Presentation on theme: "INTRO TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE History, Types, Impact & Other Key Issues For Superior Court Self Help Center Staff Nancy Marshall, LMFT, Domestic Violence."— Presentation transcript:
INTRO TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE History, Types, Impact & Other Key Issues For Superior Court Self Help Center Staff Nancy Marshall, LMFT, Domestic Violence Intervention Collaborative Steve Baron, LMFT, Retired, Superior Court, Family Court Services, Santa Clara County
753 B.C. Wife beating accepted and condoned under The Laws of Chastisement. Rule of Thumb. Tradition of these laws later perpetuated in English Common Law and throughout most of Europe
202 B.C. to 300 A.D. 202 B.C.: Women get more freedoms including property rights and the right to sue husbands for unjustified beatings. 300 A.D.: Church fathers re- establish the husband’s patriarchal authority and values of Roman and Jewish law.
Middle Ages (900-1300) Church continues to sanction the subjection of women. Man is given permission to “castigate his wife and beat her for correction…” “Rules of Marriage:…When you see our wife commit an offense…scold her sharply, bully and terrify her….if this doesn’t work…take up a stick and beat her soundly, for it is better to punish the body and correct the soul than to damage the soul and spare the body.”
Early 1400’s: I Christian church vacillates between support of wife beatings and encouraging husbands to be more compassionate and use moderation in punishment of wives. Christine de Pizan writes in The Book of the City of Ladies about women’s basic humanity and better treatment in marriage accusing men of cruelty and beating of wives.
1500’s & British Common Law Lord Hale, an English Jurist, sets the tradition of non-recognition of marital rape due to marital contract. Also burned women at the stake as witches. In England, “the Golden Age of the Rod” is used against women and children who are taught sacred duty to obey the man of the house. Violence against wives is encouraged. British common law later embraced, but limited, the husband’s authority to assault wives by adopting the “rule of thumb,” which permitted a man to beat his wife with a “rod not thicker than his thumb.
1824 to 1857 1824: Mississippi Supreme Court in a case allows a husband to administer only “moderate chastisement in cases of emergency…” 1829: In England, a husband’s absolute power of chastisement is abolished. 1857: A Massachusetts court is first to recognize spousal rape exemption relying solely on Lord Hale’s statement.
1861 John Stuart Mill writes The Subjection of Women pleading for Parliament to reform the divorce laws to allow women to divorce on the grounds of violence and cruelty.
1871 Alabama is the first state to rescind the legal right of men to beat their wives; Massachusetts follows.
1874: I Supreme Court of North Carolina rules that “the husband has no right to chastise his wife under any circumstances,” but goes on to say: “If no permanent injury has been inflicted, nor malice, cruelty nor dangerous violence shown by the husband, it is better to draw the curtain, shut out the public gaze and leave the parties to forget and forgive.”
1882 & late 1800’s Maryland is the first state to make wife- beating a crime. Courts begin to show signs that they might hold husbands responsible and found guilty of marital rape. Queen Victoria ascends to the English throne and lawmakers begin enacting reforms regarding women.
1911 - 1914 First Family Court created in Buffalo, NY First adult psychiatric clinic is directly linked to a Chicago court. The beginning of official diversion and exclusion of violence against wives from the criminal justice system.
1919 to 1930’s 1919: American women win right to vote in passage of 19 th Amendment. 1920’s-30’s: Psychoanalysis develops theory of female masochism.
1945 California statute says: “Any husband who willfully inflicts upon his wife corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition, and any person who willfully inflicts upon any child any cruel and inhumane corporal punishment or injury resulting in a traumatic condition is guilty of a felony…”
1960’s: I Making a coalition with Al-anon programs, Rainbow Retreat in Phoenix and Haven House in Pasadena are treating battered women married to alcoholic men.
1960’s: II The criminal justice system conceives of crisis intervention as a humane program to aid police, the courts and victims. Police are trained to mediate and refer families to social and psychiatric services rather than arrest. Family courts and social work approaches reduce criminal assaults to problems of individual & social pathology.
1960’s: III 1963: Betty Friedan authors The Feminine Mystique. 1967: Maine opens one of the first shelters in the U.S. 1969: California adopts no-fault divorce.
Late 1960’s and early 70’s The women’s liberation movement, by claiming that what goes on in the privacy of people’s homes is deeply political sets the stage for the battered women’s movement. Shelters begin to appear.
Early 1970’s Women’s movement begins organizing at grassroots level to transform public consciousness and women’s lives with education on DV and that social institutions are indifferent. Police departments begin to train on DV.
1972 San Jose Police Department is sued on behalf of Ruth Bunnell for wrongful death due to police negligence when she called for assistance, was refused, and her husband killed her. In the prior year, she had called the police 29 times alleging DV and child abuse.
1974-1975 1974: Erin Prizzey authors the groundbreaking Scream Quietly or the Neighbors Will Hear, the first on the subject of battered wives. 1975: NOW declares marital violence a major issue and establishes a National Task Force on Battered Women/Household Violence. Most states allow wives to bring criminal action against a husband who inflicts injury upon her. Susan Brownmiller authors “Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape.”
1976-78 1976: Domestic Violence Act (1976) allows for limited temporary restraining orders. 1977: The first White House meeting including testimony of battered women. 1978: The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights sponsors a Consultation on Battered Women: Issues of Public Policy. Del Martin, chairs the meeting and sets the focus on the roots of DV in marriage, male domination and women’s subordinate status.
1978-81 “Battered spouse” and “battered woman” are new categories added to the International Classification of Diseases. Senate passes Domestic Violence Act of 1978. 1978: Lenore Walker authors The Battered Woman. 1981: 500 battered women’s shelters in U.S.; first annual DV Awareness Week.
1984-89 SB1472 makes police intervention more effective by requiring police response, written policies, statewide officer training, and DV call record keeping. SB1058 creates mandatory jail time of at least 48 hours for persons who violate DV restraining orders. U.S. has 1,200 battered women’s programs.
1990 DA’s offices begin to adopt “no drop” policies clarifying that the prosecutor, not the victim, is in charge of the case. AB2700 requires judges to consider any history of spousal abuse before determining child custody and visitation. AB1753 prohibits people under a DVRO from obtaining a gun.
1993 The United Nations recognizes DV as an international human rights issue and issues a Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women.
1994-95 Congress passes the Violence Against Women Act, part of the federal Crime Victims Act, which funds services for victims of rape and DV, allows women to seek civil rights remedies for gender-related crimes, and provides training to increase police and court officials’ sensitivity. SB1278 gives judges authority to disallow batter’s subject to a restraining order to own or possess a firearm while the RO is in effect.
“Battering”: per Pence & Das Gupta, I An ongoing patterned use of intimidation, coercion, and violence as well as other tactics of control to establish and maintain a relationship of dominance over an intimate partner. Such violence has historical precedence and (typically) involves widespread use of superior strength and coercion. (Pence and Das Gupta)
“Battering”: per Pence and Das Gupta, II Violence used by men against women who are their intimate partners has its historic roots in centuries of institutionally sanctioned dominance of one gender over the other in key spheres of relationships such as economic, sexual, intellectual, cultural, spiritual, and emotional.
“Battering”: per Pence and Das Gupta, III While it is not unusual for a woman to use violence in her intimate relationship, it is exceptional for her to achieve the kind of dominance over her male partner that characterizes battering. ”We…believe that …a ‘one-size-fits-all’ intervention approach…would meet neither the goals of fairness nor public safety.” They identified five distinct categories of DV and “…contend that each category…has different social and historical roots (and) requires distinct interventions.”
Pivotal Issues in Battering, I: “The Legal Road to Freedom” by B. Hart The three stages of the Cycle of Violence described by Lenore Walker are: escalating tension; violence; loving reconciliation. As time progresses, the frequency and severity of violence often escalates and the periods of loving reconciliation become briefer and may eventually disappear.
Pivotal Issues in Battering, II Batterers use violence as a tool to achieve power and control over their partners and children. The risk of violent assault increases when the victim challenges the batterer’s control over her and when she acts in a way that suggests that she contemplates leaving. Batterers often increase the severity of violence at the time of separation and may view the woman’s departure as ultimate betrayal that justifies retaliation.
Pivotal Issues in Battering, III Women are most likely to be murdered when attempting to report abuse or to leave abusive relationships, or after they have left. Fear of retaliation for departure is one of the main reasons women remain in battering relationships.
Pivotal Issues In Battering, IV Men who batter often endanger and abuse their children, beyond the emotional abuse that is inherent in DV. Research indicates that additional significant child abuse occurs in about 50% of battering cases. The more grievous the abuse of the mother, the greater the likelihood that the child abuse will be severe.
Pivotal Issues in Battering, V: Boys who witness their father’s abuse of their mothers are more likely to inflict severe violence against intimates as adults than those who grow up in homes free of abuse. Girls who witness maternal abuse may tolerate abuse as adults more than girls who do not.
Pivotal Issues in Battering, VI Battered women and their dependent children are often economically compelled back into relationships with batterers. The most likely predictor of whether a battered woman will permanently separate from her abuser is whether she has the economic resources to survive without him.
Pivotal Issues in Battering, VII The adverse consequences of DV must be substantial for perpetrators to cease their acts of intimate terrorism. Research demonstrates that where police arrest perpetrators, rather than separate the couple or mediate between victim and offender, the arrested perpetrators are significantly less likely to recidivate within 6 months.
Pivotal Issues in Battering, VIII “Traumatic Bonding” (identification with the aggressor/the “Stockholm Syndrome”) Terms used to describe the strong emotional ties that develop when a victimized person perceives her/his survival depends on the other who intermittently harasses, threatens, abuses, or intimidates her or him. “Learned Helplessness”: The victim may occasionally display after experiencing the continuation of violence no matter what she tries to do to prevent it.
Pivotal Issues in Battering, IX Battered women, especially those battered over a long period of time, tend to under- estimate the frequency and severity of the violence they have experienced. Men with serious alcohol or drug problems are more apt to abuse when drunk and when sober, to be violent more frequently, inflict more serious injury, assault their partners sexually, and be violent outside of the home.
Pivotal Issues in Battering, X Research reveals that battered women are different from non-battered women only in the extent of violence in their families of origin, and no psychological predisposing traits were found. The Duluth Model of dealing with domestic violence supports the principles of: Accountability (for perpetrators, the justice system, the community), and; Coordinated community response.
“Trauma & Recovery,” by Judith Herman, M.D. Prolonged, repeated trauma occurs only in circumstances of CAPTIVITY, as can occur for: prisoners of war; hostages, and; women and children in abusive situations
“Trauma & Recovery” II The methods of establishing control over another person are: based upon the systematic, repetitive infliction of psychological trauma; the organized techniques of disempowerment and disconnection; methods of psychological control designed to instill terror and helplessness.
“Trauma & Recovery” III It is not necessary to use violence often to keep the victim in a constant state of fear. Once the perpetrator has succeeded in establishing day-to-day bodily control of the victim, he becomes a source not only of fear and humiliation, but also of solace which undermines the psychological resistance of the victim. Perpetrators seek to isolate their victims from any other source of information, material aid, or emotional support.
“Trauma & Recovery” IV After trauma, the human system of self- preservation may seem to go onto permanent alert for danger. In this state of hyper arousal, the traumatized person startles easily, reacts irritably to small provocations, and sleeps poorly. Thus, some traumatic events appear to recondition the human nervous system.
“Trauma & Recovery” V In chronically traumatized people, the chronic hyper arousal and intrusive symptoms of PTSD may sometimes fuse with symptoms of depression. After release, the survivor may experience occasional outbursts of rage which may further alienate her from others and prevent the restoration of relationships, and to control that rage she may withdraw even further thus perpetuating her isolation.
“Trauma & Recovery” VI Men with histories of childhood abuse are more likely to take out their aggressions on others, while women are more likely to be victimized by others or to injure themselves. Adults as well as children often feel impelled to recreate the moment of terror, either in literal or disguised form. They may reenact the traumatic moment with a fantasy of changing the outcome of the dangerous encounter, or in attempts to undo the traumatic moment, they may even put themselves at risk of further harm.
“Re-Examining “Battering”: Are All Acts of Violence Against Intimate Partners the Same” by Ellen Pence & Shamita Das Dasgupta “…not all violence by intimate partners follows the systematic pattern of control, intimidation, and domination that is typical of battering. Grasping that there are important differences in partner violence is crucial…since this understanding would guide the forging of effective interventions for victims and perpetrators….”
“Re-Examining…,” II ”We…believe that …a ‘one-size-fits-all’ intervention approach…would meet neither the goals of fairness nor public safety.” They identified five distinct categories of DV and “…contend that each category…has different social and historical roots (and) requires distinct interventions
1. Battering (Intimate Terrorism) An ongoing patterned use of intimidation, coercion, and violence as well as other tactics of control to establish and maintain a relationship of dominance over an intimate partner.
2. Resistive Violence Victims of battering often retaliate and resist battering by using force themselves in order to escape and/or stop the violence used against them, and as a method of protecting themselves or their children. A woman who cannot access any resource may use violence to self protect more readily than those who can access alternative resources or recourses.
3. Situational Violence Intimate partners often use violence against each other to express anger, disapproval, or reach an objective. But here the partner being violent does not use a pattern of intimidation and violence to establish control or dominance. The victim of an episode is typically not fearful of the partner. The position of victim and perpetrator may shift and change continuously.
Caution! “Battering” is often misdiagnosed as a form of situational violence because: Practitioners typically intervene in a specific incident and tend not to investigate for any pattern of abuse. Victims of battering are generally not free to describe the totality of the abuse and often do not recognize the pattern in the ongoing violence.
4. Pathological Violence In this category, individuals use violence against others including their intimate partners clearly secondary to alcohol or drug use, mental illness or physical disorders, or neurological damage. In this type, when the cause is removed or successfully treated, the violence ends.
Caution! Practitioners need to be astute in discriminating Pathological Violence from other types, e.g. batterers who also abuse alcohol/drugs and who batter when using or sober.
Antisocial Violence Violence is not typically focused on any particular person or gender. Similar to batterers as they use violence to dominate, but a very resistant to change. Nearly 25% of men who are court ordered to batterer’s programs are anti- social.
Note: Categories are not always mutually exclusive (and the nature or severity of the violence may override the need for categorizing the violence.) Practitioners may get only one chance to successfully intervene, and misjudging battering for other kinds of violence might make an enormous difference for the victim and children. “We would rather err on the side of caution.”
Reference: Ellen Pence, Praxis International, Inc.; Shamita Das Dasgupta, Manavi, Inc., & Praxis International, Inc. 2004.
DANGER ASSESSMENT Jacquelyn C. Campbell, PhD. RN, FAAN, Copyright 2004 Johns Hopkins University, School of Nursing. Several risk factors have been associated with increased risk of homicides of women and men in violent relationships.
Risk Factors I Has the physical violence increased in severity or frequency over the past year? Does he own a gun? Have you left him during the past year? Is he unemployed? Has he ever used a weapon against you or threatened you with a lethal weapon? If yes, was the weapon a gun? Does he threaten to kill you? Has he avoided being arrested for DV?
Risk Factors II Do you have a child that is not his? Has he ever forced you to have sex when you did not wish to do so? Does he ever try to choke you? Does he us illegal drugs, e.g. amphetamines, meth, PCP, cocaine, street drugs or mixtures? Is he an alcoholic or problem drinker? Has he ever forced you to have sex when you did not wish to do so?
Risk Factors III Does he control most or all of your daily activities? E.g., does he tell you whom you can be friends with, when you can see your family, how much money you can use, or when you can take the car? Is he violently and constantly jealous of you? E.g., does he say “If I can’t have you, no one can.”? Have you ever been beaten by him while you were pregnant? Has he ever threatened or tried to commit suicide?
Risk Factors IV Does he threaten to harm your children? Do you believe he is capable of killing you? Does he follow or spy on you, leave threatening notes or messages on answering machine, destroy your property, or call you when you don’t want him to? Have you ever threatened or tried to commit suicide?
Brief General Narrative Assessment Questions: Jan Johnston, PhD. Describe the FIRST, WORST, & MOST RECENT incidents or threats of violence in the relationship. Tell me everything about each, from beginning to end including when they happened. (Expand with open ended questions, e.g. “And then what happened?”) What other incidents have occurred? How often does the violence occur? In the past year, has the frequency decreased, increased, or remained the same? Why?
Fundamental Considerations for Helping Alleged Victims & Offenders. Treat every individual in a respectful, fair, and dignified manner regardless of her or his standing as an alleged victim or an alleged offender. Why treat offenders respectfully and fairly? For one reason, treating people who have histories of violent behavior disrespectfully or unfairly makes them more likely to express aggressive behavior and take it out on their victims. Secondly, it violates the Code of Ethics for Court Employees.
Fundamental Considerations…II Treating people with respect and dignity is not incompatible with insuring client and personal safety, nor with setting limits when necessary and refusing to tolerate abusive behavior of any sort.
Fundamental Considerations…III Take the time necessary to listen and understand what the client is saying and feeling, and what they are asking for. And then, before you do anything else, let the client know that you understand by paraphrasing back to the client what you understood him or her to say/feel/ask for.