing that happened to them

A survivor's story belongs to them.

Access to that story is not an entitlement created by a good cause.

Accuracy and evidence

Advocacy is stronger when people can trust it.

Before repeating a statistic, ask:

Who produced it?

What population was studied?

How recent is the data?

What does the statistic actually measure?

Does the source support the claim being made?

Has important context been removed?

Statistics can become widely repeated long after the original research has become outdated, misunderstood or impossible to trace.

When evidence is uncertain, say so.

It is better to acknowledge the limits of available evidence than to exaggerate a claim for impact.

Allegations and criminal proceedings

Public discussion of criminal cases requires particular care.

There is an important difference between:

Alleged: An allegation has been made.

Charged: Police or prosecutors have commenced criminal proceedings.

Convicted: A court has found a person guilty or the person has entered a guilty plea.

Sentenced: A court has imposed a penalty following conviction.

An arrest, charge or media report is not itself a finding of guilt.

Advocates can discuss systemic issues raised by a case while still recognising legal protections including the presumption of innocence.

Where proceedings are active, publication may also be restricted by suppression orders, identification laws, contempt laws or other legal requirements.

Do not assume that because information appears online it is lawful or ethical to republish it.

Children and young people

Additional care is required whenever children are involved.

Do not identify a child victim-survivor unless publication is lawful, appropriate and properly authorised.

Think beyond names.

A school, suburb, photograph, family relationship, parent's occupation or description of events may be enough for people in a community to identify a child.

The public's curiosity does not override a child's right to privacy.

Children should never become collateral damage in an adult campaign.

LANGUAGE

Words influence where responsibility lands

Language can subtly move responsibility away from the person causing harm and towards the person experiencing it.

Consider the difference between:

"Why didn't she leave?"

and

"What prevented her from leaving safely?"

Or:

"She returned to him."

and

"He continued using control while she was attempting to leave."

Good advocacy examines the behaviour of the person using violence, the conditions surrounding the victim-survivor and the systems influencing their choices.

Survival responses may include staying, returning, complying, minimising, withdrawing complaints, maintaining contact or delaying disclosure.

These behaviours should not automatically be interpreted as evidence that violence did not occur.

LIVED EXPERIENCE

Lived experience brings knowledge that systems often miss

Research and professional expertise matter.

So does lived experience.

People who have navigated violence, coercive control, childhood abuse, sexual violence, policing, courts, child protection, housing, health services and recovery can identify consequences and system failures that may not appear in policy documents.

Meaningful inclusion goes beyond asking survivors to tell painful stories.

People with lived experience can contribute to:

  • Policy development
  • Service design
  • Research priorities
  • Community education
  • Prevention strategies
  • Legislative reform
  • Training
  • Organisational governance
  • Evaluation

When lived experience expertise is requested professionally, organisations should also consider recognition, payment and genuine decision-making power.

PUBLIC STORYTELLING

A powerful story is not automatically an ethical story to publish

Before publishing someone's experience, consider:

Who benefits from this story being shared?

Has the person genuinely consented?

Could publication expose them to retaliation, identification or renewed trauma?

Does the story contain information about other survivors or children who have not consented?

Has identifying information been removed?

Does the headline accurately reflect the story, or is it designed primarily to provoke?

Will the person have an opportunity to review how their story is represented?

Urgency does not remove the need for consent.

SOCIAL MEDIA
SOCIAL MEDIA
Advocacy in fast-moving online spaces

Social media can give advocacy extraordinary reach, but speed can encourage people to publish before checking.

Before sharing breaking information:

  • Read beyond the headline
  • Look for the original source
  • Check the publication date
  • Confirm whether later information has changed the story
  • Avoid publishing names or images simply because another account has done so
  • Distinguish confirmed information from speculation
  • Be cautious about screenshots without context
  • Consider whether sharing graphic material actually contributes to understanding
  • Do not encourage online harassment
  • Correct inaccurate posts rather than quietly deleting them where the error has already spread

Virality is not the same as credibility.

Comment sections

Public conversations about violence can attract victim-blaming, hostility and disclosure.

Consider moderating:

  • Threats
  • Victim-blaming
  • Graphic descriptions
  • Identification of protected people
  • Personal attacks
  • Unverified accusations against identifiable individuals
  • Hate speech
  • Attempts to expose a survivor's identity

People may also disclose current abuse in comments or private messages.

Advocates should know the limits of their role and maintain clear referral pathways to appropriate services.

POLICY ADVOCACY

Move from outrage to reform

Public attention can create an opportunity for change, but sustainable advocacy usually requires more than demanding that something be done.

A strong reform argument identifies:

The problem:
What is happening?

The evidence:
How do we know?

The impact:
Who is affected and how?

The system involved:
Which law, policy, institution or practice contributes to the problem?

The proposed change:
What specifically should happen?

Responsibility:
Who has the power to make that change?

Measurement:
How would we know whether the reform worked?

Clear proposals make it easier for governments, organisations and communities to respond meaningfully.

PREVENTION

Advocacy must look upstream

Crisis services are essential.

So is preventing violence before someone needs them.

Prevention advocacy may address:

  • Consent and respectful relationships education
  • Healthy models of masculinity and relationships
  • Child safeguarding
  • Early identification of coercive and controlling behaviour
  • Community attitudes that excuse violence
  • Bystander responses
  • Professional education
  • Perpetrator intervention
  • Technology-facilitated abuse
  • Workplace responses
  • Institutional accountability
  • Economic, housing and social conditions affecting safety

Prevention should not become another way of telling potential victims how to avoid being harmed.

Responsibility for violence remains with the person choosing to use it.

SYSTEMS ADVOCACY

Sometimes the system becomes part of the harm

Advocacy may need to examine not only the original violence, but what happens when someone seeks help.

Police.

Courts.

Child protection.

Healthcare.

Housing.

Education.

Workplaces.

Immigration systems.

Disability services.

Family law.

Support services.

Each can contribute to safety. Each can also create additional barriers or harm when systems fail to recognise violence, communicate poorly, operate in isolation or place unreasonable burdens on victim-survivors.

Responsible systems advocacy asks not only:

"What should the survivor have done?"

but:

"What did the system require of them, and was that reasonable, safe and accessible?"

INCLUSION

Violence does not affect everyone in the same way

Advocacy should recognise that experiences of violence and access to support may be influenced by factors including:

  • Disability
  • Age
  • Culture
  • Language
  • Geographic isolation
  • Financial insecurity
  • Sexual orientation
  • Sex and gender
  • Immigration status
  • Caring responsibilities
  • Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander identity and community context
  • Housing insecurity
  • Technology access

Inclusive advocacy does not require pretending every person's experience is identical.

It requires making space for differences while maintaining the fundamental principle that everyone has the right to safety.

COLLABORATION

No single organisation owns the issue

Violence prevention requires cooperation across sectors.

Advocates may work alongside:

  • Victim-survivors
  • Specialist services
  • Researchers
  • Educators
  • Health professionals
  • Police
  • Lawyers
  • Government
  • Community organisations
  • Prevention practitioners
  • Journalists
  • Businesses
  • People working with perpetrators

Collaboration does not mean avoiding criticism.

It means recognising that sustainable change often requires multiple parts of a system to move together.

BOUNDARIES

Advocates need boundaries too

Working with stories of violence can have an emotional impact, particularly for advocates with their own lived experience.

You are allowed to:

  • Step away from distressing material
  • Decide which issues you will engage with
  • Decline graphic information
  • Limit private messages
  • Refer people to specialist services rather than becoming their support person
  • Take breaks from social media
  • Protect your personal information
  • Decide which parts of your own story remain private

Being committed to an issue does not require being permanently available to it.

BEFORE YOU PUBLISH

A useful final check

Before posting, publishing, speaking or campaigning, ask:

Is it accurate?

Can I identify the source?

Am I presenting allegation as fact?

Could anyone be unintentionally identified?

Does this respect survivor dignity and agency?

Am I sharing more detail than the public needs?

Does my language place responsibility where it belongs?

Am I informing people, or simply provoking them?

Have I considered legal or ethical restrictions?

Have I provided support information where appropriate?

If I am calling for reform, have I explained what change I actually want?

Strong advocacy should withstand scrutiny.

pdf - Dimitry Miroliubov

Responsible Advocacy Quick Reference Guide

Download your copy

Advocacy should create change without creating more harm

We need people willing to speak clearly about violence, challenge failed systems and demand better responses.

We also need advocacy people can trust.

Accuracy does not weaken advocacy.

Nuance does not mean neutrality about violence.

Respecting due process does not mean ignoring survivors.

Protecting privacy does not mean remaining silent.

Responsible advocacy combines courage with evidence, accountability with humanity, and urgency with care.

Because lasting change requires more than being heard.

It requires being credible.

Research Library
Partner & Collaborate