Since commitments in the 1980s to break the silence of domestic violence, Australian State, territory, and Federal government policies have gone through various iterations, and presently all have explicit policies addressing domestic violence, whether as part of a broader violence against women strategy or as a dedicated “action plan.” In 2006, Australia had in place a well-established public policy agenda concerned with domestic violence. A close examination of the naming, framing, and definitions of domestic violence suggest that although there were some similarities across the Federal, State, and territory jurisdictions, there were also significant differences. In addition, shifts in understandings and responses to domestic violence did not straightforwardly reflect changes in societal values over time but, rather, the ongoing negotiation of contested representations or discourses of domestic violence as a policy problem. Drawing on Bacchi’s (1999) “what’s the problem represented to be” approach, had highlighted current contestations as to whose experience was legitimated in naming domestic violence, noting inconsistencies as to whether children and other family members were included. In considering the framing of domestic violence policy, it was revealed that the ongoing contestations continued to influence policy approaches, which was most evident in differences between Federal and State policies. In summation, although there had been considerable success in gaining widespread acceptance of physical and sexual forms of domestic violence, the extent to which emotional abuse, financial abuse, and social isolation were identified as constituting domestic violence represented a key area of current debate and potential future direction for policy and legislation Australia. Note and references