GHS Gender Neutral Title for VAWA Questions

Help me answer these two questions and only use chapter 10 to help you answer these questions which I attached down below.

2.   The issuance of civil protection orders can serve as a “wake-up call” to put abusers on notice that the legal system is serious in its condemnation of intimate partner violence. Considering that these orders are not backed by any additional supervision or police protection, might they create a false sense of security in the victims? An alleged victim could also use the order as leverage in any future custody battle. Given that such hearings are often battles of “he said, she said” with judges frequently erring on the side of caution, what, if anything, can be done to prevent fraudulent use of civil protection orders in these hearings?

Copyright 2015. Aspen Publishing.
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
L
isa came in to her attorney’s office to ask if she could get a protective order because her husband was
stalking her. “He is always accusing me of having an affair and tries to monitor everything I do,” she said.
However, she had not moved out of their marital home and was not ready to initiate a divorce action. Her
claims of intimidation would not satisfy the court’s standard for issuing a civil protection order.
She continued to call her attorney’s office weekly to complain about her husband’s behavior. He followed her
in his car as she drove to and from work and he came to her workplace several days each week to surprise her at
lunchtime. She was also concerned that he was constantly checking her phone to see her calls and text
messages.
Two months later, she called her attorney and reported she was now ready to file for a divorce. Her
husband’s “stalking” had finally shown him what he was looking for: As he suspected, she was in fact having an
affair with a co-worker. Once this was discovered, she had no choice but to agree to his demand for a divorce.
Her husband never committed any act of violence toward her.
Teresa and her husband, Miguel, had agreed to divorce but neither had the money to move to a separate living
space. Instead, they decided to find a way to live separate and apart while both remained in their jointly owned
home. Once they were able to establish independent finances and prepare the house for sale, one of them would
move out.
Despite the decision to remain in the same home, their situation was not amicable; in fact, their relationship
was deteriorating into subtle but serious threats on the part of Miguel.
One morning Teresa went out to her car in the driveway and found blotches of red paint on her vehicle.
Another day she arrived home from work to find that all the sharp kitchen knives had been dipped in the same red
paint. A few weeks
p. 397
p. 398
later, she discovered that her clothes in the back of her closet were hanging in shreds on their hangers.
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE
AN: 2702773 ; Laura M. Walker.; Family Law and Public Policy
Account: bridcoll.main.ehost
341
She quickly found a way to relocate herself and went forward with the divorce.
PREVENTING AND STOPPING PARTNER VIOLENCE
Domestic Violence
The term domestic violence is applicable to any form of violent behavior that occurs within an intimate or
family-based relationship. This can include aggression during dating, physical altercations between members of an
extended family such as a father-in-law and a son-in-law, sibling-versus-sibling violence, and physical abuse of
children within a family setting. This chapter focuses on intimate partner violence, which includes individuals who
are dating, couples who live together, and married couples.
The term domestic violence generally refers to intimate partner violence. A review of the academic literature
reveals that many researchers are trying to determine the causes of this form of domestic violence or assess the
effectiveness of the different approaches for prevention, punishment, and rehabilitation. Preventive programs are
more likely to focus on broader societal causes. On the other hand, psychological approaches to the problem of
domestic violence try to rehabilitate both offenders and victims into new patterns of behavior. The judicial branch is
the avenue for punishment of domestic violence, but special court orders also attempt to curtail the commission of
further acts of violence. These approaches—preventive, rehabilitative, and punitive—will be examined in this
chapter.
Multiple Approaches to Curbing Family Violence
Domestic violence is a focus of practitioners in a number of academic disciplines as well as many governmental and
non-governmental organizations. Sociologists study the cultural expectations and norms that influence the
personalities of both batterers and victims. Some sociologists attribute domestic violence to an array of social
conditions. There are ongoing debates among researchers who focus on domestic violence, but they frequently cite
common factors such as weak economic conditions, subcultures that more readily accept violence, delinquency
related to academic failure, societal discrimination, cultural norms of female inferiority and male power, and the
widespread nature of family disintegration as contributing factors for domestic violence. However, the societal
framework affects people in different ways and multidimensional approaches examine why some individuals, and
not others, become part of abusive relationships.
Psychologists take a more individualized approach, asking what personal qualities of those involved might lead
to such violent interactions. Researchers and practitioners focus on attachment disorders, personal histories of
abandonment or abuse, and the lack of personal resources such as mentors and family support. In addition,
psychologists might also explore underlying problems such as diagnosed personality disorders.
p. 398
p. 399
Legislators can incorporate sociological remedies for domestic violence into their laws. For example, legislation
may outlaw discrimination, provide educational programming for underachievers, or create job and public benefit
programs. Non-government programming is a more likely source for psychological remedies, for example, private
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
342
sector, or non-profit facilities for psychotherapy. In some instances, courts will order psychological interventions as a
condition of probation. Health insurance policies may provide financial assistance for some psychological
counseling.
Psychological approaches can include group therapy—involving either a group of batterers or a group of
victims—or individual sessions with a trained professional. Victim therapy focuses on escaping the bonds of
psychological dependence. Batterers receive psychological interventions aimed at teaching them better ways to
handle conflict and anger and to unlearn the need to control their partners. Good psychotherapy can discover the
often hidden forces of the past that trigger both the abuser and the abused to be part of a cycle of violence today.
The legal system often becomes involved in specific cases of domestic violence. The court system can issue
restraining orders and provide a forum for criminal convictions and monetary reparations. Judges issue restraining
orders, also known as injunctions or civil protection orders. These orders direct an allegedly violent or harassing
person to stay away from the alleged victim of intimidation. Depending on the extent of the precipitating factors, a
prosecutor may pursue criminal prosecution at the same time, or the legal system can defer such action until there
is a subsequent infraction or a violation of the protective order. Victims of domestic violence can also use the courts
to seek monetary damages in a civil claim for the harm inflicted upon them.
The court system’s effective functioning in this capacity requires the involvement of other government actors and
services. Police officers and prosecutors need to have the necessary legal tools in the form of domestic violence
laws from the legislature. At one time, legislatures respected the privacy of intimate relationships at the expense of
the safety of family members. Today, many states have rewritten the rules for police officers responding to domestic
violence calls. These regulations typically require police to take action at the scene of a domestic disturbance and
require prosecutors to bring charges. Today, society is less inclined to view any partner violence as acceptable, and
our laws reflect this societal norm.
According to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), programs directed at men who batter women began in the
1970s and there are now approximately 2,000 such programs throughout the country.1 A United States Department
of Justice study, which looked at intimate partner violence from 1993 to 2010, concluded that incidents of this form
of violence against women declined during this time period. In 1994, there were 16.1 incidents per 1,000 women
compared to 5.9 such incidents per 1,000 women in 2010. For men, the data showed a decline from 3 incidents per
1,000 in 1994 to 1.1 incidents per 1,000 in 2010. The study also determined that “85% of intimate partner violence
victims were female and the remaining 15% were male [and that]…[t]hese distributions remained relatively stable
over time.” 2
p. 399
p. 400
SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO STOPPING
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Social Network Approach for Victims of Abuse
Legislators can intentionally establish societal based approaches to curbing domestic violence. Some government
initiatives that have the potential to limit instances of intimate partner abuse are unintentional. Programs may target
another societal problem and only indirectly affect domestic violence. For example, a program to help at-risk youth
may be trying to stop juvenile delinquency today. In the long term, a program that provides academic incentives,
increases self-esteem, and offers quality adult mentoring may also lower the probability that a teenager will become
an adult batterer or a complacent victim.
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
343
Government resources, often in conjunction with community programming, can also intentionally target domestic
violence. Where government budgets cannot accommodate this, charitable contributions may establish shelters,
outreach programs, re-education and training, and counseling. In the next article, Lisa A. Goodman and Katya Fels
Smyth describe a psychological treatment plan that incorporates a sociological approach to the problem.
Goodman and Smith assert that victims must stay connected to their “network” of social and community support.
Furthermore, they argue that the leaders of the structured programs must be proactive in bolstering these informal
entities of support. Government or non-profit staff members must actively recognize and cooperate with a victim’s
network. However, sometimes the members of the social network need to be educated on how best to support a
domestic violence victim. The formal programs can provide information to the community so friends, relatives, and
co-workers can better understand the role they play in ending domestic violence. In this article, the authors use the
following abbreviations: IPV = intimate partner violence; DV = domestic violence.
LISA A. GOODMAN & KATYA FELS SMYTH
A CALL FOR A SOCIAL NETWORK-ORIENTED APPROACH
TO SERVICES FOR SURVIVORS OF INTIMATE PARTNER
VIOLENCE *
PSYCHOLOGY OF VIOLENCE
VOL. 1, NO. 2 (APR. 2011), PP. 79-92
Intimate partner violence (IPV), that is, physical, psychological, or sexual abuse and control perpetrated by a current
or former intimate partner, causes devastating physical, psychological, and economic damage to millions of people,
primarily women, in the United States each year (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000). Although IPV is now recognized as a
widespread social problem, this was not always the case. Over the past 35 years,
p. 400
p. 401
antidomestic violence activism has transformed public perceptions of IPV from the view that it is a private matter
between two family members to the view that it is a problem requiring a formal systemic response. Our justice
system has come to view IPV as a crime worthy of prosecution and victim protection, and our social service system
has developed a far-reaching response. However, the antidomestic violence movement has had less success in
reaching one of its own primary goals: that of making IPV a problem of the community rather than a problem
between two individuals (Goodman & Epstein, 2008; Shepard, 2008).…This article reviews existing research and
conceptual evidence to support a social network-oriented approach to DV practice and outlines a potential
template for such an approach within the DV services system.
The perpetration of DV occurs within a community context that contributes to the maintenance or alleviation of
the problem (Manicini, Nelson, Bowen & Martin, 2006). Both the partner who is abusive and the partner who is
abused are embedded in relationships with family, friends, and neighbors, whether or not those relationships have
become strained or disrupted. Moreover, these community members are critical to female survivors’ efforts to
improve their lives. Women who are battered turn to their informal social support networks before or instead of DV
services, and these networks often contribute enormously to their long-term physical safety, emotional health, and
overall well-being.…
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
344
SOCIAL SUPPORT AMONG IPV SURVIVORS
Informal social support, defined here as the availability of instrumental and emotional assistance through family,
neighbors, or friends (as opposed to formal support, provided through agencies or systems), is vital to DV survivors’
emotional and physical well-being, as it is to everyone’s. We review research showing that women who are battered
are highly likely to seek help from people within their informal networks; that social networks often, although not
always, improve survivors’ mental health and physical safety; and at the same time, that partners who are abusive
often cut off survivors from these vital sources of support.…
THE NATURE OF INFORMAL NETWORK MEMBERS’
RESPONSES
Even when women who are abused seek professional help from a community agency, the legal system, or the
mental health profession, most report that the long-term support that truly helps resolve the violent relationship is
more likely to come from network members or informal supporters (Mancini et al., 2006).…Network members are
also not constrained by system-mandated time limits such as those imposed by emergency shelters or health
insurance policies.…
THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL SUPPORT ON SURVIVORS’ MENTAL
HEALTH AND PHYSICAL SAFETY
A large body of research documents that most women who are abused struggle with despair, distrust,
hopelessness, and anger (Riger et al., 2002; Sackett & Saunders, 1999).
p. 401
p. 402
These feelings often become deeply entrenched.…Several complementary theoretical models suggest how social
support works to improve survivors’ emotional well-being: The main effects model holds that social support
contributes to survivors’ psychological health regardless of the amount or severity of abuse experienced; the
moderator or buffer model holds that social support functions as a protective factor, mitigating the impact of DV on
survivors’ well-being; and the mediator model holds that social support mediates or explains the relationship
between abuse and mental health difficulties.…
Evidence exists for each of these models (Beeble, Bybee, Sullivan, & Adams, 2009), and they certainly are not
incompatible.…
CHALLENGES OF ENGAGING WITH INFORMAL NETWORKS
…Research exploring survivors’ experiences with their informal support systems indicates that network members’
unhelpful responses are as varied as their helpful responses: Family and friends may fail to understand or express
sympathy, become too frightened for their own safety to provide support, push survivors to leave before they are
ready or to stay to preserve the family, blame the abuse on the survivors, or deny the situation’s complexity and
overestimate survivors’ power to change things (Goodkind, Gillum, Bybee, & Sullivan, 2003; Kocot & Goodman,
2003; Trotter & Allen, 2009).…Contrary to the positive benefits provided by helpful network member responses,
negative responses may actually decrease survivors’ well-being and increase their risk for reabuse.…
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
345
IPV’S DIRECT AND INDIRECT CONTRIBUTIONS TO SOCIAL
ISOLATION
…IPV can also disrupt relationships in less direct ways. For example, women may “use up” friends’ and family
members’ willingness to help with issues directly or indirectly related to the abuse, especially after repeated cycles
of leaving and then returning to the relationship (Goodkind et al., 2003). Survivors may be embarrassed to admit the
abuse to network members whose norms and values suggest a potentially critical response or feel reluctant to lean
on network members whose needs seem greater than their own (Dunham & Senn, 2000; Rose et al., 2000).
Whatever the reasons, the result is often diminished access to social support, leaving a survivor with fewer
resources to deal not only with the abuse itself, but also with other needs as well. For the most part, women who
report more severe abuse report the highest level of social isolation (Thompson et al., 2000; for one exception, see
Carlson et al., 2002).…
OPPORTUNITIES FOR DV SERVICES TO HELP SURVIVORS
ENGAGE WITH INFORMAL SOCIAL SUPPORT
…
Emergency Shelters
Although only a small percentage of survivors use emergency shelters (about 4% in one national study, Hamby &
Bible, 2009; analysis of archived data from Tjaden &
p. 402
p. 403
Thoennes, 2000), shelters have nevertheless become the hallmark of the DV movement, present in 36% of United
States counties (Tiefenthaler et al., 2005). Their fundamental purpose is to offer physical safety for those fleeing DV.
Most also provide some level of advocacy (sometimes called “case management”) to help their residents begin
rebuilding areas of their lives compromised by IPV, such as health, housing, employment, mental health, and
children’s mental health (Sullivan, 2011).
The manner in which safety is achieved, however, may also contribute to survivors’ isolation in two substantial
ways. First, most DV shelters require that survivors leave their own neighborhoods and move to shelters with
unpublished addresses that take significant steps to keep their locations secret (Donnelly, Cook, & Wilson, 1999;
Haaken, 2010). As a result, survivors are not only forced to leave their abusers but must sever ties with their friends,
family, religious groups, jobs, and children’s school communities, and walk away from other grounding roles, rituals,
and cultural practices (Goodman & Epstein, 2008).…
The intent of many of these rules is to enhance residents’ physical safety, but for some, the result may be just
the opposite, as survivors begin to find secret ways to contact family and friends, sharing less and less information
with staff that might be critical to their safety (Olsen, p. 3). Certainly, these rules present enormous obstacles to any
effort to help survivors reengage with family members and friends. In the past several years, activists have begun to
discuss the relative costs and benefits of these and other shelter rules and have developed recommendations for
ensuring that these rules actually create short-term and longer term safety (see, e.g., Lyon, Lane, & Menard,
2008).…
Community-Based Services
Over time, many DV shelters have added an array of services to their offerings and extended their availability to
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
346
survivors living in the community.…In case management or advocacy, trained staff members link individuals to
resources to address immediate and longer term needs and entitlements for employment, education, housing,
financial, childcare, and legal services (Macy et al., 2009). It is entirely possible, however, that if trained and
supported in the right way, other survivors or friends and family members could help each other find needed
resources or apply for critical benefits (Smyth, in press).…
A Network-Oriented Approach to DV Practice
…Recognition of the key role of survivors’ informal support networks has already triggered a number of innovative
grassroots efforts, particularly within communities of color, to prevent DV through changing social norms or to equip
network members to intervene more effectively (Family Violence Prevention Fund, 2002, 2004). Most of these
efforts have been initiated outside the bounds of mainstream domestic services in large part because social
services systems do not provide avenues through which to engage community members (Kim, 2002).
We suggest, however, that if DV service models themselves aligned with and leveraged the potential of social
networks directly, they could dramatically enhance their ability to support survivors in securing sustainable safety.
Network-oriented practice therefore entails a realignment of services such that staff members would
p. 403
p. 404
understand their role as partnering with community members, with each member of the partnership bringing his or
her best skills, whether professional training, experiential expertise, or both, to the task of supporting survivors.
Specifically, it would enable survivors to identify and engage potentially helpful friends, family, neighbors, and
others; support informal network members’ own efforts to assist survivors; and help survivors expand or build new
support networks.…
The Role of the DV Services Practitioner
Recognition that safety is inseparable from the web of relationships that surround a survivor leads to two major
shifts in the role of the practitioner. First, although working directly with the survivor remains a priority, the
network-oriented practitioner’s role is also to collaborate with others in the survivor’s community.…Practitioners must
learn deeply about community norms and values and how the survivor understands her relationships within her
social network (Kim, 2002). This may necessitate intensive diversity training, and it will also require an investment of
time and a willingness of organizations to support staff in examining assumptions and beliefs about culture and
social networks.…
The Scope and Nature of DV Services
…A starting point for network-oriented practice is working with survivors to identify the full range of informal network
members who might be helpful.…Second, people can be helpful in some domains even when they are not in
others.…
Survivors may well find mastery and purpose in being able to give support even as they are receiving it. A
survivor’s identity is much broader and deeper than simply that of “survivor.” She may also be a mother, an
employee, an activist for immigrant rights, a caretaker for aging parents, or the best cook on her block. When
survivors maintain these roles in others’ lives, even as they struggle with IPV, they maintain a sense of self and may
also develop new sources of support.…
A simple starting place builds on the reality that whether or not they seek DV services, many survivors seek
services from employment programs, health clinics, housing agencies, or substance abuse treatment programs. DV
service providers could codevelop peer group opportunities in any one of these settings (Family Violence Prevention
Fund, 2004).…
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
347
CONCLUSION
Ultimately, a network-oriented approach recognizes that change emerges from survivors themselves, responsive
formal networks, activated community members, and the collaborations that develop among them (Mancini et al.,
2006). Adopting a network-oriented approach to DV would therefore help realize the original and ongoing intention
of the DV movement: to frame IPV as an issue that is everyone’s responsibility and within everyone’s power to
address.…
But as complex as this shift might be, it is a complexity aligned with that in the lived realities of survivors.
Furthermore, although our purpose is not to drive more survivors to formal services, it is possible that working
directly with communities
p. 404
p. 405
could powerfully extend the reach of the antidomestic violence movement, enabling it to embrace marginalized
survivors and groups who are now unlikely to access formal institutional support (Goodman & Epstein, 2008).…
*© 2011 American Psychological Association.
Knowledge and Analysis
1
Goodman and Smyth assert that formal programs can be more effective if they work collaboratively with a
victim’s social network. However, the authors also note that sometimes friends and family members, who
could potentially serve as part of the informal team of supporters, create barriers or, at times, reject the
victims’ repeated requests for assistance. Lack of understanding, fear, emotional exhaustion from past
requests for help, or a sense of a frustration or confusion can inhibit supportive responses.
In what ways, if any, does the article provide guidance on how victims can identify the individuals
who would be most responsive to their need for a social network? After identifying these individuals—and
deliberately avoiding those who may cause more harm than good—how might a victim best utilize those
sources? How might the needs that are amenable to social networking be prioritized? For example,
should the network be used primarily for psychological support, advice on financial independence, or for
temporary shelter?
2
The authors outline three theories for the benefits derived from social support: a main effects model, a
moderator or buffer model, and a mediator model. In each of these models, the abused individual benefits
from a community-based response to the domestic violence.
What basis might there be for the argument that the social network, and perhaps society in general,
is essential for the treatment of the abuser as well as the abused? In what ways, if any, could a
community network help the abuser directly, and thereby indirectly help the victim?
3
The authors assert that some government programs, particularly emergency shelters, create the
unintended consequence of interfering with a victim’s informal network of support. Although only a small
percentage of domestic violence victims use the shelters, these facilities are a crucial part of many formal
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
348
programs. They are often outside of a victim’s neighborhood and many require some degree of secrecy to
achieve sufficient protection from abusers looking for their potential targets.
What reasons might speak for, or against, the conclusion that shelter use corresponds with a
preliminary lack of an adequate social network? Beyond the important issue of personal safety, what other
benefits, if any, might a battered person derive from a shelter that would compensate for his or her
temporary disconnection from a social network?
p. 405
p. 406
Psychotherapy Approaches
In the next article, David Lawson examines therapy approaches for men who have been violent in intimate
relationships. He provides the results of a small-scale study and readily admits the problems and limitations with
such studies. This brief review of two therapeutic approaches to intimate partner violence comprises only a small
part of the ongoing process of ascertaining how to best prevent battering behavior.
Throughout the article, the author uses many abbreviations. For easier reading, they are summarized here: PV =
partner violence; CBT = cognitive behavioral therapy; PT = psychodynamic therapy; CTS = conflict tactics scale;
and ES = effect sizes. The two treatments are cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) by itself, which emphasizes
relationship distortions and emotive processing and expressing difficulties, and a combination of CBT with
psychodynamic therapy (PT), which focuses on “maladaptive interpersonal patterns…learned in childhood.” The
author notes that a third approach, the “feminist model,” sees societal patterns of male dominance as the cause of
much partner violence.
The full article provides a more thorough analysis of the treatment approaches and the results. In this edited
version, the salient feature is a comparison between a treatment that teaches new behavior skills and interpretations
of current relationships and an alternative treatment that adds an exploration of childhood experiences that might
have created a predisposition to control and abuse a partner.
DAVID M. LAWSON
COMPARING COGNITIVE BEHAVIORAL THERAPY AND
INTEGRATED COGNITIVE BEHAVIORAL
THERAPY/PSYCHODYNAMIC THERAPY IN GROUP
TREATMENT FOR PARTNER VIOLENT MEN *
PSYCHOTHERAPY
VOL. 47, NO. 1 (MAR. 2010), PP. 122-133
Few research studies have compared the effectiveness of psychotherapy models for treating partner violence
(PV).…Studies comparing different PV treatments have not found any one treatment to be more effective than any
other one.…Finally, in the most recent meta-analyses of PV treatment programs, Feder and Wilson (2005)
concluded that intervention programs yielded small treatment effects and that no one treatment was more effective
than another, corroborating Babcock et al.’s results. Both authors’ findings raise considerable doubt about the
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
349
effectiveness of PV treatment, most of which are either CBT, feminist psychoeducation, or some combination of the
two. This conclusion highlights the importance of examining other issues that may be critical in developing more
effective treatments.
The two predominant PV treatment models, CBT and feminist psychoeducation, focus on anger and stress
management, relationship skills training, beliefs about PV
p. 406
p. 407
and women, and gender role resocialization (Murphy & Eckhardt, 2005; Pence & Paymar, 1993). Broadly, CBT
assumes that PV is caused by (a) cognitive distortions about self and partner, and (b) a lack of skills to appropriately
express and process feelings leading to maladaptive expressions of anger. Feminist models hold that patriarchy
supports male dominance and entitlement leading to the use of PV to control female partners.…However, neither
model addresses childhood experiences, such as attachment patterns, that research indicates influences PV in
adult intimate relationships (Ehrensaft, Cohen, & Johnson, 2006)3.
ATTACHMENT AND PARTNER VIOLENCE
Research that examines relationships between childhood attachment and PV is particularly important with recent
developments of treatment models that incorporate psychodynamic and attachment theories (Lawson et al., 2001;
Sonkin & Dutton, 2003).…[Researchers] emphasize interpersonal relationships as a context in which to change
attachment-based maladaptive templates learned in childhood and reenacted in current relationships. Treatment
focuses on the expression and processing of these ingrained patterns as they occur within the group.
Several studies support a connection between PV and insecure childhood attachment.…Dutton (2007) suggests
that insecurely attached men are prone to anger toward partners because of perceived abandonment. As a result,
they are more likely to experience anxiety and attempt to reduce it through exaggerated attempts to control their
partners, such as PV. Some men with avoidance attachment withdraw from conflict. They may experience pressure
from partners to remain engaged in response to their attempts to disengage (Pietromonaco, Greenwood, & Barrett,
2004). This is aversive to some men, leading to extreme behavior, such as PV to end the pursuance.…
INTERPERSONAL PROBLEMS
…Interpersonal theory (Horowitz & Vitkus, 1986) proposes two postulates. The first holds that interpersonal
behaviors are organized along two dimensions: affiliation, ranging from hostile to friendly, and power, ranging from
submission to dominance.…Together, research related to attachment and interpersonal problems provides
evidence for a link between childhood experiences and adult PV and suggests their importance in treating PV.…
PURPOSE OF STUDY
The main purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two types of group treatment, CBT and
CBT/PT, in reducing PV over the course of 17 weeks of treatment.…
p. 407
p. 408
METHOD
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
350
…THE TREATMENT MODEL
The treatment groups were led by male and female cotherapists and were composed of 7-10 men per
group.…Focal elements of the CBT treatment included motivation to change, commitment to nonviolence,
self-monitoring of cues that trigger anger and violence, time-out procedures, exploring/changing attitudes toward
women and PV, responsibility plans, anger and stress management, relaxation training, cognitive
restructuring/coping statements, communication skills, and assertiveness (Murphy & Eckhardt, 2005).…The CBT/PT
model included the above CBT elements plus a psychodynamic component consistent with Time-Limited Dynamic
Psychotherapy (Strupp & Binder, 1984). This aspect of treatment focused on maladaptive interpersonal patterns
that are associated with conflict and PV. These patterns are learned in childhood and become preset expectations
that shape current interactions.…
MEASURES
Measure of Partner Violence
…The Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS) assesses three types of aggression []: (a) psychological aggression (.76; e.g.,
insulted, swore); (b) mild physical aggression (.75; e.g., pushed, slapped, grabbed); and (c) severe physical
aggression (.88; e.g., kicked, choked, beat up). Evidence supports both the content and construct validity of the
CTS (Straus, 1979). Only the mild and severe physical aggression subscales were used in this study.…
PROCEDURES
…Of the 45 men, 27 received CBT/PT and 18 received CBT. The men were not randomly assigned to groups
because a large pool of men was not available at any one time.…
RESULTS [SECTIONS OMITTED]…
DISCUSSION
Based on direct comparisons, CBT/PT was more effective in reducing attachment avoidance and severe PV, and
shifting from tending toward intrusive to tending toward socially avoidant interpersonal problems. The posttreatment
ES for between-groups supports these results. Conversely, men receiving CBT indicated greater improvement on
measures of psychological functioning and general symptoms, although the ESs for improvement on psychological
functioning was medium/large for the CBT/PT groups. ESs for between-groups differences supported these results.
Overall, results provide support for the differential effects of CBT/PT in reducing PV, improving attachment, and
shifting to a less problematic type of interpersonal problem compared to CBT, thus providing partial support for the
first three
p. 408
p. 409
hypotheses. PV recidivism rates also support the greater effectiveness of the CBT/PT treatment although other
results of CSC were more equivocal. The latter issue may be partially attributed to the largely modest changes for
most of the variables.
The differential results for CBT/PT and CBT both supports and challenges previous research. On the one hand,
meta-analytic studies have consistently found only small treatment effects for all treatment models in reducing PV
(Babcock et al., 2004). The current results support this conclusion with respect to CBT groups. On the other hand,
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
351
the results suggest that CBT/PT had a significant, moderate effect on reducing severe PV while CBT had negligible
to small effects. These results provide preliminary support for the inclusion of psychodynamic elements with CBT in
treating PV. However, results raise the question: was the active ingredient for change the combination of CBT and
psychodynamic therapy or was it the psychodynamic elements alone? Given the history of CBT effectiveness with a
wide range of problems including, to a lesser degree PV, some see it as a critical in reducing PV (Murphy &
Eckhardt, 2005). In the current study, CBT clearly was the common element in both treatments that led to
improvement in psychological functioning and to a lesser degree psychological and relational distress. Perhaps
symptom improvement via CBT is a necessary component for reducing PV but only in combination with
psychodynamic interventions.…
Results related to the second hypothesis may provide ancillary support for the above explanation. The men in
the CBT/PT group reported a change toward more secure attachment dimensions (more approaching). With
research indicating that partner violent men tend toward more insecure attachment styles than nonpartner violent
men (Holtzworth-Munroe et al., 2003), the decrease in attachment avoidance of the CBT/PT group may contribute
to the reduction in PV. Changes toward a more secure attachment would be consistent with a change in the men’s
perception of self in relation to others, perhaps resulting from processing attachment avoidance and PV in an
atmosphere of trust. Within the group, they were supported in exploring and reexperiencing thoughts and feelings
about their relationships with group members and significant others. They learned to approach rather than avoid
uncomfortable feelings related to attachment. This contrasts with CBT groups that focused on skill acquisition to
stem PV, not the modification of maladaptive attachment and interactional patterns experientially within the group as
with CBT/PT.
If the above explanation is accurate, then the interpersonal experiences in the group along with the
self-management skills may have combined to attenuate the PV. Conversely, time outs, challenging dysfunctional
beliefs, and so forth alone may fail to address the deeper feelings of insecurity, feared abandonment, and
maladaptive interpersonal patterns that are important in reducing PV. Finally, it is possible that group differences
can be accounted for by the CBT/PT groups spending less time focused on CBT components and/or because
CBT/PT had more treatment components.
LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH
Although the study has contributed new and constructive findings for treating PV, it had several limitations. First, the
modest sample size may not have provided adequate power to identify all significant relationships related to
outcome. Second, the treatment was limited to only a pre to posttreatment assessment, precluding evaluation of
treatment durability. In addition, a particular problem inherent with this
p. 409
p. 410
*© 2010 American Psychological Association.
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
352
1
the
2
3
more long-term order, the court must hold a full hearing and give both parties the opportunity to be heard in a
courtroom. In either case, these court decrees tell the alleged batterer not only to cease certain behaviors, but,
typically, to avoid any contact at all with the complainant-victim.
Historically, attorneys and judges have had an adage that “a restraining order is only as good as the person
against whom it is issued.” If a court directive prompted the violent person to curtail his or her wrongful actions, that
was a laudable outcome, but there was no significant enforcement power—no monitoring or supervision—that went
with the court’s order. Those who were determined to remain confrontational, threatening, and dangerous were
seldom inclined to change behavior simply because a judge had issued an order.
Civil protection orders (restraining orders) operate in three main ways 6. First, they may give some reassurance
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
353
and validation to the victim. Second, they clearly inform the batterer that the behavior is unacceptable and has been
duly noted in a public record. The third prong of a civil protection order is that it allows the victim to report, police to
respond to, and prosecutors to charge for, precipitating behaviors, such as proximity and verbal exchanges, without
the need to wait for any violent behaviors and actual infliction of physical harm. However, a restraining order does
not come with a police escort or monitoring service and those who seek these orders are still vulnerable to the
behaviors of the batterer.
The following article challenges the premise that restraining orders have little impact. Logan and Walker suggest
that in some cases a restraining order can be an effective societal tool for curtailing violence. They theorize that a
restraining order operates on a psychological level for both the victim and the abuser, in addition to a fear of law
enforcement level that affects the abuser alone. However, restraining orders rarely intimidate a determined stalker,
and court interventions cannot easily stop this form of partner abuse.
T.K. LOGAN & ROBERT WALKER
CIVIL PROTECTIVE ORDER EFFECTIVENESS: JUSTICE
OR JUST A PIECE OF PAPER? *
VIOLENCE AND VICTIMS
VOL. 25, NO. 3 (2010), P. 332
Many victims, victim advocates, and even law enforcement believe that protective orders [PO] are “just a piece of
paper,” suggesting that they do not work or are not
p. 412
p. 413
effective. This study examined protective order effectiveness by following 210 women for 6 months after obtaining a
protective order. There are four main themes that were identified from the study results. First, protective orders were
not violated for half of the women in the sample during the 6-month follow-up period. Second, even among those
who experienced violations, there were significant reductions in abuse and violence. Third, overall, women were
less fearful of future harm from the PO partner at the 6-month follow-up, and a vast majority felt the protective order
was fairly or extremely effective. Fourth, stalking emerges as a significant risk factor for protective order violations,
sustained fear, and lower perceived effectiveness of the protective order. Implications for practice and future
research are discussed.
Partner violence affects about 1.8 million women each year (Tjaden & Thonnes, 2000). Although all states have
criminal laws against partner violence, the criminal system has a number of features that make addressing partner
violence cumbersome. Thus, to increase protection for victims of partner violence, all states have enacted civil
protective orders, which provide victims of partner violence with a time-limited judicial injunction that directs the
offender to refrain from further abusive behavior (Buzawa & Buzawa, 1996; DeJong & Burgess-Proctor, 2006;
Eigenberg, Berry, Hall, & McGuffee, 2003)…
First, consistent with civil process and because the purpose of protective orders is to prevent future unlawful and
violent behavior, there is a lower burden of proof than would be required for criminal charges.…Second, punishment
is usually faster for those who violate civil protective orders compared to adjudication and sentencing procedures for
criminal offenses. Violations of civil protective orders can be addressed with a contempt of court charge, and
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
354
contempt hearings can be concluded quicker than criminal trials (Lemon, 2001).…Third,…civil protective orders are
supposed to provide situational specificity in meeting women’s safety needs…civil protective orders allow judges to
provide relief that can be crafted for each individual case in order to address the specific violence as well as
provisions for children, child support, and counseling. Thus, civil protective orders allow courts the discretion to tailor
protective order provisions to the interests of the petitioner and the case characteristics.…
This study provides an opportunity to examine victim perceptions of protective order effectiveness as well as to
incorporate all of the factors that have been identified in previous studies as being associated with protective order
violations and re-abuse together.…
Overall, 213 women were recruited out of court from five jurisdictions (one urban and four rural) when they
obtained a protective order against a male intimate partner (PO partner) between June 2006 and August 2007.…
MEASURES
…It should be noted here that victims could have received either a no-contact PO, where technically any contact is
a violation of the protective order, or a no-violent contact PO, where only violent contact, as defined by the
statute…constitutes a violation.…Just over half (51%) were or had been married to the PO partner, while the other
half had cohabitated with the PO partner. Women were in the
p. 413
p. 414
relationship with the PO partner (at the baseline interview) an average of about 6 years.…
Overall, the physical violence severity score was 17.81 (range 0-38). The vast majority of women experienced
verbal abuse, degradation, and jealousy and control. Also, the vast majority experienced threats of serious harm
and death from the PO partner. Two-thirds experienced symbolic violence, including property destruction and
physical threats of harm (e.g., throwing something at her). About one-third experienced threats with a knife or gun.
Of those with children in common with the PO partner (n = 102) just over 40% reported threats about child
interference. Also, about half of the women reported being stalked the 6 months before the PO.
About three-fourths experienced moderate violence, and just over half reported severe physical violence during
the 6 months before the PO was issued. Fourteen percent of women reported being raped by the PO partner during
the 6 months before the PO was issued.
Over half of the women reported that the PO partner made threats to her about harming others close to her,
actually made threats to someone close to her, or actually assaulted someone close to her.
Although the vast majority of women separated or remained separated after the PO was issued, almost one-third
spent any time back in the relationship with the PO partner during the 6-month follow-up period. Of those who spent
any time in the relationship, they spent an average of 122 days together during the 6-month follow-up period.…
During the 6-month follow-up period after women obtained a protective order, half (50%) reported a violation of
the protective order and half did not.…
Given that pre-PO stalking played such a significant role in violations of the protective order, several subsequent
analyses examined specific outcomes by violation group. Specifically, there were three groups, including: (1) those
who experienced no violations (n = 101); (2) those who experienced and reported violations but no stalking (n = 54);
and (3) and those who experienced and reported violations plus post-PO stalking (n = 51). Four participants were
not included in the violation group analysis because it was too difficult to categorize them.…
On average, the violation but no post-PO stalking group (n = 54) had an average of 7 violations compared to an
average of 18 violations for those who were stalked after the PO.…Thus, victims who experienced violations and
stalking reported more overall violations and more severe violence during the follow-up period than victims who
experienced violations but no stalking.
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
355
VIOLENCE SEVERITY
Average severity scores for 6 months before the PO was issued and for 6 months after the PO were compared for
all three groups. For those with no violations, the score was 16.59 before and 0 after; for the violations but no
post-PO stalking group, the score was 17.39 before and 4.13 after; and for the violations and post-PO stalking
group, the score was 20.67 before and 6.55 after.…When specific abuse tactics were examined, the number of
women who reported experiencing each of the abuse tactics was significantly lower at follow-up.…
p. 414
p. 415
Fear dimensions were examined in two main ways: (1) overall reduction in the number of women who were
afraid from baseline to follow-up and (2) the number of women afraid at follow-up by violation group. The sample for
this analysis includes only those that had a follow-up measure of fear (n = 170).…
Overall, 80% of respondents, regardless of group, indicated they were fairly or extremely satisfied with the
protective order process. At the 6-month follow-up, 91% of the orders were still in effect. Almost 5% (4.8%) of
women indicated their orders had expired, and only 4.3% indicated they had dropped the order. Although overall
84% of the women in the sample indicated they perceived the PO to be fairly or extremely effective, there were
significant differences by violation group.…
There are four main findings related to protective order outcomes. First, protective orders were not violated for
half of the women in the sample during the 6-month follow-up period. Second, even among those who experienced
violations, there were significant reductions in abuse and violence. Third, overall, women were less fearful of future
harm from the PO partner at the 6-month follow-up, and a vast majority felt the protective order was fairly or
extremely effective. Fourth, stalking emerges as a significant risk factor for protective order violations, continued
fear, and lower perceived effectiveness of the protective order.
The current study found that about half of the women in the sample did not experience a violation of the order
over the course of the 6-month follow-up, which expands on a previous study of 756 women, which found that 40%
of women with protective orders did not experience a violation of a protective order during a 12-month follow-up
(Logan & Walker, 2009a).…
This study examining women’s experiences with protective orders lays to rest the fundamental question as to
whether they are just a piece of paper or an authentic protective process. While beyond the scope of this study, it
may even be that those with protective orders are more effectively served than victims of many other crimes if one
considers the typical complaints of low rates of arrest and successful prosecution of most types of crimes. Most
importantly, this paper shows that a public policy of harm reduction can work—both in terms of stopping partner
violence in many cases and in reducing its frequency in many other cases.
This study found that an important indicator of protective order effectiveness is the reduction in women’s fear of
future harm in a variety of areas. The reduction in fear alone constitutes an important gain in quality of life and likely
reduction in the development of fear-related health and mental health problems (Logan, Walker, Jordan, &
Leukefeld, 2006).…These results suggest that not only do protective orders address the incidents of abuse and
violence, but they also address the coercive control. Thus, protective orders may play a critical role in increasing
women’s quality of life, feelings of freedom, and being free from constant fear (Logan, Walker, et al., 2009; Logan &
Walker, in press).
Findings from this study are not uniformly positive. Civil protective orders do seem to be “just a piece of paper”
for women who experience stalking after the protective order was issued (Logan, Cole, et al., 2006).…
While this study substantiates the claim that, overall, protective orders do what they intend, the findings also
clearly call for the justice system to revise the protective order process when stalking is involved. In fact, one key
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
356
policy implication of this study is that victims of partner violence who also are stalked might need to be
p. 415
p. 416
considered differently from victims who have not experienced stalking during the protective order process.…
There were several limitations of this study, including a limited follow-up period of 6 months after the protective
order.…
[I]t may be important to examine in detail how protective order violations are monitored and enforced by law
enforcement and the courts, and under what specific conditions women report violations. This kind of research may
need to include careful consideration of jurisdictional differences such as the court process, the overall philosophy of
the court, the training and philosophy of the local law enforcement personnel, the thoughts and perspective of
victims, and, perhaps, even community values pertaining to the local acceptance of violence against women.…The
lay public and even many in the court system likely do not draw the distinction between stalkers and other
perpetrators of partner violence at this time. However, this study, coupled with other research, suggests it is critical
to recognize that stalking must be addressed within the protective order context and by all the various agencies that
provide services to domestic violence victims.
*Copyright Springer Publishing Company 2010.
Knowledge and Analysis
1
A restraining order is, in effect, an individualized law: a court creates a “law” that is applicable to only one
person. An intimidated person can seek a restraining order against the perpetrator to stop future threats
and acts of violence. The victim can also ask government authorities to bring a criminal prosecution for a
past action that prompted the restraining order request. If criminal charges are initiated and the defendant
does not gain pretrial release through the bail process, the complaining witness is already protected
temporarily, and no restraining order is needed at that particular point. However, a restraining order allows
a court to take an extra step; in effect it takes a proactive stance against a partner’s intimidating and
threatening behavior. Notably, a protective or restraining order prohibits actions that are often precursors
to violence, such as coming near the partner’s workplace and residence, or sending emails and leaving
messages. These orders allow law enforcement to act sooner, rather than later, to prevent criminal acts.
What would be the benefits and the detriments to combining criminal prosecution with every civil
action to obtain a restraining order? For example, in what ways would it be beneficial, or not, for the legal
system to require initiation of a criminal action for past violence as a precondition to issuing an order
against future behavior?
2
Sometimes an order forbidding the alleged aggressor to be in close proximity to the alleged victim creates
a logistical problem. Both parties may attend the same religious institution or attend school and
extracurricular
p. 416
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
357
p. 417
events for their children. The former intimate partners may shop at the same stores and enjoy the same
social activities.
How far should the court go in establishing specific instructions for these situations? What
guidance, if any, might a state law provide to judges who must deal with these practical difficulties?
3
It might be advantageous to connect both partners with crucial community resources at the civil protection
order stage rather than waiting for a court to order such services as part of probation after a criminal
conviction. T.K Logan, Robert Walker, and William Hoyt concluded in a recent study that protective orders
saved over $85 million in one state over a 12-month period. Their theory is that stopping partner violence
is cost effective 7. They insist that the cost assessment must include physical and mental health, quality of
life, property damage, and the costs of the judicial process.
If civil protection orders generally lead to beneficial and efficient outcomes, what additional steps, if
any, should the legislature take to assure compliance with restraining orders? If a court has the option of
requiring attendance at group therapy meetings, individual psychotherapy sessions, or anger
management classes, what arguments support such mandates for some or all victims and batterers?
What arguments support assigning the costs for such programs to the alleged batterer, the alleged victim,
or both, or to taxpayers? What other concerns, if any, might be raised about such programs by persons
ordered to attend them?
4
The study, based on assessments of the severity of violence committed at the time of issuance and six
months later, leads to a conclusion that protection orders can be beneficial in most cases.
In what ways, if any, might a future study discern whether the reduction is due to the alleged
abuser’s reaction to the implied control of a court order or due to the alleged victim’s new sense of power
and protection manifested by taking an assertive stance of zero tolerance for abuse? Is there a method, or
not, by which any possible distinctions of cause and effect could be ascertained?
Continuation of Protective Orders
Protective orders can be initiated in an ex parte format with the alleged victim seeking immediate assistance. These
orders are short-term and the legal system mandates a prompt follow-up of a full hearing, where the individual who
is allegedly intimidating the other can fully present his or her side of the controversy. Once a judge issues a
protective order after this more complete deliberation, the order
p. 417
p. 418
remains in effect until someone pursues further action or until its expiration date as specified by law and/or by the
order itself. Rules can vary by state, but an initial temporary order may be good for several weeks and a final order
may remain effective for several years.
In the following case, Ritchie v. Konrad, the original victim, Ritchie, sought to renew the restraining order even
though the parties no longer lived in the same town and there had been no contact for three years. The California
appellate court does not simply focus on the facts but also on the state statute. The statute requires that all
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
358
protective orders must include a restriction on firearms, even when the restrained party is guilty of only lesser forms
of harassment, such as annoying phone calls and emails rather than acts of violence. The lower court attempted to
renew the protective order without imposing any restriction on Konrad’s ability to use a firearm for hunting.
The case demonstrates the interplay between the parameters set by the legislature and judicial interpretations of
the law as applied in individual cases. Judge Johnson articulates the need to look at evidence of the intimidating or
violent behavior, the wording of the law, the burden on the restrained party, and, most importantly, the safety of the
individual requesting assistance.
RITCHIE V. KONRAD
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT, DIVISION SEVEN
115 CAL. APP. 4TH 1275 (2004)
Johnson, J.
In this case of first impression we consider the criteria a trial court should apply in deciding whether to renew a
domestic violence protective order. We conclude the trial court should grant a requested extension unless the
request is contested and the judge determines the protected party does not entertain a “reasonable apprehension”
of future abusive conduct. (As the relevant statute makes clear, it is unnecessary, however, to find any abuse has
occurred since issuance of the initial protective order.) Because the trial court granted the renewal in this contested
case on the assumption petitioner was entitled to that order “just upon request,” we reverse and remand for a
reconsideration of the decision to grant a permanent extension of this protective order.
In 1994 respondent Rebecca Annamarie
Ritchie and appellant Mark Konrad began dating.
The appellate court suggests two conditions that
In 1995 they started living together and became
preclude an automatic renewal of a protective
engaged. The engagement lasted until early
order. First, Konrad’s objection makes the new
1998. According to Ritchie’s allegations in her
request “contested,” and second, the facts may
initial 1999 protective order action, during the final
or may not indicate reasonable apprehension.
stages of that engagement there were frequent
arguments. Then on one occasion Konrad
grabbed her arm and slammed the car door.
Shortly thereafter, she moved out and told him not to contact her ever again. Over the next few months, however,
he
p. 418
p. 419
sent a barrage of e-mails and letters, telephoned her repeatedly at her office, and the like. He also repeatedly
phoned and sent e-mails to Ritchie’s father. This conduct allegedly forced Ritchie to resign and take a new position.
But Konrad located her at the new job and renewed the phone calls and e-mails. He also filed two allegedly frivolous
lawsuits in small claims court.
In early 1999, Ritchie’s new employer wrote Konrad and told him to cease contacting Ritchie at work. Konrad
responded by coming to that office and threatening the chief financial officer with a harassment lawsuit. About that
time someone vandalized Ritchie’s car when it was parked outside her office building.…
Finally, Ritchie petitioned the court for a protective order. On May 7, 1999, the court issued a domestic violence
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
359
restraining order against Konrad with a duration of three years.…
“I will grant the restraining order. Standard restraint on personal conduct. Stay 300 yards away from the plaintiff’s
residence, place of work, and the residence and place of work of the protected person named in the petition.”…
During the following three years Konrad made no attempt to contact Ritchie. Both of them married other people
and Ritchie moved with her new husband to Henderson, Nevada, near Las Vegas, while Konrad remained in the
Los Angeles area.
On May 16, 2002, Ritchie filed a “request” that the three-year restraining order be made permanent, pursuant to
California Family Code section 6345.…
We ultimately conclude we are compelled to reverse the order renewing the protective order and remand for
reconsideration of Ritchie’s “request.”…As Konrad points out, a protective order imposes costs and penalties on the
restrained party—the stigma (which may have practical consequences for employment and elsewhere in life) and,
for those with reasons to own or use firearms in their profession or for protection or just for sport, there is the
automatic firearm relinquishment requirement.…The fact a judge found enough grounds to grant a protective order
three years earlier does not necessarily mean sufficient grounds remain to renew that order for another three
years—or as in this instance, permanently—merely because the protected party files a “request” and expresses her
subjective desire the court issue such an extension.…
…[T]he court must find the probability of future abuse is sufficient that a reasonable woman (or man, if the
protected party is a male) in the same circumstances would have a “reasonable apprehension” such abuse will
occur unless the court issues a protective order. This same formulation appears appropriate when a trial court
considers a contested request for an extension of the initial order.…
[T]he trial court should not permit the restrained party to challenge the truth of the evidence and findings
underlying the initial order, as Konrad seeks to do in this case. This would contradict principles of collateral
estoppel and undercut the policies supporting those principles.…The restrictions contained in two orders may read
precisely the same. Yet one may rest on a half-dozen violent acts against the protected party and a psychological
evaluation the restrained party is a lifelong sociopath, while the other was based on a single threat issued in an
angry moment during a painful divorce.…[T]he protective order itself often fails to disclose even the species of the
conduct on which it is based—to say
p. 419
p. 420
nothing of the degree or timing of that conduct or the risk it will be repeated in the absence of a renewed protective
order.
All of which is to say the mere existence of a
protective order, typically issued several years
The collateral estoppel doctrine stops a litigant
earlier, seldom if ever will provide conclusive
from disclaiming facts that he or she has already
evidence the requesting party entertains a
litigated in a prior case in which he or she had
“reasonable apprehension” of future abuse of any
the opportunity to be heard.
kind should that order expire.…
Also potentially relevant are any significant
changes in the circumstances surrounding the
events justifying the initial protective order.…Or have there been no significant changes or even perhaps changes
that enhance the opportunity and possibility of future abuse?
The other side of the equation—the “burdens” the protective order imposes on the restrained party—may or may
not be a relevant factor in the trial court’s consideration of a contested request for renewal of a protective order.
Certainly those burdens would never justify denial of a renewed protective order where the “reasonable
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
360
apprehension” is of future acts of physical violence. It is true those “burdens” on the restrained party can be very
real. There often will be some social stigma attached while a person is subject to a protective order.…
Once again, however, the physical security of the protected party trumps all of these burdens the original or
renewed protective order may impose on the restrained party. Thus, where the protected party has a “reasonable
apprehension” of future physical abuse if the current protective order expires, that order should be renewed despite
any burdens this inflicts on the restrained party.…
[T]he evidence and findings we have before us from that 1999 hearing are insufficient to establish conclusively
Ritchie could entertain a “reasonable apprehension” Konrad will even repeat these lesser, nonviolent forms of abuse
should the protective order expire.
On the other hand, there was evidence tendered at the renewal hearing suggesting the circumstances had
changed rather dramatically over the three years.…Accordingly, for these reasons, we are compelled to reverse for
a further hearing on Ritchie’s requested renewal of the protective order. The purpose is to allow the trial court to
apply the proper test and determine whether Ritchie’s expressed fear of significant future abuse is reasonable and
thus sufficient to warrant a permanent (or lengthy) extension of the original protective order. This court expresses no
view as to the appropriate outcome of the trial court’s reconsideration of the merits.…
The court focused on the firearm restriction as the sole significant burden Konrad would experience if it renewed
the protective order. Nothing in the record suggests whether the trial court would have exercised its discretion to
deny the requested renewal had it considered Konrad would remain subject to the firearm prohibition once the
protective order was extended.…
It is apparent, however, the current statutory
framework denied the trial court the authority to
The lower court purported to separate what it
effectively delete the firearm restriction.…Some
could not separate according to state law. In
might quarrel with this inevitable and irrevocable
California, any protective order must be joined
pairing of protective orders and firearm
with a firearm prohibition and a judge has no
restrictions. But it is not difficult to understand how
ability to alter this statutory requirement in an
it came to pass. If a person represents a
individual case.
substantial threat
p. 421
to inflict physical harm on another person, it appears reasonable to disarm the former, at least to take away the
weapons most capable of causing death or death-threatening injury, e.g., firearms. The logical connection has
become less clear, however, with recent amendments allowing protective orders based primarily on nonviolent
conduct, such as a pattern of unwanted and obnoxious communications.…
In 1998, however, as mentioned earlier in this opinion the Legislature amended the statutory scheme to expand
the definition of “domestic violence” and “abuse” to embrace nonviolent but harassing conduct.…As a consequence
of these 1998 amendments, intended or otherwise, a firearms restriction becomes mandatory even when a trial
court imposes a protective order based solely on the restrained party placing annoying telephone calls or sending
unwanted e-mails, letters, or the like.…And it is for the Legislature, not this court, to revisit the wisdom of this
consequence of the 1998 amendments.…
What is not clear in this case is whether the trial court would have renewed the protective order had it realized its
attempt to strike the firearms restriction was a futile gesture.…The trial court ordered the renewal only after believing
it had entirely eliminated what it deemed the entire “burden” side of the equation.…
Konrad claimed he had legitimate reasons for wanting to at least possess and use, if not own firearms. In
particular, he presented evidence his in-laws are avid hunters and outdoorsmen, and thus the firearm restriction
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
361
interfered with his ability to participate fully with his new family and their activities. So there was significant evidence
available supporting the conclusion the renewal of the order would impose a real, not just theoretical, burden on
Konrad.
On the other side of the equation, Ritchie did not even attempt to present any evidence Konrad should be denied
access to firearms because there was a threat to shoot her. Indeed the trial court obviously concluded that was such
a remote or non-existent threat it readily struck the firearm restriction, thus permitting Konrad to own, possess and
use any firearm.…So it is more than apparent Ritchie does not consider Konrad a threat to use a gun to inflict
serious bodily harm on her.
For these reasons, and as a second independent and sufficient grounds for reversing this judgment, we remand
for the trial court to reconsider its renewal of the protective order with the understanding a renewal of that order will
carry with it a continuation of the firearm restriction for so long as the renewed order remains in effect.
Knowledge and Analysis
1
The court describes the sequence of considerations for the issuance, or not, of a protective order. The
opinion explains that non-violent forms of intimidation or harassment can lead to a protective order, and
that all protective orders, even those based on psychological abuse rather
p. 421
p. 422
than physical abuse, must include a restriction on firearms. Possession of a firearm is an individual’s
constitutional right, but it may nevertheless be regulated for important or compelling government purposes
8.
What arguments might be made for, and against, the position that unwanted or annoying phone
calls and emails create a sufficiently important government interest that justifies a firearm ban?
2
The court’s primary focus is the safety of the requesting party. However, the burden on the restrained
party is also relevant. The particular facts of the day-to-day life of both Ritchie and Konrad have changed
since the original order and the court must examine the renewal request against this backdrop. The court
admonishes Konrad for trying to challenge the propriety of the original order but agrees it must newly
examine the reasonable apprehension standard.
On remand, the trial court must re-examine the propriety of extending the protective order. Which
case facts support and which detract from a court decision to continue the order?
3
Both the trial and appellate courts compared the justifications for the petitioner’s request to the burden on
the restrained party.
What rules, if any, could help classify burdens into those that should be relevant, or not, within the
judicial process? For example, should restrictions be placed into categories of what is affected, such as
recreational pursuits, employment, or social reputation? Would it be better to categorize restrictions
according to types of individual freedoms, such as freedom of mobility, communication, attendance,
participation, or possession? How might a classification scheme help or hinder the judicial
decision-making process?
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
362
Consequences for Violating a Civil Protection Order
As mentioned above, judicial protection orders can be described as a law a court writes that applies to only one
person—the defendant, on behalf of another person—the complainant or petitioner. If a person violates the court’s
order, the judge can process the violation as a contempt of court citation. If the person’s actions correspond with an
applicable section of the criminal code, a prosecutor may choose to bring a criminal charge. There are two types of
contempt of court, punitive and coercive. The punitive type is focused on violation of a court order. For this, the
consequences are specific, for example, a set period of time in jail. The court sanction in the coercive form of
contempt is more open-ended: jail time until the person indicates willingness to comply with a court order. Typically,
this would
p. 422
p. 423
involve a court order that can be followed within the confines of the courtroom itself, such as agreeing to testify
(when there is no Fifth Amendment privilege against compelled self-incrimination) or to sign a necessary form in a
legal proceeding. This type of contempt is connected to obstruction of justice charges.
Other times, a court order might require proactive out-of-court behavior such as reporting to an alcohol
awareness program. This category could be punitive or coercive. In the case of civil protection orders, the court
typically requires a person to refrain from an activity such as encroaching on someone’s personal space. Violations
of these orders are generally classified under punitive contempt proceedings.
The constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy in the Fifth Amendment may require the government to
choose between punitive contempt or a criminal charge based in the general criminal statutes. When the penalties
corresponding to contempt and criminal law are different, defendants have an incentive to argue for application of
the provision with the smaller potential penalty. Prosecutors, acting as representatives of society at large, often use
their freedom of prosecutorial discretion to choose the path that leads to a larger penalty.
FORMS OF PUNISHMENT FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Criminal Statutes, Contempt of Court, and Penalty Enhancement
Government can prosecute the perpetrator of domestic violence in different ways. First, the prosecution can
emanate from the broad-based criminal statutes, such as prosecutions for assault and battery. However,
prosecutors typically take a different path to prosecution by using a subset of criminal statutes that slightly alter the
elements of the crime or the penalty range for a crime committed within a family relationship or intimate partner
setting.
The third path for prosecution consists of criminal contempt of court charges, as discussed above. In this
context, criminal contempt results from violation of a court order governing potentially violent, harassing, or
intimidating behavior outside of the courtroom.
In Washington v. Goodman, Lee Goodman pleads guilty to violating statutes and a protection order and the
appellate court re-examines the validity of using the intention to hurt an intimate partner as a factor to enhance Mr.
Goodman’s punishment in his criminal case. This case raises the long-standing issue of proper sentencing for those
convicted of a crime. Typically, there are two schools of thought. The first view emphasizes uniformity based on the
principle of equal treatment for criminal offenders. The second view recognizes nuances in criminal offenses. Rather
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
363
than attaching the same punishment to all violations of the same law, judges use their discretion within a specified
range of penalties. Details of the crime and the background of the defendant affect which punishment is chosen
within this range. For this case, in which Goodman is charged with arson, the trial judge uses aspects of the
domestic relations case to determine the appropriate penalty.
p. 423
p. 424
WASHINGTON V. GOODMAN
COURT OF APPEALS OF WASHINGTON, DIVISION TWO
108 WN. APP. 355 (2001)
Armstrong, C.J.
…Lee Goodman and his wife, Christine, met in 1979. Shortly thereafter, Goodman began serving a prison sentence
for manslaughter. Goodman had killed a real estate agent whom he called out to his house when his former wife left
him. The State charged Goodman with first degree murder, but he pleaded guilty to first degree manslaughter.
When he got out of prison in 1985, he and Christine began living together, and they married in 1989.
Goodman inflicted emotional and physical abuse throughout the relationship.…Christine eventually became
afraid to speak at home and feared that Goodman would kill her. In September 1998, Christine called the police
after Goodman threatened to kill her and her parents. Before the police arrived, Goodman hit her on her face, beat
her with the telephone, and threatened to stab her. Christine obtained a protection order, and the State filed felony
harassment and first degree assault charges. Christine continued to live at their home after her husband moved out.
Released on $100,000 bail, Goodman returned to the home in December 1998 and burned it down “to keep [her]
from living in the house with another guy.” The fire killed Christine’s dog, Jazz.
Goodman pleaded guilty to first degree arson, residential burglary, violating a protection order, and killing a pet.
He stated that he “did not know it was a crime to burn your own house.” At sentencing, he admitted that he would
“do it again.” The sentencing court found that Goodman knew that the dog was in the house when he set the fire
and killed the dog to further harm his wife emotionally. The court imposed an exceptional sentence of 360 months
after finding that Goodman has no respect for the law or life, engaged in an ongoing pattern of domestic abuse, and
manifested deliberate cruelty or intimidation of the victim while committing the arson.
Goodman first argues that the charging information was insufficient for failing to state the “elements” of the
domestic violence definition in RCW 10.99.020(3).…
We hold that the charging information here was sufficient because domestic violence is not a separate crime
with elements that the State must prove. Identifying a crime as a domestic violence crime “does not itself alter the
elements of the underlying offense; rather, it signals the court that the law is to be equitably and vigorously
enforced.” Thus, Goodman’s information was not insufficient for failing to state the “elements” of domestic violence.
Goodman next argues that the trial court erred
by imposing an exceptional sentence for first
The term “information” here refers to the
degree arson based on impermissible aggravating
criminal charge against the defendant.
factors of future dangerousness and domestic
violence. He also complains that the length of his
sentence is clearly excessive.…
While a court may not rely on concern for public safety as an aggravating factor, it may consider the defendant’s
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
364
extraordinary disregard for the law. Here, Goodman
p. 424
p. 425
violated a protection order and release conditions by going to his wife’s house and burning it down. We hold that the
sentencing court did not improperly rely on future dangerousness as an aggravating factor. Similar to rapid
recidivism or committing additional crimes while on parole, violating a protection order and release conditions
exhibited extraordinary disregard for the law.
Goodman also contends that the trial court improperly considered domestic violence as an aggravating factor
under RCW 9.94A.390(2)(h). A trial court may consider domestic violence as an aggravating circumstance if the
offense involved domestic violence, as defined in RCW 10.99.020(3), and the defendant either (1) committed the
offense as “part of an ongoing pattern of psychological, physical, or sexual abuse of the victim manifested by
multiple incidents over a prolonged period of time,” (2) committed the offense in the presence of minor children, or
(3) manifested deliberate cruelty or intimidation of the victim while committing the offense. Here, the trial court relied
on the first and third factors.
Goodman initially argues that the arson did not involve domestic violence.…He maintains that the crime was not
against his wife but against “their jointly-owned property.”…[E]ven if we accept the argument that destroying
community property is not a crime against the co-owner spouse, Goodman did more than destroy community
property. Intending to cause emotional harm, he destroyed her home and killed her pet. Under these circumstances,
we hold that Goodman’s wife “sustained emotional, psychological, physical, or financial injury to person or property
as a direct result of the crime charged.” As such, she was a victim of the arson.
Goodman further argues that the arson was not against his wife because she suffered no personal harm. He
points to the nearly $300,000 in insurance proceeds that she collected and her testimony that she was happier with
the money than with the house. But a defendant does not avoid criminal liability merely because the victim recovers
the loss.…
Goodman contends that even if domestic violence were a permissible aggravating factor, the trial court
improperly found that the arson 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.” He argues that the court violated the “real
facts” doctrine of RCW 9.94A.370(2), which provides that a sentencing court may base the defendant’s sentence
only on the facts of the present crime established at trial or sentencing.…Here, the real facts doctrine does not apply
because RCW 9.94A.390(2)(h) specifically allows the court to consider past incidents of psychological, physical, or
sexual abuse in departing from the standard sentence range.
Goodman also argues that the trial court erred by finding that his conduct while committing the arson manifested
deliberate cruelty or intimidation of the victim.…When a defendant challenges whether the sentencing court’s factual
findings support its reasons for imposing an exceptional sentence, the appellate court independently decides
whether the trial court’s reasons justify the sentence as a matter of law. Deliberate cruelty is “gratuitous violence, or
other conduct which inflicts physical, psychological or emotional pain as an end in itself.”…And the cruelty must be
“‘of a kind not usually associated with the commission of the offense in question.’”
Divisions One and Three of this Court have each considered whether a defendant manifested deliberate cruelty
while committing an arson. Division Three reversed an exceptional sentence in State v. Pockert (1989). Pockert
burned his ex-girlfriend’s
p. 425
p. 426
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
365
house about a month after their relationship ended. The trial court imposed an exceptional sentence based in part
on its conclusion that Pockert manifested deliberate cruelty while committing the arson because he was “extremely
agitated because of the breakup of the relationship and was ‘getting even’ with [the victim].” Division Three held that
Pockert’s vengefulness was not deliberate cruelty because the malice element of arson encompasses “‘an evil
intent, wish, or design to vex, annoy, or injure another person.’”
In contrast, Division One upheld an exceptional sentence based on deliberate cruelty. Tierney and his victim met
during a vacation and spent some time together. Tierney visited her after the vacation, but she ended the visit when
he became overly possessive of her. Tierney proceeded to call the victim and her parents numerous times,
threatening to kill them. He also threatened to burn the victim’s parents’ home. Eventually, Tierney “ransacked and
burned” the victim’s apartment and inscribed a defaming and derogatory phrase on her wall. He later sent obscene
letters to the victim and her parents. Division One upheld the trial court’s conclusion that Tierney manifested
deliberate cruelty because of his ongoing harassment of the victim and her parents before and after the arson. The
court distinguished Pockert, noting that “Tierney’s retaliatory conduct greatly exceeded the conduct at issue in
Pockert both in terms of quantity and quality.” The court held that, unlike Pockert’s conduct, the egregious nature of
Tierney’s conduct was clearly beyond the scope of conduct encompassed in the malice element of first degree
arson.
As in Pockert, the malice element of first
degree
arson
encompasses
Goodman’s
For a sentence enhancement, the court must find
vengefulness and evil intent. But, as in Tierney,
a factor beyond the arson statute. Arson already
Goodman’s conduct went beyond the malice or
encompasses malice; therefore, it is not an
cruelty usually associated with arson. The trial
“added” factor.
court found that Goodman knew that Jazz was in
the house and killed the dog to harm his wife
emotionally. And, similar to the facts of Tierney,
Goodman had assaulted and threatened to kill his wife and her parents in September 1998, only two months before
the arson. Goodman again alleges a violation of the real facts doctrine. But, as discussed above, the domestic
violence aggravating factor is an exception to the real facts doctrine. Thus, we uphold the trial court’s conclusion
that Goodman’s conduct while committing the arson was deliberately cruel.…
Knowledge and Analysis
1
The appellate court allows a history of domestic abuse to be part of the sentence enhancement process.
Moreover, Lee Goodman pled guilty to violating both an arson statute and a protection
order—acknowledging that the arson transgressed both rules.
The facts of this case make it easy for a court to link the intimate partner violence to the arson
statute. In addition to Mr. Goodman’s
p. 426
p. 427
admissions that the domestic situation influenced his decision to burn down the house, the court
speculates further about his intentional cruelty, which it describes as “beyond the scope of conduct
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
366
encompassed in the malice element” of the statute.
Does a crime against a family member always allow more speculation about the egregious nature
of the motive or the intensity of hostility? Should these additional speculations be limited to cases in which
courts have previously issued civil protection orders?
2
The court considers a history of domestic violence as an aggravating factor under the law because it fits
into the category of “deliberate cruelty” beyond that normally “associated with arson.” In this case, the
court was able to list other instances of egregious behavior beyond the burning of the house, including
threats of murder, actual beatings, and threats of more physical violence.
How is this similar to or different from a statute that specifies a greater penalty for repeat
offenders? Does it matter, or not, that a repeat offender statute gives clear advance warning of an
increased penalty for each successive conviction?
3
The Goodman court references the doctrine of real facts. This has been described as follows:
“The real facts doctrine requires sentences [sic] be based upon the defendant’s current conviction, his criminal
history, and the circumstances of the crime.” A sentencing court may not base an exceptional sentence on an
unproved or uncharged crime. And, the sentencing court “may not impose a sentence based on the elements of a
more serious crime that the State did not charge or prove.”9
This court says the victim can introduce the history of domestic violence at sentencing to show “deliberate
cruelty” without violating the real facts rule. While there may be little sympathy for Mr. Goodman, what
arguments, if any, can be made that enhancing a sentence for arson based on a history of domestic
violence is contrary to equitable public policies?
Government Responses to Extreme Forms of Domestic Violence
Notorious examples of domestic violence lead to public outcries for more state and federal programs to prevent
these crimes and assure that a variety of resources are available to protect and assist victims. Advocates for ending
domestic violence often cite the experience of Yvette Cade as an example of judicial deficiencies, as well as of the
extreme nature of partner violence. Ms. Cade was married to Roger Hargrave
p. 427
p. 428
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
367
YVETTE C
REMARKS BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON HE
APRIL 17, 200
* Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
368
Hearing: Too Much, Too Long? Domestic Violence in the Workplace (April 17, 2007).
There is growing recognition that partner violence imposes financial hardships on its victims. Intimidation, the
need for time off from work to attend court hearings, and the potential need to relocate as a preventive precaution
are three factors that disrupt employment. Some of these difficulties may be easily overlooked by those who have
not suffered the turmoil of long-term violence and ongoing intimidating threats. At the same senate hearing where
Cade spoke, the president of Legal Momentum elaborated on these concerns.
KATHY RODGERS, PRESIDENT, LEGAL MOMENTUM
REMARKS BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON HEALTH,
EDUCATION, LABOR AND PENSIONS*
APRIL 17, 2007
For thirty-seven years, Legal Momentum has advanced the rights of women and girls through the power of the law
and effective public policy.…
p. 430
p. 431
Since its enactment in 1994, VAWA has dramatically improved the response of the police and the criminal and
civil justice systems to victims of domestic and sexual violence and the availability of shelters, counseling, and other
essential services for them. But far too many working women and men who are victims of domestic and sexual
violence remain unable to access these services simply because they cannot take any time off from work.…
According to a 1998 report of the U.S. General Accounting Office, between 25% and 50% of domestic violence
victims in three studies reported that they lost a job due, at least in part, to domestic violence.…
Permitting individuals to take time off to take actions outside of work to address the violence—like going to court
or moving to a safe location—is one important aspect of supporting employees. Other easy, low-cost or no-cost
steps…include changing a phone extension so that an abuser can no longer harass a victim at work, or letting an
employee modify her regular working hours so that her abuser will no longer know when she’s likely to be
commuting to or from work. If a batterer has threatened to come to the workplace, registering a copy of a protective
order with building security or a receptionist, or transferring the employee to another work site, might be
appropriate.…
Well over half of the states now have at least some explicit employment-related protections for victims of
domestic or sexual violence.…For the true potential of these statutes to be realized, federal legislation is needed to
ensure all survivors of sexual and domestic violence receive at least basic economic protections.…
Importantly, the protections provided under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) are not adequate
to meet the many of the needs (sic) of survivors of domestic or sexual violence…many of the typical injuries caused
by domestic or sexual violence—such as a badly-swollen eye from a punch in the face or a sprained ankle from a
push down the stairs—may not qualify as “serious health conditions” under the FMLA but could nevertheless require
that an individual miss a day of work. Additionally, many victims work for employers who are too small to be required
to provide FMLA leave.…
We urge you to adopt legislation that would make such benefits [unemployment benefits] available to victims
regardless of where they live. [Other proposed laws] are good models for federal legislation in this area. They are
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
369
drafted to ensure that victims who must leave a job because of domestic or sexual violence can get benefits while
permitting states flexibility in how they address the issue. A victim who must leave her job to protect herself, her
family, or her coworkers must be able to maintain financial independence at this critical time and to return to the
workforce as soon as possible.
* Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
Hearing: Too Much, Too Long? Domestic Violence in the Workplace (April 17, 2007) (Remarks of Kathy Rodgers, President, Legal
Momentum).
Knowledge and Analysis
1
The VAWA provides federal resources for the prevention of domestic violence and assists those who are
victims of this violence. As both Cade and Rodgers assert, domestic violence can affect the work
environment, making it harder for victims to remain employed.
p. 431
p. 432
Based on what criteria should government money be allocated to combat the employment-related
problems associated with domestic violence? It is beyond the scope of this book to present and analyze
the costs and benefits of the many options mentioned in this congressional testimony. However, is there a
process that should guide government priorities for designating funds for such things as anti-bullying
programs, psychological counseling, employer training, police training, unemployment benefits, and
similar programming?
2
What value, if any, should government decision makers place on research studies? What might support
the argument, or not, that government funding choices should be driven by goals of prevention more than
punishment after the fact? Why might it be better, or not, to focus more on targeted programming, such as
individual therapy, than broad programming, such as anti-bullying curricula? What aspects of the problem
might guide policy makers in choosing between employer training and police training?
FEDERAL LAWS TO ADDRESS PARTNER VIOLENCE
Since 1994, Congress has attempted to address partner violence through the Violence Against Women Act. This
law encompasses the national approach to expand protections for intimate partner crimes. The brief excerpt below
gives an overview of this important piece of federal legislation.
CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
THE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT:
EBSCOhost – printed on 3/1/2023 2:19 PM via BRIDGEWATER COLLEGE. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use
370
OVERVIEW, LEGISLATION AND FEDERAL FUNDING
MAY 2012 17
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), currently due for reauthorization, was originally passed by Congress as
Title IV of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.…Among other things, it enhanced
investigations and prosecutions of sex offenses by allowing for enhanced sentencing of repeat federal sex
offenders, mandating restitution to victims of specified federal sex offenses, and providing grants to state, local, and
tribal law enforcement entities to investigate and prosecute violent crimes against women.…
p. 432
p. 433
In the 1980s, researchers began to address the violence against women issues as well.…The criminal justice
system and the public were beginning to view family violence as a crime rather than a private family matter.…The
shortfalls of legal response and the need for a change in attitudes toward violence against women were primary
reasons cited for the passage of VAWA.…
…[I]t established new offenses and penalties for the violation of a protection order as well as stalking in which an
abuser crossed a state line to injure or harass another…added new provisions to require states and territories to
enforce protection orders issued by other states.…VAWA provided for federal grants to state, local and tribal law
enforcement entities to investigate and prosecute…[and] authorized grants for education and training for judges and
court personnel.…
Knowledge and Analysis
1
Yvette Cade’s case raises many of the issues that dominate concerns about domestic violence. More
knowledge of the characteristics of a potential abuser might have helped Cade avoid involvement with
Hargrave at an early stage of their relationship. Psychotherapy for Hargrave might have decreased his
tendencies to dominate, control, and eventually to attempt to destroy his former intimate partner. Cade’s
story also includes problems within the judicial branch, including insensitive judges and a poorly
announced court decision terminating, intentionally or unintentionally, a crucial protective order.
In what ways, if any, does Cade’s story suggest a priority for more programs for abusers and
victims, better training for judges, and/or different laws from the legislature?
What basis might there be for the argument that news accounts of Cade’s courtroom hearing
confuse the public about the power of a civil protection order?
2
A protective order does not include a police presence around the potential victim as a shield against
violence. Moreover, perpetrators of domestic violence can operate swiftly—often before the victim or
anyone nearby has time to take effective countervailing actions. In the Cade-Hargrave incident, less than
a minute elapsed between his entry into her workplace with a soda …