It was reported to the Inquiry by a number of people that the role of church ministers is changing as they now visit their congregation far less than previously practiced. “Church ministers are hardly doing visitations anymore. In the olden days they did not just visit your congregation – they used to visit everyone.” Inquiry Participant, Inquiry public hearings This echoes the sentiments of many other witnesses who bemoaned the fact that some church ministers are only ever seen on a Sunday nowadays and there is barely any interaction in the intervening days. Not only does this limit the amount of spiritual guidance provided to the congregation, but it prevents church ministers from identifying potential family violence before it occurs, or intervening when it does start. It is a key preventive mechanism of family violence in Samoa, which has now all but disappeared. In addition to the lack of visitations by church ministers, the practice of folafola (calling out the names and amounts of financial donations on a weekly basis) has also contributed to the prevalence of violence. Whilst this does not happen in all churches, it reflects a wider issue of church obligations placing great financial pressure on families (to the point some have to take out bank loans) and bring shame on those who cannot donate much (and therefore showing the church’s insensitivity). Money issues was commonly cited as a trigger for family violence and by contributing to this problem, churches are directly contributing to greater risk and prevalence of family violence, and must start to take responsibility for this fact. A further common policy of church ministers is in the provision of character references for perpetrators of family violence when they come before the courts. Character references can be helpful in helping judges determine appropriate sentences but in this context they are problematic. Family violence is usually a pattern of abusive behavior, and whilst it may be a first court appearance it is unlikely to be the first time it has happened. The courts are usually unaware of any historical abusive behavior (particularly if it was never reported before) and do not have the means to explore this. Reaching out via character references is effort by the court to be informed in this regard. These character references however tend routinely to paint the perpetrator in the best light possible and glosses over other relevant factors. Through the provision of defective character references, church ministers are therefore increasing the space within which perpetrators can act with impunity and further strengthening the idea that family violence is a normal part of life to be accepted. This is less surprising when one considers the far more active role church ministers play in family violence – as abusers themselves. “One of the reasons for their (church ministers) silence on this issue is that some clergy are themselves guilty of inappropriate behaviour toward women, either their wives or women in their parishes.” Mercy Ah Siu-Maliko, ‘A Public Theology Response to Domestic Violence in Samoa’, Inquiry document 39