Efforts to end IPV?

I've been reading up on laws being passed around the world in effort to stop intimate partner violence (IPV). I've posted a number of articles related to these efforts on the VAWG Dialogue FACEBOOK PAGE, but wanted to get into more of an analysis here.

Mandatory Arrest Laws
My research for the past few years has been on the implementation and effects of mandatory arrest laws in the U.S.  These laws, while slightly different by state, require officers to make an arrest when responding to a situation where probable cause to believe a crime has been committed between intimate partners. Notably, many states have these laws, and those that don't may have pro-arrest policies, which encourage arrest, but do not mandate it.

These laws have sparked debate since their implementation. Unintended consequences, the largest of which is the tremendous increase of women arrested for intimate partner violence, have founded many of the criticisms. Additional concerns revolve around this idea of mandatory arrest as a one-size-fits-all policy and a blanket approach.

A new development has recently been proposed that I believe strongly impacts the mandatory arrest laws. Recently the Indiana House approved a law allowing homeowners to kill police officers. This law, I believe, puts officers in a very difficult position. Situations of IPV are already often emotionally charged and unpredictable. This proposed law, however, simply increases the likelihood of danger. Officers are required to attend to situations of IPV and often are faced with making an arrest. If an officer enters a home upon hearing screams (probable cause) this law would allow individuals in the home to shoot the officer. Having laws that work against one another is certainly a predicament. HERE is a link to a news article.

I don't see mandatory arrest as a best-case scenario; I've definitely become educated about the effects (for officers and individuals identified as perpetrators). But, I also know not all officers attend to IPV appropriately.

Clare's Law
Just yesterday a link about Clare's law was posted on our FB page. Clare's law, dubbed after a woman murdered by a former boyfriend, gives individuals the "right to ask" authorities about their partner's criminal/violent histories. Currently there is a year-long pilot trial testing the effectiveness of this law in Greater Manchester, Nottinghamshire, Wiltshire, and Gwent.

Police already have common law powers to provide information about someone's background if officers think there is a pressing need to do so to prevent a crime. This law, however, provides greater accessibility to histories. Debate continues regarding whether the law (common law powers) should remain the same, or should be changed to a woman's right to ask the police or to the woman's right to know (where the police would automatically disclose information in certain circumstances). (NOTE: Men also have the right to ask under this law.)

Criticisms of this law focus on it's effectiveness and it's intrusion on personal privacy. Some organizations contend that education and awareness programs would be more effective. This law doesn't necessarily change anyone's mindset or provide resources once you find out information.  Additionally, claims against this law suggest that once an individual has served the time/paid the price for crime, s/he should not continue to be labeled.

Lebanese Efforts
I was so thrilled when I first learned about the efforts being made to criminalize not only physical violence, but also sexual, psychological and economic violence in Lebanon.  The proposed legislation has been drafted by the NGO Kafa and supported by a number of other groups. Currently, there is no such legislation and family law is governed by religious courts.

The law, as drafted, would have appointed public prosecutors to investigate incidences of violence, estibalished special police units, obliged medical personnel to report cases of expected IPV, and empowered women and children to seek restraining orders.

A problem has arisen. The parliamentary committee tasked with reviewing this law (made up of 8 MPs--7 men, 1 woman) has made numerous amendments to the law. The law was expected to be reviewed/held by the MPs for 3 weeks, but has now been held for over 6 months. In fact, one of the male MPs made a statement in December 2011 that "There's nothing called rape between a husband and a wife. It's called forcing someone violently to have intercourse." Yikes!!! So frustrating. So, marital rape has been eliminated from the law, and a clause establishing a specialized police force for IPV cases was also deleted. And efforts to identify and prosecute economic and verbal abuse has been weakened.

Protests have been held and organizations continue to put pressure on the government.

Below is a video. If you need subtitles, click on the button to the bottom right that looks like an upward error. A menu will pull up and click the CC button. Alternatively, if you double click on the video when beginning to watch it, it will pull up on youtube (as opposed to watching it on the blog) and you will see a CC button on it's own to the bottom right and you can click on it there.

Domestic Violence in Muslim Communities

Today as I read through the news I came across an article entitled, "Nazish Noorani, Domestic Abuse and American Muslims." This immediately caught my eye because the American Muslim population is an understudied population when it comes to issues related to violence within intimate relationships. As I read this article, I came to appreciate that it not only discussed resources, such as Turning Point for Women and Families, but that it attempted to break the dynamics of abuse down and additionally examine the components of intimate violence that might be not only specific to Muslim populations, but to faith-driven relationships of all denominations. For example, the article details that it takes on average 10 attempts at leaving before a woman finally leaves. Previously that number was 7 attempts. This rise in attempts demonstrates added elements that religion and culture play within intimate relationships, including or absent of violence. And, did you really just think about that. 10 attempts. This alone demonstrates that need for support women seeking exit from violence require. And, keep in mind that the research shows the most dangerous time for a woman in a violent relationship is as she leaves.

Furthermore, I appreciated that this article discussed the impact on children. When I teach Violence against Women and Girls, I spend quite a bit of time on this topic. Sometimes it seems adults forget how aware children really are.  While the statistics represented in the article are a bit different from the research I draw from, I think the commonality that everyone would agree on is that children are affected.

I've included a link below of an actual 911 police call made by a 6-year-old girl named Lisa (Nov 21, 1991).  While the audio in this video is extremely upsetting, the police report that upon arrival, the violence was actually rather minimal. What we have to remember, however, is that the perception of a child can be much different from that of an adult.

WARNING: This may be graphic and emotionally upsetting for some. If you choose not to hear the audio, you may read the transcript of the call by clicking here.

To listen to the 911 call, please click here. Note, there are parts of the tape that get quite loud. Be aware of the volume of your speakers.

When Lisa was found approximately 15 years later, she was in an abusive relationship herself. When she was pregnant with her second child, she reported that something snapped and she decided to get out of the relationship. She stated that she didn't want to end of like her mother.

So, this article was full of great things to think about. The impact on children, resources available specifically to the Muslim population, how religion impacts the experience of domestic violence and/or help-seeking behaviors. I highly recommend checking it out. Let me know what you think of the article and/or of the Lisa tape.

Lastly, since today brought up the intersection of religion with VAWG, I also found the following article on the Huffington Post. Check it out if you're interested: What Christians Need to Learn from Sl*twalks

Reproductive Coercion: Pregnancy as a form of Violence against Women

I've been interested in reproductive coercion for several years. My interest began when I assisted as a researcher on a project about teen parenting. There was quite a bit of discussion around one teen telling his/her partner that they needed to have a baby for a, b, or c reason. One teen would tell the other that protection was being used, when in reality there was none being used. Reproductive coercion has been discussed in America in 2 primary ways and is most certainly NOT only related to teenagers.

The first way you might hear about reproductive coercion is pregnancy as a means of boosting the U.S. economy. The argument is that when women birth many children, the U.S. benefits economically, demographically, and in numerous other ways. This argument makes some sense--think about the Baby Boom era--but what is forgotten is this idea that women, and the babies they have, become a strategy.  The value of human life and the value of a woman as a human being gets lost.  Recently I read an article on this very topic. It was published in the Boulder Weekly and was written by the keynote speaker from SlutWalk Denver, Pamela White. The article is entitled, Women are Not Farms.  I love this! I think this is a perfect title. This idea that women can birth numerous children to boost various facets of our society is simply dehumanizing the individuals, the notion of family (in all forms), and is known as reproductive coercion.

Now, as mentioned above, there is a second way you may hear words reproductive coercion. This is the way I used it in my opening and also the way that I am most familiar in hearing it used. Reproductive coercion may also be a tool against a woman--there has been some research in the realm of teen dating violence regarding this topic.  Essentially, this is the notion that in opposite-sex relationships, men actively attempt to get their female partners pregnant. Male partners might take condoms off during sexual intercourse, might break condoms on purpose, or might flush birth control pills down the toilet if found.  So, here's the situation: female doesn't want to get pregnant. Attempts to be responsible by getting birth control pills. Male partner won't let her take the pills. Guilt trips, words of affection, and talk of future lives may also be common and convincing for these women. "Honey, we're going to have beautiful babies." "If you loved me, you'd have a baby with me." On the opposite side, pregnancy coercion is involved as well. Men might state that they'll leave the woman if she doesn't have a child with him. He might say he'll hit her if she uses birth control.  

Don't be fooled, numbers are much too high for experiencing reproductive coercion. This is not an uncommon experience for women.  If you'd like to hear about this in greater detail, check out this podcast by Dr. Elizabeth Miller (author of Pregnancy Coercion, Intimate Partner Violence and Unintended Pregnancy). 

American Indian Women Targeted

Statistics support the notion that crimes against American Indian Women are of epidemic proportions.  In fact, 1/3 of Native women will be raped in their lifetimes and nearly 3 out of 5 will be assaulted by a partner.

I frequently encounter questions about this population in regard to how crimes against women are handled within this sect of the population.  Questions about whether crimes are handled within the tribe or within larger government corrections are most frequently asked.  Currently, Justice Department officials are seeking greater purview over reservations. One of the primary reasons for this is that sentences on reservations would then more closely mirror the sentences offenders receive within state courts for committing the same offenses.

Similarly, changes in law would also allow tribes to prosecute both Native and non-Native offenders within their tribal courts.

Essentially, Congress is currently attempting to close several primary gaps within legislation.  It seems the proposed bill targets such things as protection order enforcement, partner violence, and sentencing. Check out this article for greater detail.

In the meantime, if you were surprised by the statistics presented above regarding the disproportionate amount of violence perpetrated against American Indian Women, I strongly encourage you to check out the book "Conquest" by Andrea Smith.

What's in a word?

Domestic violence, intimate partner violence, violence against women, partner abuse, domestic terrorism, sexual assault, rape... the list could continue for at least another 5 lines. Alas, what's in a word? What does it really tell us? Are the words really that important if everyone understands? I mean, they do understand, right?

The term for violence between partners has long been debated. Historically domestic violence was the term used; however, problems arose when the term was looked at more critically and individuals began to recognize that partners don't always live in the same domicile and if we do consider all parties living under one roof, then won't we also need to consider violence between siblings?

Furthermore, though slowly changing, how do we account for violence between partners of all sexualities? Not all people are allowed to marry; thus, it's crucial we not use language that excludes the consideration of violence among all people, regardless of personal characteristics.

Also, what about the gendered nature of such language? We know statistically that men are more often perpetrators of violence toward women than are women toward men. Consequently, is it not more exact and correct to call a spade a spade and use the term violence against women?

A final piece of food for thought today is how the use of narrow or broad terms may impact various components of our battle to end violence against women.  If we use a narrow term, such as rape, how might that affect the feelings or understanding of a woman about her experience if she was not "raped" but was indeed sexually assaulted?  Does this contribute to her likelihood of trivializing, minimizing, or self-shaming and self-blaming?  Sexual assault is the crime that goes most underreported.  If we use language that allows or asks a woman to redefine her experience, she will be less likely to report it and seek physical and/or emotional support. Additionally, use of a broad term allows for a woman who has perhaps experienced multiple acts of sexual violence to understand each experience as such.

Critiques of broad language? Well, are you familiar with the phrase, "everything but the kitchen sink"?  Use of broad language can create a breakdown of communication between individuals as they attempt to understand exactly what happened. Moreover, it is much more difficult to accurately and effectively study and discuss 50 behaviors as opposed to 1 specific behavior. In other words, if you are interested in rape, then use the word rape. If you are discussing workplace sexual harassment, then use this term.  Similarly, use of terms such as domestic violence or intimate partner violence include a myriad of forms of violence: physical, emotional, economic, etc.

So, what's in a word? Quite a bit. The language we choose to use in our everyday lives can tell a person quite a lot about the ways we think about violence (or any other topic really).  Just think about the following:

• Rape vs. sexual assault vs. Non-consensual sexual interaction
• Female genital mutilation vs. Female genital cutting vs. Female circumcision
• Intimate partner abuse vs. Intimate partner assault vs. Intimate partner violence
• Same-sex intimate partner violence vs. Opposite-sex intimate partner violence
• Same-sex physical assault vs. Opposite-sex economic abuse
• Violence against women  vs. Violence

Is it important to know the couple is a teen dating couple versus an elderly couple? Is it important to know that the couple is same-sex or opposite-sex?

So, how do you feel about all of this? What comes to mind when you think of the word "assault"? Now, what about the word "abuse"?  Is it important? What words do you choose to use when discussing these topics? Let's get this dialogue rolling! No, seriously. Leave a comment. Tell me what you think and then come back later to see what others have said. So ask yourself: