How is Domestic Violence Defined for Therapeutic Purposes?
J. Michael Olivero
Central Washington University
Introduction
This paper analyses the definition of domestic violence used in domestic violence evaluations. It begins with the process of domestic violence assessment in the state of Washington. This is followed by a review of the literature and a discussion of the definition of domestic violence. Finally, qualitative data are provided through interviews with probation officers and domestic violence arrestees, and domestic violence evaluations.
Domestic Violence Evaluations
The state of Washington provides for mandatory arrest in instances in which there has been a crime between related individuals. The criminal acts under Washington’s domestic violence laws are the same as criminal acts between non-related people.1 In the event of a conviction or a deferred prosecution, perpetrators of domestic violence may undergo a domestic violence assessment, by a state certified provider of domestic violence treatment. The issues of assessment for domestic violence are governed by statute.2 The domestic violence treatment provider gives a recommendation to the court as to the need for batterer’s treatment. If batterer’s treatment is deemed necessary, statute provides for at least one year of treatment and the content of the treatment or course curriculum.3
The treatment provider defines the term domestic violence and applies it to the specific context of a case. The definition of domestic violence to be used in the assessment is not provided by statute. Without a definition of domestic violence the decision for treatment may be a mere term of art. Further, how we define domestic violence is important; because how we define it will determine the steps we take to overcome the problem (Fall, 2004). If one relies on or reviews the research and published works on the definition of domestic violence, the matter is not clearly agreed upon and a host of interpretation may present themselves. In addition, the providers of domestic violence treatment have a financial stake in mandating that prospective clients take domestic violence classes.
Legal Definitions of Domestic Violence- Criminal Acts
Using the available statutes as the defining point as to what constitutes domestic violence may have its draw backs. According to Fantuzzo and Mohr (1999) a model code on domestic violence limits its definition to acts of physical harm, or the threat of physical harm. Model codes aside, there is no single statutory definition of domestic violence throughout the United States:
Domestic violence is defined very broadly in most American laws. There is no standard definition of domestic violence in American law. Each state has its own ‘domestic violence’ law (sometimes several different statutes, with different definitions), and additionally there are several federal statutes defining and punishing ‘domestic violence.’ Thus, domestic violence has many definitions (Wardle, 2003: 701).
Furthermore, Bingham (2005:81) reports that:
Domestic violence is defined differently among states' civil and criminal codes. Some states define the offense broadly, providing specific statutory protection against emotional abuse. Other statutes attempt to cover emotional abuse through provisions protecting against harassment or stalking. Still other statutes are drafted narrowly and are significantly more restrictive regarding what constitutes domestic violence. Such statutes may provide protection against ‘the infliction of fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury, [or] sexual activity’ but not against emotional harm independent of such physical abuse or habitual conduct.
Federal law seems to focus upon criminal, not psychological, acts of violence. For example, the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) defines domestic violence as a felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence committed by a related person.4
In a similar manner, Washington State 5 and others (including states such as Florida,6 Idaho, Iowa) seem to focus on a discrete criminal act by related individuals that is recognizable at an instance by a police officer at the scene of violence between related people.7 For example, the State Code of Iowa of 1995 defined domestic violence as is assault committed:
“between family or household members residing together, between separated or divorced spouses, between persons who are parents of the same minor child, or between persons who have been family or household members residing together within the past year and not residing together currently(Consalvo,1998): 62)..”8
Assault is defined by the Iowa code as:
“ ...any act that is intended to cause pain or injury to another or any act that is intended to place another in fear of immediate physical contact that will be painful, injurious, insulting, or offensive, coupled with the apparent ability to execute the act (Consalvo(1998): 62).”9
In Washington, domestic violence is an act involving the following features:
"…physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or the infliction of fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury or assault[,]...sexual assault[,]...or stalking" by one family or household member against another(Letendre, 2000: 973).”10
Tuerkheimer (2007) believes that the legal definition of domestic violence bears little resemblance to the actual nature of the abuse and that there exists a disconnection between battering as it is practiced and battering as it is criminalized. She suggests that the legal model for domestic violence, isolates and “decontextualizes” it, and thus conceals the reality of power and control element involved.
In a similar manner, Robertson (1995:1193) argued that, “It is of primary importance that each act of violence that takes place in the context of an intimate relationship is not labeled as domestic violence.” She believed that random, one time acts of violence, in the absence of a pattern, should be acknowledged and accounted for in a different manner than defining it as domestic violence.
Diverse Definitions of Domestic Violence
Conduct included in the definition of domestic violence currently varies with the context within which it is used (Fantuzzo and Mohr, 1999). Outside of the legal sphere, domestic violence is defined in multiple ways. In fact, domestic violence has been defined in various ways in the legal, social science, and psychology fields (Goelman, 2004). As such, researchers on domestic violence have not agreed on a uniform definition of what constitutes violence or an abusive relationship (Makar, 1998) and the question becomes what definition should a domestic violence treatment provider use to identify domestic violence.
Researchers on the incidence of domestic violence have had significant problems operationally defining what domestic violence is. In researching custody decisions, Miller (2005) defined domestic violence as, “any act of physical aggression or coercive control, including ‘psychological intimidation or control,’ used by one parent to compel the other parent to do something against her or his will. However, allegations of emotional abuse were not included for purposes of calculating abuse claims. In a similar manner, Collins (1994) measured the incidence of domestic violence as “yes” responses on surveys to items involving physical assault such as: “has spouse or boyfriend ever thrown something at you; pushed, grabbed, shoved, or slapped you; kicked, bit, or hit you with a fist or some other object; beaten you up; choked you; or forced you to have sex against your will.”
The focus on crime, and differences in types of crimes included, results in differing research conclusions on incidence. Raphael (2003) points out that researchers found the incidence rate of domestic violence among a certain group of women, when the definition was expanded to include emotional abuse and coercion at two other sites, the incidence rose to 35% and 49%. The National Clearinghouse for the Defense of Battered Women prepared a metastudy on the incidence of domestic violence which reveals significant inconsistencies. Some of the discrepancy may be explained by the varied definitions of domestic violence. Some studies only consider serious assault, and others included slapping, pushing, and kicking. Many studies also neglected to include sexual abuse (Klemperer, 1995). West (2005:10) reports that “the fact that there is disagreement over the definition of domestic violence is often cited as one reason the incidence of domestic violence in America is difficult to determine.” Lastly, Whestone (2001) reports that the incidence of domestic violence is measured differently by researchers in the fields of criminal justice, social services and medical professionals producing large discrepancies.
A Criminal Act and the Notion of a First Strike or Primary Aggressor
If the statute requires mandatory arrest at the scene of an instance of assault when the parties are related, the police must arrest someone. The police could use criteria such as who struck first, or who the primary aggressor was. Illinois’ Victims' Economic Security and Safety Act specifically precludes protection for an individual subjected to domestic violence if the "victim" was actually the first aggressor. However, it may be impossible for the police to discern whether a victim was a first aggressor, as this is a factual issue that court proceedings are often unable to resolve (Tarr, 2007).
Indeed, the literature identifies women who are the victims of domestic violence who engage in violent behavior and it provides confusion of terms. Vela (2000:1231) stated that a domestic violence victim, “is a person who has been subjected to acts or threats of violence, not including acts of self-defense, committed by a current or former spouse of the victim…(bolded by this writer).” Some writers have suggested that we need to modify the definition of domestic violence from a single act to avoid defining the victim of domestic violence as the perpetrator. Kurtz (1997) was concerned that statutory definitions of domestic violence would prevent a victim who used violence solely as a means of defense from retaining or gaining custody in divorce proceedings. She suggested that the statutes should contain elements such as “a history of acts," "a history or pattern," or "the occurrence of ongoing domestic abuse" to prevent the victim from becoming the batterer within the statute.
Nonphysical Acts of Abuse
An Act of Emotional Abuse
Feminist legal scholars criticized famous domestic violence researcher Lenore Walker, for not including a definition of domestic violence that included coercion and her exclusive focus on physical violence (Kuennen, 2007). West (2005) states that advocates of domestic violence prevention believe that the legal definition of domestic violence is not broad enough, and wish to extend the definition to include sexual, emotional, and financial abuses. She stated that, “This disagreement over the definition only adds confusion in determining what really constitutes domestic violence (West, 2005: 10).11
Merrell (2001) suggests that domestic violence includes more categories of conduct than just a physical act of violence. While forms of violence may include physical acts, it also may involve emotional abuse, economic abuse, as well as verbal, psychological and spiritual elements. In addition, Bessette and Petererson (2002) include not only psychological abuse or psychological/emotional assaults, and economic abuse, but also include isolation, and intimidation. Robertson (1995) includes similar kinds of behaviors, but also includes extreme jealousy, public humiliation, and destruction of personal property. Raphael (2005) added abuse through pregnancy, and obstruction to education along with many of the behaviors listed above. Rawles (2004) adds pet abuse into the equation. Spitz (2003) included pet abuse too, but also added stalking. Whetstone (2001) included victims who are or were intimate partners, as well as children and the elderly. Hague, Aris and Mullender (2003) believe that we should include children’s exposure to domestic violence as domestic violence. Bermann and Edleson (2001) argue against the automatic assumption” that child exposure to violence is a form of maltreatment, as not all children react negatively or in the same manner.
The American Medical Association12 goes beyond a physical criminal act 13 and suggests that while domestic violence involves an act, it also involves, “ongoing, debilitating experience of physical, psychological and/or sexual abuse... (Thomas, 1999: 903).” Bingham (2005) calls the domestic violence dynamic "systematic terrorism," and finds that many victims experience "multiple forms of abuse and control at the hands of their partners," not just physical violence.
Psychological abuse that constitutes domestic violence might be difficult to define. Fort (1993:21) defined domestic violence as:
"’any act occurring between two individuals who live or have lived together that is intended or perceived to be intended to cause physical or psychological harm. An act of domestic violence can range from verbal abuse to the use of a deadly weapon, with a multitude of possibilities in between.’”
As such, it would appear that domestic violence could be one act of verbal abuse that causes psychological harm. Wardle (2003: 791) tells us that “Domestic violence involves a continuum of behaviors ranging from degrading remarks to economic exploitation, from beating to sexual abuse, from threats to homicide.”
Some commentators suggest that we must look beyond the specific act or acts of abuse, physical or psychological, and analyze the intention behind the act.
Acts with the Intent of Power and Control Forming a Pattern
Tuerkheimer (2007) suggests that legal definitions domestic violence should be revised to include a "course of conduct," where physical acts are no longer understood as the sole incident, but where disconnected events are woven together by the thread of control. Rawles (2004: 74) suggests that domestic violence is, “a social problem in which one's property, health and/or life are threatened, endangered or harmed intentionally by a family member or significant other to coerce, control, revenge and/or punish.” As such, it is not just a criminal act, but the ultimate intention behind the act. Rawles includes acts of coercion, revenge and punishment, while other focus on power and control.
According to Peterson (2003) domestic violence as, “virtually any serious assertion of power by one family member against another along any of three continuums of abuse: sexual abuse, physical abuse, or psychological abuse.” Meier (2003) focuses on the power and control intent behind the act, to define domestic violence. In addition, he suggests that it also involves a pattern of acts, rather than an act, designed for the intention of power and control. Meier (2003: 657) points out that that when, “one understands that domestic violence is defined by a ‘pattern of coercive control,’ instead of mere discrete incidents of violence, it becomes much harder to fabricate.” Pfier (2005) allows for a sexual orientation and gender neutral perspective stating that “domestic violence should be defined as a pattern of behaviors utilized by one partner to exert and maintain control over another person where there exists an intimate, loving and dependent relationship."
Robertson (1995), Klemperer (1995) and Stewart (2004) believe that the Power and Control Wheel is a useful tool in identifying behavior associated with domestic violence. Klemperer (1995) stated that battered women's advocates define domestic violence as a pattern of coercive control characterized by a range of behaviors. These behaviors include physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, financial, and psychological abuse. She points to the Power and Control Wheel, developed by the Duluth Abuse Intervention Project, which illustrates the imbalance of power between men and women as a vital factor in understanding the nature of domestic violence.14 The descriptors are not gender and sexual orientation neutral. Further, the instrument serves as a descriptor of the types of behavior displayed by perpetrators, but is not exhaustive or definitive. The purpose of the Power and Control Wheel is not to define domestic violence, but to educate victims on batterer behavior.15
Makar (1998:91) provides a similar description as the Power and Control Wheel, including a pattern of acts designed to achieve power and control, but the behaviors are described in gender and sexual orientation neutral terms:
a) Conduct perpetrated by adults or adolescents against their intimate partners in current or former dating, married, or cohabitating relationships of heterosexuals, gay men, and lesbians.
b) A pattern of assaultive and coercive behaviors, including physical, sexual, and psychological attacks as well as economic coercion.
c) A pattern of behaviors including a variety of tactics--some physically injurious and some not, some criminal and some not--carried out in multiple, sometimes daily, episodes.
d) A combination of physical attacks, terrorist acts, and controlling tactics used by perpetrators that result in fear as well as physical and psychological harm to victims and their children.
e) A pattern of purposeful behavior, directed at achieving compliance from or control over the victim.
Some researchers suggest that the definition domestic violence should include a historical pattern involving phases. In a similar manner, Letendre (2000: 973) described the pattern as a cycle of control, marked by specific phases:
Domestic violence generally cycles through three periods: tension building, acute battering, and a honeymoon phase. Minor episodes of violence may occur in the tension-building stage where individuals cope by avoiding or placating their batterers. In the next phase, explosive or acute battering incidents occur, which may last from a few minutes to several days. Following such battering, some couples enter a honeymoon phase where the batterer showers the victim with apologies, love, and affection, while other couples proceed directly back to a tension-building stage.
Merrell (2001) supports a definition of domestic violence that involves an escalating pattern of abuse. The intent of the escalation is the same as previously discussed where one partner in an intimate relationship uses methods to control the other partner. Meyersfeld (2003) described domestic violence as having two components to the abuse. The first is emotional and the second is physical. While these two components may operate separately, they are generally combined to spin a web of abuse in which the exigency of violence escalates. Vainik (2007) also describes domestic violence as a pattern of control that becomes more dangerous with time. As such, once physical or psychological intimidation begins it usually escalates, becoming more frequent and severe. Abuse may begin with verbal abuse and escalates to physical violence, and in extreme cases, homicide (Whetstone, 2001; Brodwin and Siu, 2007). . One episode builds on past episodes and sets the stage for future episodes (Ogden, 1998/1999). This violence tends not to lessen over time. Generally, the threats and/or beatings happen more frequently, last longer and cause greater physical injuries as time goes by (Sousa, 1999).
It would appear that Utzig (1997:7) summarizes this definition of domestic violence well:
Domestic violence has been defined as "causing or attempting to cause bodily injury." However, this definition also includes additional forms of power and control, such as physical abuse, sexual abuse, economic abuse, emotional abuse, and psychological abuse. Therefore, it can be said that domestic violence is any act that causes the victim to do something that she does not want to do, prevents her from doing something she wants to do, or causes her to be intimidated and afraid.
In domestic violence situations, there is a grave power imbalance. One person becomes the oppressor and the other the victim. This relationship may develop after several incidents of abuse, or after one isolated incident of abuse. With this said however, domestic violence is not usually an isolated incident, but rather a gradual development involving many incidents. Commonly, domestic abuse begins with the oppressor degrading the victim, causing her to believe that she is inferior. Once the victim's self esteem and self worth begins to diminish, the victim becomes isolated and more dependent upon the batterer. As the batterer gains control, more severe forms of abuse follow. The abuse operates in a cyclic fashion and becomes the central dynamic of the relationship.
Domestic Violence as a Male Against Female Only Act
Much of the literature on domestic violence seems to focus upon males as the abusers and females as the victims. Some commentators have gone as far as to suggest that the focus on men as perpetrators of domestic violence has to do with Feminism and the historical connection between the two. For example, Kirk (2004:42) expresses the opinion that the focus on males as perpetrators comes from the feminist lobby:
“So now it gets worse. They just passed a new custody law. If you can prove two incidents of domestic violence, throughout the entire relationship, you get custody. You want to overcome the presumption, you have to take a bunch of classes and prove the other parent is unfit. Heck, you may have to do that just to get unsupervised visitation.
The worst part, though, is that the judge can't hold it against the other parent if she's alienating the kids. Matter of fact, she can take off to another state without leaving an address…All she has to do is when she's finally tracked down, claim there were two incidents over the course of, say, twenty years.
Okay, I see your point, but you're thinking about wife beating. I'm talking about domestic violence as it's defined in the statutes. It can be all kinds of things, some of which don't even involve touching. It can be threatening, harassing, or throwing a plate at the wall.
Well that's my point, Jimmy, stuff like that happens when a couple is breaking up. People get a little crazy, do stuff they wouldn't normally do. Some guy grabs his wife by the arm, as she's going out the door, and says "wait, stay and let's talk about it" and now he's screwed in the divorce case.
How does it happen? The legislature gets sold a bill of goods, that's how. The anti-male radicals go down there to Juneau, they start talking about the worst cases, the ones where some guy shoots his wife, himself, and maybe a cop too. Like any restraining order is gonna stop someone if he's decided to do that. Then they start in about the "cycle of violence", like all domestic violence situations have the same dynamic. Bull. The typical situation where somebody, say, yelled in somebody's face or kicked a door when they were splitting up, has nothing in common with the few guys who knock the wife around on a regular basis. Whole different deal. But that's the scenario the politicians get sold. So they keep defining domestic violence down, while upping the consequences…
…Now, if you can goad your spouse into shoving you, or even just lie well enough to convince the judge that he did, you win almost everything. It ain't that hard, you scream in somebody's face long enough, he's gonna react eventually.
We're back to the future, in a way. Except, since the party who didn't want to split the sheets is more likely to react badly, now it's the unfaithful spouse who's more likely to get the advantage. It's like we've spun full circle.
Nerenburg (2000) reports that domestic-violence theory is grounded in the belief that society is inherently sexist and that domestic violence reflects society's acceptance and tacit approval of male dominance over women. As such, domestic violence is defined as a pattern of escalating violence by men against women, for the purpose of exercising power and control. This perspective is supported on the international level as well (Aguirre and Wolfgram, 2002).
Kelly (2003: 791) argues against notions that males are the sole abusers and places blame on this “misconception” on the history of the development of domestic violence consciousness and feminism:
How is it that our general legal understanding of domestic violence as defined by the male abuse of women is so squarely contradicted by the empirical reality? Honestly answering this question requires tracing the history of both the theory and practice of domestic violence law. Undertaking such an exploration, one quickly finds that the "discovery" of domestic violence is rooted in the essential feminist tenet that society is controlled by an all-encompassing patriarchal structure. n8 This fundamental feminist understanding of domestic violence has far-reaching implications. By dismissing the possibility of female violence, the framework of legal programs and social norms is narrowly shaped to respond only to the male abuse of women. Female batterers cannot be recognized. Male victims cannot be treated. If we are to truly address the phenomenon of domestic violence, the legal response to domestic violence and the biases which underlie it must be challenged.
Because of the focus upon the male/female dynamic in our definition of domestic violence, there doesn’t seem to be a place for domestic violence by females or in homosexual relationships.
Some writers seem to acknowledge that domestic violence involves both genders, but simply tell the reader that “for the purposes” of their writing domestic violence is defined as an act by a male against a female (Jones, 2000; Anderson and Aviles, 2006; Jones, 2000; Nolder, 2001). This might be the result of the toll domestic violence takes upon women at the hands of men. While the term domestic violence is a gender neutral term, statistics show that domestic violence affects men and women in vastly different ways (Vainik, 2007). While both genders commit domestic violence, “it is clear that women are much more often than men, the victims of serious and severe violence” (Wardle, 2003:791).16 Buzawa and Buzawa (1992) suggest that their definition is “is gender neutral in that we see violence as a problem for both sexes. Lundy (2993:273) reminds us that domestic violence is sexual orientation neutral as well. Lundy (1993:273) stated that “Domestic violence is often perceived in sex-based terms (man v. woman) or incident-based terms (number of physical assaults). In reality, domestic violence is both broader and deeper than these definitions imply, “including heterosexual and homosexual relationships.
In an interesting example of attaching domestic violence to male perpetrator and female victim, Thomas (1999) ties a gender neutral definition of domestic violence provided by the American Medical Association and joins it with male perpetrated violence and the damages to women:
WHY WOULD A MAN USE THE PERSON he loves as a punching bag? Domestic violence, defined by the American Medical Association as "ongoing, debilitating experience of physical, psychological and/or sexual abuse," is the leading cause of injury to women between the ages of 15 and 44. The FBI reports that as many as one out of four women are victims of domestic violence at least once during her lifetime, and that 55 percent of those who beat their partners also beat their children. Obviously, the problem of domestic violence is pervasive (Thomas, 1999: 903).17
There could also be an ideological based proclivity to see men as the perpetrators of domestic violence and women are the victims. For example:
For the purpose of my analysis, domestic violence is defined as an instance of physical, emotional, or sexual violence against women, directed at them by their husbands, ex-husbands, boyfriends, or ex-boyfriends. This conceptualization is a slight modification of the legal definition... (Consalvo (1998): 62)(bold added by this writer).”
In the above example, the author seems to believe that defining males as abusers goes hand in hand with the statutes as a “slight modification.” The writer seems to completely avoid the notion that females perpetrate acts of domestic violence.
Because of the tendency to see domestic violence as a man/woman dynamic, law enforcement and others18 have failed to understand the presence of domestic violence among homosexual couples. Knauer (1999) stated that people in same-sex relationships are often denied the protections afforded by domestic violence laws precisely because their relationship is not recognized as being "domestic." Writers on homosexual domestic violence have also pointed out how police officers misunderstand domestic assault when it comes to gay men. Jablow (1999) stated that there is a popular misconception that gay and lesbian battering is “mutual battering” and is simply a fair fight between two men or two women.19 Some states have avoided this by amending statutes concerning what constitutes domestic to include same sex violence where the offender and the victim were cohabiting or had been cohabiting within 5 years prior to the date of the alleged occurrence (Aulivola, 2004).
Qualitative Data Concerning the Application of Domestic Violence to Specific Cases
The data for this study came from a Washington State certified domestic violence treatment provider located in Central Washington. Data were collected from interviews with county probation officers, Washington Department of Corrections Community Correctional Officers, arrestees for domestic violence, domestic violence victims, domestic violence treatment providers, and through our reading of domestic evaluations. We interviewed approximately 300 arrestees and reviewed their domestic violence evaluations from this agency collected between 2006-2008. The evaluations include a review of the police officer’s arrest report and also contained interviews with the victims. Clients usually come to the agency as a result of court order. Typically, they have been arrested, have a deferred prosecution or a conviction for domestic violence and the court orders a domestic violence evaluation. The agency performs a host of assessments including domestic violence, a lethality index, as well as mental health and substance dependence checks. The agency, then, provides treatment recommendations to the court concerning these issues.
Direct Referral to Domestic violence Batterer Treatment by the Court
In some instances, the court itself decides the course of action independent of an evaluation. These cases seem to be a rare occurrence. However, in one instance, the probationer signed a plea agreement that mandated that he directly go through domestic violence services. The probationer received a domestic violence assessment from the provider that indicated that he was in need of anger management classes and that that domestic violence perpetrator treatment was not required. Despite this, the court ordered that he had signed the plea bargain and he was to attend domestic violence treatment. In another instance, a client came on for an anger management evaluation and the recommendation was for domestic violence treatment and the recommendation was supported by the probation department. In another case, the matter would not have been brought to the attention of this research project, as the defendant agreed to undergo counseling, despite her arrest for domestic violence, and this was agreed to by the court. The matter was brought to the attention of treatment providers, during the course of a custody dispute when the defendant was ordered to get an anger management evaluation and was directed to go to a domestic violence treatment provider for the assessment.
Questionable Practices by Domestic Violence Treatment Providers
According to many arrestees, and credible others, there are treatment providers that may be corrupted and provide recommendations for domestic violence perpetrator services when the services are not warranted. The providers of domestic violence services have a vested financial interest in recommending domestic violence services, as opposed to anger management or other forms of therapeutic intervention. The state requires at least one year of services for anyone in a domestic violence perpetrator services.
Some arrestees and probation officers report outright questionable financial practices. Some programs require payment of services for groups even though the participant did not attend the group for justifiable reasons. Some programs require not only weekly group therapy sessions that are mandated by the state, but they also charge for a monthly individual therapy session along. One arrestee reported that the program he was contracted for provided for a six month weekly series of classes at $35 a week, followed by six months of classes at $75 a month. He got behind on his bill and the treatment provider mandated that he attend weekly sessions at $35 a week until he was caught up on his payment. He continued to go to weekly classes way beyond the 26 weeks, and almost paid the cost equivalent for a year’s program with weekly before he caught up on his bill. The treatment provider then wanted him to go through 6 monthly classes. He also said that he was also told that it was state law that the monthly cost of classes was $75. There exists no state law that would require this fee. The veracity of this arrestees claim might be valid, as he provided us with his receipts.
One treatment provider alleges that he was directed by his agency director to mandate perpetrator treatment for state referred clients to augment the numbers in his group to increase the income for his agency. This allegation was bolstered by our review of the polygraph examination, after the agency director denied making this directive. The director of this agency was not disciplined by the agency’s board of directors possibly because she was concerned about the agency remaining financially solvent.
No Objective Criteria Defining Domestic Violence
Some probation officers routinely allow probationers to get second opinions on recommendations as they have concerns about justification for the original one year treatment plan. This seems to be an unusual practice as some judges have concerns about “diagnosis shopping” in family court in other matters. Indeed, there are instances in which one treatment provider recommended one year of treatment for domestic violence and a second treatment provider required anger management violence treatment. For example from the evaluation:
XXXX had six months of treatment for domestic violence and her service provider discontinued his practice. She is college educated. She has no criminal history other than the present assault and has been convicted of a felony for assaulting her ex-husband. She does not appear to have problems with substances. XXXX husband admitted that he was having an affair and one of many since their marriage. He told her that he was going to divorce her. They were standing in the kitchen when the discussion got heated about making him leave. There was a knife on the counter and she stabbed the victim once in the back. He drove himself to the hospital and was not seriously injured. At the time, XXXX was undergoing breast cancer treatment and was on medication and receiving counseling for severe depression…
Recommendation: XXXX does not fit the requirements for domestic violence batterer treatment. There is no indication that the present offense was part of a larger pattern of an attempt to utilize power and control to dominate her husband. Her husband agrees with this assessment of the situation. She did not plan to stab her husband; it was an impulsive act and one she greatly regrets. She has abided by the restraining order and has moved on with her life.
In another instance, a male probationer had a domestic violence evaluation provided by two domestic violence treatment providers or agencies. The first provider indicated that he was a domestic violence batterer and in need of one year of services. The second provider recommended ten sessions of anger management classes (from the evaluation):
XXXXXX is currently on disability and unemployed. He is six months clean and sober. His drug of choice is methamphetamine. He thinks that he is not an angry guy….He got into a fight with his roommate; they have never been romantically involved and worked at the same place. He said that she attacked him and he hit her. He was pinned in a corner and had no way to get away. He was on his away to work. Early that day he called the police because she tried to run over him. She got a little cut on her nose from the fight. The police indicated that the victim was intoxicated and uncooperative. They arrested XXXXXX because he seemed to be the primary aggressor…
In this example, by statute it involved domestic violence as they shared an apartment. However, there was no romantic connection with the individuals. He was arrested because “he seemed to be the primary aggressor.” This line was lifted directly from the police report and placed into the evaluator’s report.
Arrest for Domestic Violence as the Criteria for Domestic Violence Treatment
Probationers and probation officers alike have complained that some domestic violence treatment providers see the assessment phase of the evaluation to be an intake, rather than an evaluation. These treatment providers may be relying upon Washington’s WAC 388-60-0165 that sets forth what information the treatment program should collect and discuss with the “client during the intake process or assessment interview.” It appears that the legislature had two issues in mind, an intake and an assessment. Most of the court orders require the arrestee to undergo a “domestic violence evaluation.” Further, the language of WAC 388-60-0165 states that “(1) Treatment programs must conduct an individual, complete clinical intake and assessment interview with each perpetrator who has been accepted into the treatment program…” In order to be admitted to the program some evaluation should logically take place to see whether the client meets the criteria for admission to the program and this would include being a domestic violence perpetrator.
Are All Person’s Arrested for Domestic Violence Perpetrators?
In one instance, both a male and a female were arrested for domestic violence. The police were called to a residence after a non-married couple threatened each other with knives. The couple was college students and she owned the computer. She wanted the male to get off the computer and to go to bed because his typing was keeping her awake. When he kept telling her he needed to get his assignment done, she got made, hit him in the head and then picked up a knife and threatened to stab him if he didn’t get off of the computer. He went around her and got another knife from the kitchen and threatened to stab her if she didn’t leave him alone. Both were yelling loudly. She ran into the bathroom and locked herself inside and then crawled out the window and got into her car. The police arrived, having been called by the neighbors who heard the commotion and they found both individuals in possession of knives. Both individuals were arrested for domestic violence, which is an impossibility according to the models described above.
Females are a clear minority of those arrested for domestic violence. In the present sample, they reflect 5% of those arrested for domestic violence. This may reflect the actual incidence of female violence or a whole host of other reasons may explain it. With respect to females it could be that a significant majority of those arrested for domestic violence, might indeed be the victim and the arrest re-victimized the victim. Several of the women arrested for domestic violence seem to fall under the terms of a victim acting out. For example from an evaluation:
XXXXX She has been charged with reckless Engenderment-DV. XXXXX has been married to Mr. XXXXX for four years. They have one child together. Mr. XXXXX has been unemployed since October of 2005. Mr. XXXXX has a history of domestic violence with another woman previous to this relationship and has received treatment. Mr. XXXXX and XXXXX had been drinking and a fight erupted over the radio in their car. Mr. XXXXX threw a beer at the family car and began calling her foul names. XXXXX brought in Mr. XXXXX’s gun. He was screaming foul language at her and she pointed the gun in his direction and told him to stop threatening her and to shut up.
This incident appears to be a single and isolated one for XXXXX. It does not fit into a pattern of criminal conduct. She has no previous arrests for anything. When speaking with XXXXX and reading the police report, it does not seem that she was involved in a process or dynamic of power and control, but was more of an impulsive act of anger. Further, granted Mr. XXXXX history and her description of the nature of the dynamic in the couple’s relationship, it may very be that XXXXX is a victim of domestic violence. It is not unheard of for victims of domestic violence to engage in this kind of conduct. That said, she exhibited significant and poor impulse control of her anger and someone could have been hurt or killed.
Recommendation:
XXXXXX does not exhibit symptoms of mental illness. She has no history of treatment for mental illness. She did see a therapist briefly concerning issues relative to her marriage and being abused. We make the following recommendations: XXXXX should undergo a drug and alcohol evaluation. She should abide by the recommendations of her treatment provider. While XXXXX’s conduct was completely unacceptable, there is insufficient evidence to suggest that she is in need of domestic violence batterer’s treatment (by statute that would include a year’s period of treatment). XXXXX should undergo a domestic violence victim class as a means to gain awareness of the dynamics in her relationship with Mr. XXXXX and appropriate coping mechanisms. Ms. XXXXX should undergo 26 anger management classes, with weekly sessions for six months.
In another example from an evaluation:
XXXXXXX has undergone a domestic violence evaluation. The victim’s name is XXXXX and we have not been able to reach him. XXXXXXX was asked to engage in sexual behavior by the victim that she found to be highly upsetting. She has a history of being sexually abused as a child and is currently undergoing Dialectic Behavior Therapy for borderline personality through XXXXXXX. XXXXXXX has a history of suicidal ideation and conduct. She is also undergoing medication for anxiety disorder. XXXXXXXX’s conduct while wrong is also what could be expected from someone with her history and a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder. The present evaluator is trained in Dialectic Behavior Therapy and is very familiar with its elements. XXXXXXX denied possession of firearms and significant use of mood altering substances. She admitted to being highly anxious during the interview and to threatening suicide on a regular basis.
Recommendation:
XXXXXXXX does not seem to have a significant record or pattern involving this type of behavior. However, she has a long-standing pattern of symptoms associated with borderline personality disorder and was and is under treatment for this disorder. Dialectic Behavior Therapy is the most effective therapy at this time to deal with borderline personality disorder. One of the components of this therapy is anger management and affects regulation. It is my recommendation that XXXXXXX be ordered to attend her group and individual therapy for borderline personality, and to abide by the recommendations of her treatment provider, for the next year while on probation.
In a third example from an evaluation:
She has been arrested two times, once for assault-4 domestic violence and for violation of the restraining order. The victim was Mr. XXXXXXXX who was currently housed in Kittitas County Jail. She has one child with Mr. XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX, who is 8 months old. She has never been married and she currently has no boyfriend. She has undergone counseling in the past as the result of father’s homicide when she was an adolescent. She said that she had been physically and sexually abused as a child. She said that her arrest for domestic violence stemmed from a disagreement with Mr. XXXXXXXXX. He refused to out of her car. She physically forced him out of her car. He responded by grabbing her keys and throwing them so that they were lost. He called the police. She indicated that there had been violence before in the relationship usually as the result of Mr. XXXXXXXXXXX being the primary aggressor. She said that her child had been taken from her as the result of the doctor’s concerns about a failure to thrive. The arrest for violation of the restraining order was not the result of fighting, but a result of being caught together by the police
Recommendation: At present, it would appear that Ms. XXXXX would benefit from some form of anger management classes. It does not seem that she is in need of domestic violence batterer’s classes, and there was significant indication that she is a victim of domestic violence
At any rate, it seems likely that many women are being arrested for domestic violence and that the actual dynamic is not domestic violence.
In addition to cases where the female offender appeared to the victim acting out, in addition to the example provided above, there were also cases in which the female offender was arrested for domestic violence, but the situation appeared to be anger management. For example from an evaluation:
XXXXXX has undergone a domestic violence/anger management evaluation… She has been arrested for several offenses including, Trespassing 3, Malicious Mischief, Threats to Do Harm and Domestic Violence. The victim’s name is Mr. XXX …and we have been unable to reach him. Mr. XXX is XXXXX’s estranged boyfriend. With respect to trespassing, she saw her boyfriend’s car at another woman’s house and the other woman would not open the door. She said that she was pounding on the door and the door came open and broke the other woman’s entertainment center. She said that she went into the house and ran into the bedroom after them. She eventually confronted him about his conduct. They walked out the door and she went to the gate and the other woman hit her with a hammer. They went at it, pulling hair and he tried to break it up. She had a warrant for a failure to appear on a harassment charge for the same woman. She went to jail. He came back home soon thereafter and they tried for a period of time to make things better. It didn’t work and he started staying elsewhere. He came to the house upset and was banging on her door. She went out to talk to him and he was on the phone talking to the other woman. He told her that the other woman was pregnant and she smacked him. Ms. XXXXX has been pregnant by him three times and wasn’t trying to get pregnant. The other woman was on the other line when she hit him and she called the police. Ms. XXXX has two children, XXXX and XXXXX. Their dad is XXX XXXXX. He has no contact with the kids. He was domestically violent. She does not like fighting.
Recommendation:
It would seem that XXXXXXX had a very unhealthy relationship with Mr. XXXXX. Her conduct does not seem to have indicators of her being a domestic violence batterer involved in a pattern of behavior involving power and control. Instead, it seems that in these very stressful situations, she responded with violence. We recommend 10 sessions of anger management classes.
In this example from an evaluation, there is a relationship, but it is not a romantic relationship. Basically, one woman beat up her former roommate and was charged with assault-domestic violence:
She has a history that involves three previous arrests, one for assault 2nd degree and received anger management classes with XXXXX. She denies a history of drugs and alcohol. She has no other history of psychotherapeutic counseling. She gave no indication of suffering from mental illness. She does not own a firearm. We need a copy of the police report. She gave the following rendition: She had her brother’s mother in law live with her a month and a half; she had four kids and a boyfriend in her house. She agreed to pay rent and didn’t pay. Two months she asked her for money, she went to work and moved out and took her stuff. She came back for her stuff and she asked her for her money and then noticed her stuff gone…When she saw her she confronted her. Her sister was with her. She asked nicely why she stole from her. She said, “I am not going to pay you because you killed your baby and are a bitch.” The victim slammed her finger in the door and XXXXX went crazy. She hit her three times and she had a bloody face. Her glasses broke on her face. She also bit her boyfriend’s arm when he tried to break it up. She called the police. She left and came back and the cops pulled her over. She jumped out and told the police that it was her. Hurt bad and wanted to know if she used a weapon. She was arrested and taken to jail.
In this last example from an evaluation, this woman was pregnant and became angry and impulsive when the father of her child decided to terminate the relationship and leave town:
She does not have an extensive history of violence. She did not indicate suffering from mental illness and did not own a firearm. She has received counseling for post partum depression. She is not currently suicidal or homicidal according to her self-report. She did not found to be dependent upon the victim. A restraining order is currently engaged and she has not violated it…She gave the following story with respect to the incident. He was leaving her because they weren’t romantic and not interested in each other. She had a high-risk pregnancy and they weren’t having sex. He left and she went to find him. He wanted to go back to his parents. She found him at the Greyhound station. He shoved her and she pushed him into the trees. She smacked him and left a mark. She called the cops to try and stop him from leaving. They arrested her. She was seven months pregnant.
Recommendation
XXXXXXXX does not seem to be in need of further services. We did discuss anger management issues while she was here and she did receive some anger management information as a result. The present incident sounds like an isolated situation and unlikely to be repeated. At the time she was seven months pregnant, she has no significant history of assaults, provided no other indication of problems with anger, and the victim did not seem to receive significant injuries. This recommendation could change after we read the arrest report or hear from the victim. However, no further treatment is recommended at this time.
There were also many instances of males being arrested for domestic violence and the evaluator found that it was an anger management issue instead. For example from an evaluation:
…XXXXX has undergone a domestic violence/anger management evaluation…He freely admits to be an addict. The victim is his girlfriend, XXXXXX XXXXXX (telephone number: 248-2172) and we interviewed the victim. The restraining order has been lifted. They have just had a child together. They fought over his doping and dealing. It was a weekly thing to fight about dope. She was punching him in the face and hit him. He stated that he is “kind of passive and lets the shit pass off him.” He said that he warned her not to hit him again. When she did, he pushed her down, grabbed his dope and ran out to his motorcycle. His mom lived next door and she called the police. He was yelling and screaming.
Recommendations: XXXXXXXXX does not seem to fit the profile for a domestic violence perpetrator. He does admit to having troubles with anger management. He has been coming to anger management classes, where he seems to take advantage of the opportunity and “works his program.” We recommend 10 sessions of anger management classes. In addition, he should attend continue with Drug Court and abstain from any drug or alcohol use.
Another example from an evaluation:
... He saw a counselor about anger management and was diagnosed as suffering from PTSD as the result of childhood abuse…He described the incident as follows: He acted out while drunk. He was mad at her and beat up the hood of his car, punched holes in the wall and broke things. He called the cops because he thought he was going to beat her up. The police report indicates that he shoved and hit her and hit her under the chin. He also broke the deck railing. He provided a police report. She said that he had an anger problem and talked about going to a counselor. She said that he also had an alcohol problem. He thinks that the victim “needs some kind of an eye opener on real life.” He said that he feels real bad about doing what he did in front of the kids.
He said that he had drunk more than a “half rack” the day of the incident. He also said that this was a routine thing. He would come home, drink this much, eat dinner and pass out. He said that he had an alcohol assessment and that they found no significant problem. He also indicated that the victim would “start in on” him when he came home and that she made him angry with her alleged demands and laziness.
Recommendations
This evaluator has real concerns about whether XXXXXXXX does not have problems with alcohol and wonder whether he was truthful during the assessment and gave them the same information that he provided this assessor. We recommend that he obtain an evaluation if he has not already had one, abstain from alcohol and abide by the recommendations of treatment providers. We also recommend 26 weeks of anger management based upon the report of the victim and by his own admission as needing anger management assistance. There was insufficient indication, according to the victim and our assessment, to suggest that he needs domestic violence classes. He may have unresolved issues from childhood abuse that result in anger and anger management problems while under the influence. We are concerned that he is at risk to reoffend in the event that he is under the influence and has contact with the victim and would not support dropping the restraining order at this time.
Finally, in a few instances, males were the arrested party although the police report and the victim report that the incident was mutual combat or started by the female. In a couple of instances, he was deemed the primary aggressor due to the damages that he had inflicted, as opposed to who the primary aggressor was and how the fight started. There were also instances in which the police indicated that one or the other needed to go to jail and the male decided to go to jail because the female needed to stay and care for the children.
Conclusion and Discussion
The definition of domestic violence is open to debate and discussion. The domestic violence law in the state of Washington focuses upon a criminal act, whereas others would define domestic violence using a host of other criteria. Clearly, domestic violence perpetrator treatment providers define domestic violence in diverse manners. The definition of domestic violence has significant meaning to treatment providers as the definition dictates the approach. The domestic violence treatment providers who do domestic violence evaluations have a vested interest in a finding of a need for domestic violence treatment. It would appear that a definition of greater clarity should be utilized, so that those with a vested interest in the outcome do not have undue sway. We have found a host of cases that are very questionable with respect to a domestic violence label. There are cases in which the domestic violence evaluators do not agree as to whether the incident involves domestic violence or anger management. It can very well be that there are persons who are given one year of domestic violence classes and the appropriate treatment should focus solely on anger management issues, rather than power and domestic violence related issues.
Inappropriate treatment leads to significant issues. First, there is a sense of injustice and the system as being ridiculous by anger management offenders that is not conducive to treatment. The system looks chaotic and out of control, rather than a process to engender personal change.
In addition, much of the treatment is almost completely a loss for persons with anger management problems. The focus of treatment for those with anger management problems is skills in the awareness and appropriate expression of anger and other emotions, including communication skills, conflict resolution skills and stress management. In contrast, the focus of treatment in domestic violence classes is change in a belief systems which support the use of violence in intimate relationships, identification of physical, sexual and psychological abuse, the batterer is held accountable for all abusive behaviors, there is confrontation of denial, minimization and victim blaming, examination of societal and personal beliefs that support violence, discussion of the impact of battering on family, non-violent and non-controlling relationship skills, as well as “anger management” issues (Eastside Domestic Violence Program (2003-2004).
Washington’s Administrative Code requires the following topical issues for domestic violence classes, the majority of which may not be appropriate for anger management and mutual combatant types of violence:
WAC 388-60-0245 What topics must the treatment program include in the educational curriculum?
The curriculum of the treatment program must include the following topics:
(1) Belief systems that allow and support violence against women;
(2) Belief systems that allow and/or support the use or threat of violence to
establish power and control over an intimate partner;
(3) Definitions of abuse, battering, and domestic violence;
(4) Forms of abuse, including:
(a) Physical abuse;
(b) Emotional and sexual abuse;
(c) Economic manipulation or domination;
(d) Physical force against property or pets;
(e) Stalking;
(f) Terrorizing someone or threatening him or her; and
(g) Acts that put the safety of battered partners, children, pets, other family
members, or friends at risk.
(5) The impact of abuse and battering on children and the incompatibility of
domestic violence and abuse with responsible parenting;
(6) The fact that a participant is solely responsible for the participant's violent
behavior, and must acknowledge this fact;
(7) The need to avoid blaming a victim for the participant's abusive behavior;
(8) Techniques to be nonabusive and noncontrolling;
(9) Negative legal and social consequences for someone who commits domestic
violence;
(10)Why it is necessary to meet financial and legal obligations to family
members;
(11) Opportunities for a participant to develop a responsibility plan:
(a) The treatment program may assist the participant in developing the plan.
(b) In the plan, the participant must make a commitment to giving up power and
control over the victim.
(12) Education regarding individual cultural and family dynamics of domestic
violence; and
(13) Washington state laws and practices regarding domestic violence, as
described in chapters 10.31, 10.99, and 26.50 RCW.
These topics are clearly not in concert with anger management needs. Further, we point to “ (1) Belief systems that allow and support violence against women,” above, which infers that women are the only victims, excluding female and homosexual forms of domestic violence. The treatment approach is definitely designed for the power and control elements of the ideal type domestic violence perpetrators described above and in addition seems to be imbued with the notion of a male batterer and female victim, when the statute that defines domestic violence could involve two females and two males.
Lastly, the whole system is designed to make victims safe and not to re-victimization. The cost of a yearlong domestic violence class is significant. Some of the males in the study are the primary breadwinners. By mandating a yearlong treatment, especially when domestic violence is not required, and a failure to focus on those who truly deserve domestic violence treatment, may lead to unintended results including hardship on the victims. Further automatic domestic violence classes for those arrested for domestic violence leads to the possibility of victims being penalized and subjected to domestic violence classes, when they are the victims of domestic violence.
Bibliography
Addler, J. 1999. “Strengthening Victims’ Rights in Domestic Violence Cases: An Argument for 30-Day Mandatory Restraining Orders in Massachusetts.” 8 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J. 303
Aguirre, M. and A. Wolfgram. 2002. “United Nations Policy and the Family: Redefining the Ties that Bind:A Study of History, Forces and Trends.” 16 BYU J. Pub. L. 113
Anderson, T. and A. Aviles. 2006. “Diverse Faces of Domestic Violence.” ABNF Journal. Lisle: Fall 2006. Vol. 17, Iss. 4; pg. 129, 4 pgs
Aulivola, M. 2004. “Outing Domestic Violence: Affording Appropriate Protections to Gay and Lesbian Victims. ” 42 Fam. Ct. Rev. 162
Bessette, H. and S. Peterson. 2002. “Attitudes of adult nurse practitioner students toward women experiencing domestic violence.” Journal of Nursing Education. Vol. 41, Iss. 5; pg. 227, 4 pgs
Bingham, J. 2005. “Emotional Abuse in the Domestic Violence Context.” 81 N. Dak. L. Rev. 837
Brodwin, M. and F. Siu. 2007. “Domestic Violence Against Women Who Have Disabilities: What Educators Need to Know.” Education. Vol. 127, Iss. 4; pg. 548, 4 pgs
Consalvo, Mia. 1998. “Hegemony, domestic violence, and cops: A critique of concordance.” Journal of Popular Film & Television. Vol. 26, Iss. 2: 62-71.
Cramer, A. and A. Todd. 2000. “Sexual Orientation Bias in Arizona’s Legal System.” 37 AZ Attorney 36
Fall, K. 2004. Alternatives to Domestic Violence. Routledge Press: New York
Fantuzzo, J. and W. Mohr. 1999. “Prevalence and effects of child exposure to domestic violence.” The Future of Children. Vol. 9, Iss. 3; pg. 21, 12 pgs
Fort. M. Mercedes. 1997. A New Tort: Domestic Violence Gets the Status it Deserves in Jewitt v. Jewitt, No. 93 2 01846 5 (Wash. Super. Ct. Spokane County April 21, 1993). 21 Southern Illinois University Law Journal 355.
Graham-Bermann, S. and J. Edleson. 2001. Domestic Violence in the Lives of Children: The Future of Research, Intervention, and Social Policy.” American Psychological Association: Washington, DC
Goelman, D. 2004. “Shelter from the Storm: Using Jurisdictional Statutes to Protect Victims of Domestic Violence after the Violence Against Women Act of 2000.” 13 Colum. J. Gender & L. 101
Hague, G. , Aris, R and A. Mullender, A. 2003. Is Anyone Listening?: Accountability and Women Survivors of Domestic Violence. Routledge: New York
Hastings, C. 2004. “Letting Down Their Guard: What Guardians Ad Litem should Know about Domestic Violence in Child Custody Disputes.” Colum. J. Gender & L. 101
Idaho Code Statutes Annotated. 2007. General Laws, Title 39. Health and Safety, Chapter 63. Domestic Violence Crime Prevention. Idaho Code § 39-6303 (2007) § 39-6303. Definitions (1)
Jablow, P. 2000. “Victims of Abuse and Discrimination:Protecting Battered Homosexuals Under Domestic Violence Legislation.” 28 Hofstra L. Rev. 1095
Jones, R. 2000. “Guardianship for coercively controlled battered women: Breaking the control of the abuser.” Georgetown Law Journal. Vol. 88, Iss. 4; pg. 605, 53 pgs
Kelly, L. 2003. “Disabusing the Definition of Domestic Abuse: How Women Batter Men and the Role of the Feminist State.” 30 Fla. St. U.L. Rev. 791
Kirk, K. 2004. “It's enough to drive you to drink: Back to the Fault Divorce' future.”28 AK Bar Rag 27
Klemperer, J. 1995. Symposium on Reconceptualizing Violence Against Women by Intimate Partners: Critical Issues: Programs for Battered Women- What Works? 58 Alb. L. Rev. 1171
Knauer, N. 1999. “Same-Sex Domestic Violence: Claiming a Domestic Sphere While Risking Negative Responses. 8 Temp. Pol. & Civ. Rts. L. Rev. 325
Kuennen, T. 2007. “Analyzing the Impact of Coercion on Domestic Violence Victims: How Much is Too Much?” 22 Berkeley J. Gender L. & Just. 2
Kurtz, L. 1997. “Protecting New York’s Children: An Argument for the Creation of a Rebuttable Presumption Against Awarding a Spouse Abuser Custody of a Child.” 60 Alb. L. Rev. 1345
Letendre , L. 2000. “Beating Again and Again and Again: Why Washington Needs a New Rule of Evidence Admitting Prior Acts of Domestic Violence. 75 Wash. L. Rev. 973
Lundy, S. 1993. “Abuse That Dare Not Speak Its Name: Assisting Victims of Lesbian and Gay Domestic Violence in Massachusetts.” 28 New Eng.L. Rev. 273
Makar, M. 1998. “Domestic Violence: Why The Florida Legislature Must Do More to Protect the "Silent" Victims.” 72 Fla. Bar J. 10
Meier, J. 2003. “Domestic Violence, Child Custody, and Child Protection: Understanding Judicial Resistance and Imagining the Solutions.” 11 Am. U.J. Gender Soc. Pol'y & L.
Merrell, J. 2001. “Social support for victims of domestic violence.” Journal of Psychosocial Nursing & Mental Health Services. Vol. 39, Iss. 11; pg. 30, 6 pgs
Meyersfeld, B. 2003. “Reconceptualizing Domestic Violence in International Law.” 67 Alb. L. Rev. 371
Miller, J. 2007. “Custody and Visitation: Allegations of Domestic Violence in Child Custody Proceedings.” 16 J. Contemp. Legal Issues 229
Nerenberg, L. 2000. “Developing a service response to elder abuse.” Vol. 24, Iss. 2; pg. 86, 7 pgs
Nolder, M. 2001. “The Domestic Violence Dilemma: Private Action in Ancient Rome and America.”81 B.U.L. Rev. 1119
Peterson, D. 2003. “Getting Together: My 23 minutes of Fame.” 27 AK Bar Rag 16
Pfeifer, T. 2005. “Out of the Shadows: The Positive Impact of Lawrence v. Texas on Victims of Same-Sex Domestic Violence.” 109 Penn St. L. Rev. 1251
Pulido, M. “Pregnancy: A time to break the cycle of family violence.” Health & Social Work. Vol. 26, Iss. 2; pg. 120, 5 pgs
Raphael, J. 2003. “Battering Through the Lens of Class.” 11 Am. U.J. Gender Soc. Pol'y & L. 367
Rawles, P. 2004. “Emotional Abuse as Domestic Battered System.” Fire Chief. Atlanta: Mar 2004. Vol. 48, Iss. 3; pg. 74, 3
Robertson, J. 1995. Symposium on Reconceptualizing Violence Against Women by Intimate Partners: Critical Issues: 58 Alb. L. Rev. 1193
Rawles, P. 2004. “Battered System.” Fire Chief. Vol. 48, Iss. 3; pg. 74, 3 pgs
Robbins, K. 1999. “No-Drop Prosecution of Domestic Violence: Just Good Policy, or Equal Protection Mandate?” 52 Stanford Law Review: 205.
Schepard, A. 2000. “The Evolving Judicial Role in Child Custody Disputes: From Fault Finder to Conflict Manager to Differential Case Management.” 22 U. Ark. Little Rock L. Rev. 395.
Spitz, M. 2003. “Stalking: Terrorism at Our Doors-How Social Workers Can Help Victims Fight Back.” Social Work. New York: Oct 2003. Vol. 48, Iss. 4; pg. 504, 9 pgs
Suk, J. “Criminal Law Comes Home.” The Yale Law Journal. Vol. 116, Iss. 1; pg. 2, 69 pgs
Tarr, N. 2007. “Employment and Economic Security for Victims of Domestic Abuse.” 16 S. Cal. Rev. L. & Social Justice 371
Thomas, R. 1999. “Departments: History has been brutal for women.”Texas Bar Journal. 62: 903.
Tuerkheimer, D. 2007. “Renewing the Call to Criminalize Domestic Violence: An Assessment Three Years Later.” 75 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 613
Utzig, K. 1999. “Entering the Debate on Spousal Abuse Divorce Mediation: Safely Managing Divorce Mediation When Domestic Violence is Discovered.” 7 CIRCLES Bu. W. J. L. & Soc. Pol. 51
Vainik, J. 2007. “Kiss, Kiss, Bang, Bang: How Current Approaches to Guns and Domestic Violence Fail to Save Women's Lives.” 91 Minn. L. Rev. 1113
Varela, M. 2000. “Protection of Domestic Violence Victims Under the New York City Human Rights Law’s Provisions Prohibiting Discrimination on the Basis of Disability. 27 Fordham Urb. L.J. 1231
Vera Institute of Justice, Inc. 2002. Federal Sentencing Reporter. Washington's Post-Blakely Legislation. 18 Fed. Sent. R. 62
Wardle, L. 2003. “Domestic Violence Issue: Marriage and Domestic violence in the United States: New Perspectives About Legal Strategies to Combat Domestic Violence. 15 St. Thomas L. Rev. 791
West, M. 2005. “Non-Traditional Strategies for Domestic Violence.” Law & Order. Vol. 53, Iss. 9; pg. 10, 1pgs
Whetsone, T. 2001. “Protecting Victims by Working Around the System and Within the System: Statutory Protection for Measuring the Impact of a Domestic Violence Coordinated Team. 81 N. Dak. L. Rev. 837
Whetstone, T. 2001. “Measuring the impact of a domestic violence coordinated response team.” Policing. Vol. 24, Iss. 3; pg. 371, 28 pgs
- For example, …"Domestic violence" includes but is not limited to any of the following crimes when committed by one family or household member against another:
(a) Assault in the first degree (RCW 9A.36.011);
(b) Assault in the second degree (RCW 9A.36.021);
(c) Assault in the third degree (RCW 9A.36.031);
(d) Assault in the fourth degree (RCW 9A.36.041);
(e) Drive-by shooting (RCW 9A.36.045);
(f) Reckless endangerment (RCW 9A.36.050); …(TITLE 10. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, CHAPTER 10.99. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE -- OFFICIAL RESPONSE, Rev. Code Wash. (ARCW) § 10.99.020 (1999), § 10.99.020. Definitions).
- WAC 388-60-0165
What information must the treatment program collect and discuss with the client during the intake process or assessment interview?
(1) Treatment programs must conduct an individual, complete clinical intake and assessment interview with each perpetrator who has been accepted into the treatment program. The program staff must meet face-to-face with the program participant to conduct this intake and interview.
(2) During the intake interview, program staff must obtain the following information, at a minimum:
(a) Current and past violence history;
(b) A complete diagnostic evaluation;
(c) A substance abuse screening;
(d) History of treatment from past domestic violence perpetrator treatment programs;
(e) History of threats of homicide or suicide;
(f) History of ideation of homicide or suicide;
(g) History of stalking;
(h) Data to develop a lethality risk assessment;
(i) Possession of, access to, plans to obtain, or a history of use of weapons;
(j) Degree of obsessiveness and dependency on the perpetrator's victim;
(k) History of episodes of rage;
(l) History of depression and other mental health problems;
(m) History of having sexually abused the battered victim or others;
(n) History of the perpetrator's domestic violence victimization and/or sexual abuse victimization;
(o) Access to the battered victim;
(p) Criminal history and law enforcement incident reports;
(q) Reports of abuse of children, elderly persons, or animals;
(r) Assessment of cultural issues;
(s) Assessment of learning disabilities, literacy, and special language needs; and
(t) Review of other diagnostic evaluations of the participant.
(3) If the program cannot obtain the above information, the program client file must include documentation of the program's reasonable efforts to obtain the information.
- WAC 388-60-0255
What is the minimum treatment period for program participants?
(1) The minimum treatment period is the time required for the participant to fulfill all conditions of treatment set by the treatment program. Satisfactory completion of treatment is not based solely on a perpetrator participating in the treatment program for a certain period of time or attending a certain number of sessions.
(2) The program must require participants to attend treatment and satisfy all treatment program requirements for at least twelve consecutive months.
(3) The program must require the participant to attend:
(a) A minimum of twenty-six consecutive weekly same gender group sessions, followed by:
(b) Monthly sessions with the treatment provider until the twelve-month period is complete. These sessions must be conducted face-to-face with the participant by program staff who meet the minimum qualifications set forth in this chapter.
- Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), passed in 1994, included substantial funds to further enhance the criminal justice response as well as support for battered women's services (Stark, 1995).
- While Washington State focuses upon criminal acts per se for arrest and conviction in cases of domestic violence, Washington allows for sentencing enhancements when, “The offense was part of an ongoing pattern of psychological, physical, or sexual abuse of the victim manifested by multiple incidents over a prolonged period of time (Sentencing Reform Act, Effective Date:4/25/2005).
- Makar states that in “Florida, domestic violence is defined as any ‘assault, aggravated assault, battery, aggravated battery, sexual assault, sexual battery, stalking, aggravated stalking, kidnapping, false imprisonment, or any criminal offense resulting in physical injury or death of one family or household member’ (Makar, 1998:10).”
- Colorado includes "an act or threatened act of violence upon a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an intimate relationship(1999:330)."
- Idaho Code § 39-6303 (2007) defines domestic violence to mean the physical injury, sexual abuse or forced imprisonment or threat thereof of a family…
- The Victims' Economic Security and Safety Act (VESSA) is used to protect people who are the victims of "domestic or sexual violence." Domestic violence includes both acts as well as threats of violence, if the behavior causes distress or fear (Tarr, 2007).
- Family or household members" means spouses, former spouses, persons who have a child in common regardless of whether they have been married or have lived together at any time, adult persons related by blood or marriage, adult persons who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past, persons sixteen years of age or older who are presently residing together or who have resided together in the past and who have or have had a dating relationship, persons sixteen years of age or older with whom a person sixteen years of age or older has or has had a dating relationship, and persons who have a biological or legal parent-child relationship, including stepparents and stepchildren and grandparents and grandchildren…(TITLE 10. CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, CHAPTER 10.99. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE -- OFFICIAL RESPONSE, Rev. Code Wash. (ARCW) § 10.99.020 (1999), § 10.99.020. Definitions).
- Johnston and Roseby (1997) defined domestic violence in physical terms, and acknowledged to their readers that emotional abuse is often more pervasive and possibly more psychological damaging than physical abuse, it is not included their definition.
- According to Paulido (2001) The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1998) defines domestic violence as a pattern of assaultive and coercive behaviors including physical, sexual, and psychological attacks, as well as economic coercion, used against current or former intimate partners.
- Knauer (1999) states that some people reject the term "domestic violence" because "domestic" trivializes the violence. Instead, and they suggest that "intimate violence" or "partner abuse," better capture the nature of the phenomenon.
- COERCION AND THREATS: Making and/or carrying out threats to do something to hurt her. Threatening to leave her, commit suicide, or report her to welfare. Making her drop charges. Making her do illegal things.
INTIMIDATION: Making her afraid by using looks, actions, and gestures. Smashing things. Destroying her property. Abusing pets. Displaying weapons
EMOTIONAL ABUSE: Putting her down. Making her feel bad about herself. Calling her names. Making her think she’s crazy. Playing mind games. Humiliating her. Making her feel guilty.
ISOLATION: Controlling what she does, who she sees and talks to, what she reads, and where she goes. Limiting her outside involvement. Using jealousy to justify actions.
MINIMIZING, DENYING, AND BLAMING: Making light of the abuse and not taking her concerns about it seriously. Saying the abuse didn’t happen. Shifting responsibility for abusive behavior. Saying she caused it.
USING CHILDREN: Making her feel guilty about the children. Using the children to relay messages. Using visitation to harass her. Threatening to take the children away
ECONOMIC ABUSE: Preventing her from getting or keeping a job. Making her ask for money. Giving her an allowance. Taking her money. Not letting her know about or have access to family income.
MALE PRIVILEGE: Treating her like a servant: making all the big decisions, acting like the “master of the castle,” being the one to define men’s and women’s roles.
COERCION AND THREATS: Making and/or carrying out threats to do something to hurt her. Threatening to leave her, commit suicide, or report her to welfare. Making her drop charges. Making her do illegal things (Developed by: Domestic Abuse Intervention Project, 202 East Superior Street, Duluth, MN 55802218.722.4134)
- Robertson (1995) advocates that emergency room medical practitioners ask possible victims of domestic violence questions that seem to naturally develop from the Power and Control Wheel, such as, : 1. Does your partner ever say or do things which make you feel like you just can't do anything right or that you are worthless?, 2. Does your partner monitor and/or limit your time with family and friends?, 3. Has your partner ever threatened to harm or destroy any of your personal belongings or a pet? (For example, has your partner ever thrown objects, punched walls, or pulled the phone from the wall?), 4. Has your partner ever threatened to harm or actually harmed you physically? (For example, has your partner pushed, slapped, kicked, punched, bitten, or strangled you, or forced you to have sexual relations against your will?), and, 5. Are you or have you ever been afraid of your partner?
- Schepard (2000) stated that domestic violence directed against women is one of the most frequently reported crimes in the United States. The exact incidence rate is unknown, partly because of differing definitions of domestic violence. Male incidence of victimization is smaller, but a significant number of men significant number of men suffer abuse each year.
- Thomas cited British philosopher, John Stuart Mill, wrote in 1869, “From the earliest twilight of human society, every woman ... was found in a state of bondage to some man ... How vast is the number of men in any great country, who are little higher than brutes, and ... this never prevents them from being able, through the laws of marriage, to obtain a victim ... The vilest malefactor has some wretched women tied to him, against whom he can commit any atrocity except killing her ... and even that he can do without too much danger of a legal penalty’(Thomas, 1999: 903).”
- Domestic violence shelters have been slow and late in providing services to homosexual people, with many shelters refusing to admit them or expressing homophobic attitudes (Pfeifer, 2005).
- For example, a victim of same sex domestic violence was unable to obtain a special, expedited "domestic violence" order of restraint after a single beating. After several beatings, a general restraining order prohibiting ongoing harassment was available, but not a "domestic violence" order (Cramer and Todd, 2000).
|
