<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<record
    xmlns:xsi="https://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
    xsi:schemaLocation="https://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim https://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd"
    xmlns="https://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">

  <leader>01019nam a2200181   4500</leader>
  <controlfield tag="001">14879</controlfield>
  <datafield tag="090" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">14879</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">20010326c1998       y0pory50      ba</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="101" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">eng</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="200" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">Rethinking domestic violence</subfield>
    <subfield code="e">which way now?</subfield>
    <subfield code="f">Liz Dixon</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="330" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">The letters pages of the last two issues of Probation Journal have seen a vigorous debate on approaches to domestic violence.Here, Liz Dixon, Probation Officer in Inner London and Lecturer in the School of Social Work at Brunel University College, offers an alternative perspective, and warns against any unhelpful polarisation in an important debate. She argues that for practitioners the crucial issue is not the theory per se, but its applicability to the realities of practice.</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="461" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="v">V.45,n.2</subfield>
    <subfield code="d">June 1998</subfield>
    <subfield code="p">p.92-94</subfield>
    <subfield code="t">Probation Journal</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">London</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="606" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">VIOL&#xCA;NCIA FAMILIAR</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="700" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="a">DIXON</subfield>
    <subfield code="b">Liz</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="852" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="j">PP105</subfield>
  </datafield>
  <datafield tag="995" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
    <subfield code="1">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="4">PP_105_000000000000000</subfield>
    <subfield code="5">2021-12-17</subfield>
    <subfield code="9">18208</subfield>
    <subfield code="a">DGRSP</subfield>
    <subfield code="c">DGRSP</subfield>
    <subfield code="k">PP105</subfield>
    <subfield code="n">2021-12-17</subfield>
    <subfield code="o">0</subfield>
    <subfield code="r">AP</subfield>
  </datafield>
</record>
